Table 1: Interventions With Promise
Intervention or strategy |
Description |
---|---|
Enhanced access to nonemergent care outside of the ED | Enhanced access to external specialists, imaging and other diagnostic interventions, home care, primary care, postoperative follow-up, and long-term care, including access outside of regular business hours. |
Surge management and prediction | Planning and tools to apply real-time protocols to address uncertainty in demand for ED services and help ensure appropriate resource levels and manage surges before they occur. |
Matching staffing to patient arrival | Analyzing patient arrival patterns (e.g., by day, week, or seasonal), and matching staffing capacity and skill mix to these patterns. |
Remote triage | Triage from a distance, including telephone, video, web, or SMS. |
Paramedic practitioner service | Paramedic practitioners receive additional training (e.g., palliative care, gerontology) to “assess and treat” or to refer older adults with a range of conditions as part of prehospital care. |
EMS prehospital decision-making | Prehospital decision-making by first responders with training in and access to prehospital decision systems and associated decision support tools. |
Ambulance offload strategies | Dedicated staff and space for ambulance offload, including offload to chairs. |
Ambulance diversion strategies | ED diversion protocols for ambulances transporting patients with nonemergent conditions who may be suitable for care at facilities offering subacute care (i.e., facilities providing primary care or multidisciplinary care for patients without immediate or acute care needs) rather than EDs. |
Home-based care strategies | Health and supportive care provided by a professional in the home, which may include support for a range of activities, such as bathing, toileting, feeding, and supporting activities of daily living. Home care providers may also monitor vital signs, carry out physician orders, and facilitate testing and monitoring of patients’ conditions. |
ED = emergency department.
Table 2: Moderate- and High-Quality Conclusive Evidencea
Intervention |
Description |
Characteristics across evidenceb |
Intervention effectiveness by outcomec |
---|---|---|---|
Paramedic practitioner service | Paramedic practitioners receive additional training to assess and treat or to refer individuals to the next care provider as part of prehospital care |
|
|
EMS prehospital decision-making | Ambulance personnel have training in and access to the prehospital decision system and decision support tools to triage eligible individuals to alternative health care |
|
|
Remote triage | Remote triage from a distance (e.g., telephone, video, web, text message) for initial assessment and management of acute, unscheduled, or undifferentiated care |
|
|
ED = emergency department; EMS = emergency medical services.
a Interventions with certain evidence or evidence with some uncertainty (moderate or high certainty) that is moderate or high quality based on AMSTAR 2 ratings.
b Population and setting characteristics of the individual studies that contributed to the evidence.
c The outcome measured in the evidence with its effectiveness across the evidence. Favourable: certain evidence or evidence with some uncertainty of better effectiveness of the intervention versus a comparator. Neutral: certain evidence or evidence with some uncertainty (moderate or high certainty) that neither the intervention nor the comparator was favoured.
Table 3: New and Emerging Interventions
Intervention |
Description |
Implemented where? |
---|---|---|
Mobile integrated health response teams |
|
|
Neighbourhood model |
|
|
Community support teams |
|
|
Rapid access to diagnostic testing and IV therapy in long-term care |
|
|
Same-day physician access in long-term care |
|
|
Nurse-led shared medical appointments |
|
|
Attract Connect Stay model |
|
|
Community pharmacy primary care clinics |
|
|
Embedded physician assistants in rural and remote primary care |
|
|
Real-time virtual support for rural physicians |
|
|
Remote monitoring and home health monitoring |
|
|
QR codes to increase use and distribution of discharge instructions |
|
|
Quality improvement in palliative oncology |
|
|
RELIEF digital health app |
|
|
Used cellphone program for people experiencing houselessness |
|
|
Mobile apps to reduce hospital readmissions after surgery |
|
|
HEARTSMAP for children and youth experiencing mental health challenges | BC Children’s Hospital (Vancouver, British Columbia) | |
Community hospital–based heart function clinics | Central Local Health Integration Network (Ontario) | |
ED return visit quality program |
|
|
ED avoidance classification |
|
|
Housing placement intervention to reduce ED readmissions |
|
|
Surge management and prediction |
|
|
Forecasting daily attendance at EDs |
|
|
Clinical roles for emergency medical communications centres |
|
|
PriCARE patient classification for potentially preventable ED visits by ambulance transport |
|
|
Real-time wait time reporting |
|
|
Virtual pediatric ED visits |
|
|
Minor injury ED appointment bookings |
|
ED = emergency department; QR = quick response.
Note: indicates implemented in Canada.
Table 4: Inconclusive, Unfavourable, or Low-Quality Evidence
Intervention |
Characteristics across evidencea |
Intervention effectiveness by outcomeb |
---|---|---|
Telemedicine with electrical stethoscope and real-time videoconferencing |
|
|
Group education sessions to assess and manage asthma |
|
|
General practitioner cooperative located near ED of a general hospital) |
|
|
Interventions to help people look after minor health problems and know how to access the right services (e.g., navigation tools, written or oral education, rapid triage website) |
|
|
Home-based care (care delivered at home) |
|
|
Telephonic models of care (delivered through telephone or mail) |
|
|
Primary care models (embedded in primary care) |
|
|
Community-based models (care coordination outside the health care system and where people are located) |
|
|
Ambulatory intensive care units |
|
|
Paramedic and allied health professionals providing onsite care to long-term care patients |
|
|
Interventions to reduce ED visits in children with medical complexities (e.g., ambulatory, hospital, primary care, hospital pharmacist-led) |
|
|
Telemedicine triage |
|
|
Telemedicine |
|
|
Primary care or home care-based case management, medical alerts, hospital in nursing home, onsite long-term care |
|
|
Direct mailing intervention (to promote influenza vaccinations and to promote telephonic nurse advice service) |
|
|
Health service interventions for people with dementia living in the community, to avoid hospital use |
|
|
Paramedic decision-making interventions (e.g., triage, assessment, treatment, and referral) |
|
|
Interventions to reduce nonurgent ED visits by children (e.g., educational materials, ED sessions, telephone counselling) |
|
|
Remote triage (e.g., telephone, video, web, text message) |
|
|
Interventions led by staff with geriatrics training for nursing home residents |
|
|
General practitioner interventions (e.g., extended opening hours, walk-in centres) |
|
|
General practitioner cooperatives or walk-in centres |
|
|
Hospital-at-home interventions for older adults |
|
|
Intensive primary care programs |
|
|
ED = emergency department.
a Population and setting characteristics of the individual studies that contributed to the evidence.
b The outcome measured in the evidence with its quality based on A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews Version 2 (AMSTAR 2) ratings and the effectiveness across the evidence. Inconclusive: very uncertain evidence (has low or very low certainty). Unfavourable: unfavourable effectiveness of the intervention on outcomes versus a comparator. Low quality: systematic review has a critical flaw based on AMSTAR 2 ratings and may not provide an accurate and comprehensive summary of the available studies that address the question of interest. Moderate quality: systematic review has more than 1 weakness, but no critical flaws. High quality: systematic review provides an accurate and comprehensive summary of the results of the available studies that address the question of interest. Favourable: certain evidence or evidence with some uncertainty of better effectiveness of the intervention versus a comparator. Neutral: certain evidence or evidence with some uncertainty (moderate or high certainty) that neither the intervention nor the comparator was favoured. Mixed: heterogeneous results for effectiveness of an intervention versus a comparator, and the heterogeneity is too serious to draw a conclusion. Unfavourable: unfavourable effectiveness of the intervention on outcomes versus a comparator. Inconclusive: very uncertain evidence (has low or very low certainty). No evidence: there is no evidence from primary studies.