4.1 Article

A cross-sectional study of the clinical characteristics of cancer patients presenting to one tertiary referral emergency department

Journal

INTERNATIONAL EMERGENCY NURSING
Volume 24, Issue -, Pages 35-38

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ienj.2015.05.007

Keywords

Cancer; Oncology; Haematology; Emergency; Time to antibiotic; Chemotherapy; Radiation

Categories

Funding

  1. Ramsay Nursing & Midwifery Scholarship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: There is increasing evidence of cancer patients presenting to emergency departments (ED). The study aim was to analyse the characteristics of adult cancer patients presenting to one ED. Understanding cancer patient presentations could assist in the development of new models of care. Methods: A 12 month retrospective audit was conducted of a random sample of cancer patients. Demographics and characteristic variables were analysed using descriptive, comparative and correlational statistics. Results: The presentation rate for adult cancer patients was 1110 (2.4%) with 290 sampled. The common symptoms were fever (n = 54: 18.6%), abdominal pain (n = 34: 11.7%), and shortness of breath (n = 32: 11%). The majority of patients were allocated a Triage Category 2 (n = 94: 32.4%) or Triage Category 3 (n = 131: 45.2%). The majority of patients presented between 2 and 15 times. For patients administered antibiotics the average time was 119.8 minutes (SD +/- 85.5). The average ED length of stay was mean 8.08 hours with 271 patients (93.4%) admitted to the hospital. Of the 290 patients, 105 (36.2%) had died within 12 months of ED presentation. Conclusion: The study has shown that while cancer patients are only a small percentage of ED presentations the vast majority are allocated high triage codes, have high admission rates and high mortality rates. Crown Copyright (C) 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available