Endoscopic investigation in non-iron deficiency anemia: a cost to the health system without patient benefit

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The indication for endoscopy to investigate anemia of causes other than iron deficiency is not clear. Increasing numbers of endoscopic procedures for anemia raises concerns about costs to the health system, waiting times, and patient safety. The primary aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic yield of endoscopy in patients referred to undergo investigation for anemia. Secondary aims were to identify additional factors enabling the risk stratification of those likely to benefit from endoscopic investigation, and to undertake a cost analysis of performing endoscopy in this group of patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of endoscopy referrals for the investigation of anemia over a 12-month period at a single center. The patients were divided into three groups: those who had true iron deficiency anemia (IDA), tissue iron deficiency without anemia (TIDWA), or anemia of other cause (AOC). Outcome measures included finding a lesion responsible for the anemia and a significant change of management as a result of endoscopy. A costing analysis was performed with an activity-based costing method. RESULTS: We identified 283 patients who underwent endoscopy to investigate anemia. A likely cause of anemia was found in 31 of 150 patients with IDA (21 %) and 0 patients in the other categories (P < 0.001). A change of management was observed in 35 patients with IDA (23 %), 1 of 14 patients with TIDWA (7.14 %), and 8 of 119 patients with AOC (6.7 %) (P < 0.001). The cost of a single colonoscopy or gastroscopy was approximated to be $2209. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic investigation for non-IDA comes at a significant cost to our institution, equating to a minimum of$ 293 797 per annum in extra costs, and does not result in a change of management in the majority of patients. No additional factors could be established to identify patients who might be more likely to benefit from endoscopic investigation. The endoscopic investigation of non-IDA should be minimized

Empiric management of community-acquired pneumonia in Australian emergency departments

Objective: To describe empiric community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) management in Australian hospital emergency departments (EDs) and evaluate this against national guidelines, including use of the pneumonia severity index and antibiotic selection. Design: A multicentre, cross-sectional, retrospective audit, April 2003 to February 2005. Setting: 37 Australian hospitals: 22 principal referral hospitals, six large major city hospitals, four large regional hospitals, four medium hospitals and one private hospital. Participants: Adult patients with a diagnosis of CAP made in the ED. Data on 20 consecutive CAP ED presentations were collected in participating hospitals. Outcome measures: Documented use of the pneumonia severity index, initial antibiotic therapy prescribed in the ED, average length of stay, inpatient mortality, and concordance with national guidelines. Results: 691 CAP presentations were included. Pneumonia severity index use was documented in 5% of cases. Antibiotic therapy covering common bacterial causes of CAP was prescribed in 67% of presentations, although overall concordance with national guidelines was 18%. Antibiotic prescribing was discordant due to inadequate empiric antimicrobial cover, allergy status (including contraindication to penicillin), inappropriate route of administration and/or inappropriate antibiotic choice according to recommendations. There was no significant difference between concordant and discordant antibiotic prescribing episodes in average length of stay (5.0 v 5.7 days; P=0.22) or inpatient mortality (1.6% v 4.1%; chi(2) = 1.82; P=0.18). Conclusions: Antibiotic therapy for CAP prescribed in Australian EDs varied. Concordance with national CAP guidelines was generally low. Targeted interventions are required to improve concordance