학술논문

The current status of emergency departments in secondary emergency medical institutions in Japan: a questionnaire survey
Document Type
article
Source
International Journal of Emergency Medicine, Vol 16, Iss 1, Pp 1-12 (2023)
Subject
Secondary emergency medical institution
Emergency medical system
Emergency department
Japan
Emergency care
Medical emergencies. Critical care. Intensive care. First aid
RC86-88.9
Language
English
ISSN
1865-1380
Abstract
Abstract Background While emergency medicine (ER)-based emergency care is prevalent in many countries, in Japan, the “department-specific emergency care model” and the “emergency center model” are mainstream. We hypothesized that many secondary emergency medical institutions in Japan have inadequate systems. Using a questionnaire, we investigated the status of and problems in the emergency medical services system in secondary emergency medical institutions in Japan. Until date, there has not been an exhaustive survey of emergency facilities on a countrywide scale. The main objective of this study was to investigate problems in the Japanese emergency medical services system and thereby improve optimal care for emergency patients. Results A nationwide questionnaire survey involving 4063 facilities (all government-approved emergency medical facilities certified by prefectural governors) in Japan was conducted. Of the facilities that responded, all secondary emergency facilities were included in the analysis. Responses from 1289 facilities without a tertiary emergency medical care center were analyzed. Among them, 61% (792/1289) had ≤ 199 beds, and 8% were emergency department specialty training program core facilities. Moreover, 42% had an annual patient acceptance number of ≤ 500, 19% did not calculate the number of acceptances, 29% had an acceptance rate of ≥ 81%, and 25% had an acceptance rate of 61–80%. Pregnant women (63%) and children (56%) were the major types of patients that affected the acceptance rate. Factors affecting facilities with a response rate of 81% or higher were “hospitals designated for residency training” and “facilities making some efforts to improve the quality of emergency care and the emergency medical system” (logistic analysis, P