Original Article

A Comprehensive View of Frequent Emergency Department Users Based on Data from a Regional HIE

Authors: Steven Howard Saef, MD, MSCR, Christine Marie Carr, MD, Jeffrey S. Bush, MD, Marc T. Bartman, MD, Adam B. Sendor, BA, Wenle Zhao, PhD, Zemin Su, MS, Jingwen Zhang, MS, Justin Marsden, BS, J. Christophe Arnaud, BS, Cathy L. Melvin, PhD, Leslie Lenert, MD, MS, William P. Moran, MD, MS, Patrick D. Mauldin, PhD, Jihad S. Obeid, MD


Objectives: A small but significant number of patients make frequent emergency department (ED) visits to multiple EDs within a region. We have a unique health information exchange (HIE) that includes every ED encounter in all hospital systems in our region. Using our HIE we were able to characterize all frequent ED users in our region, regardless of hospital visited or payer class. The objective of our study was to use data from an HIE to characterize patients in a region who are frequent ED users (FEDUs).

Methods: We constructed a database from a cohort of adult patients (18 years old or older) with information in a regional HIE for a 1-year period beginning in April 2012. Patients were defined as FEDUs (those who made four or more visits during the study period) and non-FEDUs (those who made fewer than four ED visits during the study period). Predictor variables included age, race, sex, payer class, county of residence, and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes. Bivariate (χ 2 ) and multivariate (logistic regression) analyses were performed to determine associations between predictor variables and the outcome of being a FEDU.

Results: The database contained 127,672 patients, 12,293 (9.6%) of whom were FEDUs. Logistic regression showed the following patient characteristics to be significantly associated with the outcome of being a FEDU: age 35 to 44 years; African American race; Medicaid, Medicare, and dual-pay payer class; and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes 630 to 679 (complications of pregnancy, childbirth, and puerperium), 780 to 799 (ill-defined conditions), 280 to 289 (diseases of the blood), 290–319 (mental disorders), 680 to 709 (diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue), 710 to 739 (musculoskeletal and connective tissue disease), 460 to 519 (respiratory disease), and 520 to 579 (digestive disease). No significant differences were noted between men and women.

Conclusions: Data from an HIE can be used to describe all of the patients within a region who are FEDUs, regardless of the hospital system they visited. This information can be used to focus care coordination efforts and link appropriate patients to a medical home. Future studies can be designed to learn the reasons why patients become FEDUs, and interventions can be developed to address deficiencies in health care that result in frequent ED visits.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.


1. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2011 Emergency Department Summary Tables. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ahcd/nhamcs_emergency/2011_ed_web_tables.pdf. Accessed May 21, 2016.
2. LaCalle E, Rabin E. Frequent users of emergency departments: the myths, the data, and the policy implications. Ann Emerg Med 2010;56:42-48.
3. Fuda KK, Immekus R. Frequent users of Massachusetts emergency departments: a statewide analysis. Ann Emerg Med 2006;48:9-16.
4. Hunt KA, Weber EJ, Showstack JA, et al. Characteristics of frequent users of emergency departments. Ann Emerg Med 2006;48:1-8.
5. Locker TE, Baston S, Mason SM, et al. Defining frequent use of an urban emergency department. Emerg Med J 2007;24:398-401.
6. Chang G, Weiss AP, Orav EJ, et al. Predictors of frequent emergency department use among patients with psychiatric illness. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2014;36:716-720.
7. Shapiro JS, Johnson SA, Angiollilo J, et al. Health information exchange improves identification of frequent emergency department users. Health Aff (Millwood) 2013;32:2193-2198.
8. Castillo EM, Brennan JJ, Killeen JP, et al. Identifying frequent users of emergency department resources. J Emerg Med 2014;47:343-347.
9. Rooney KD, Schilling UM. Point-of-care testing in the overcrowded emergency department-can it make a difference? Crit Care 2014;18:692.
10. Doupe MB, Palatnick W, Day S, et al. Frequent users of emergency departments: developing standard definitions and defining prominent risk factors. Ann Emerg Med 2012;60:24-32.
11. Castner J, Wu YW, Mehrok N, et al. Frequent emergency department utilization and behavioral health diagnoses. Nurs Res 2015;64:3-12.
12. Sun BC, Burstin HR, Brennan TA. Predictors and outcomes of frequent emergency department users. Acad Emerg Med 2003;10:320-328.
13. Sandoval E, Smith S, Walter J, et al. A comparison of frequent and infrequent visitors to an urban emergency department. J Emerg Med 2010;38:115-121.
14. Milbrett P, Halm M. Characteristics and predictors of frequent utilization of emergency services. J Emerg Nurs 2009;35:191-198.
15. Mandelberg JH, Kuhn RE, Kohn MA. Epidemiologic analysis of an urban, public emergency department’ frequent users. Acad Emerg Med 2000;7:637-646.
16. Vinton DT, Capp R, Rooks SP, et al. Frequent users of US emergency departments: characteristics and opportunities for intervention. Emerg Med J 2014; January 28.
17. Liu SW, Nagurney JT, Chang Y, et al. Frequent ED users: are most visits for mental health, alcohol, and drug-related complaints? Am J Emerg Med 2013;31:1512-1515.
18. Weinick RM, Burns RM, Mehrotra A. Many emergency department visits could be managed at urgent care centers and retail clinics. Health Aff (Millwood) 2010;29:1630-1636.
19. Ondler C, Hegde GG, Carlson JN. Resource utilization and health care charges associated with the most frequent ED users. Am J Emerg Med 2014;32:1215-1219.
20. Saef SH, Melvin CL, Carr CM. Impact of a health information exchange on resource use and Medicare-allowable reimbursements at 11 emergency departments in a midsized city. West J Emerg Med 2014;15:777-785.
21. Framingham Heart Study. http://www.framinghamheartstudy.org. Accessed September 27, 2015.
22. Effects of treatment on morbidity in hypertension. Results in patients with diastolic blood pressures averaging 115 through 129 mm Hg. JAMA 1967;202:1028-1034.
23. Shapiro JS, Crowley D, Hoxhaj S, et al. Health information exchange in emergency medicine. Ann Emerg Med 2016;67:216-226.
24. US Census Bureau. QuickFacts. http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/45015,45035,45019,00. Accessed January 29, 2016.
25. Carr CM, Saef SH, Zhang J, et al. Can data from a health information exchange be used to describe patients who visit multiple emergency departments within a region? Acad Emerg Med 2014;21(5 suppl 1):137.
26. Ragin DF, Hwang U, Cydulka RK, et al. Reasons for using the emergency department: results of the EMPATH Study. Acad Emerg Med 2005;12:1158-1166.
27. Lucas RH, Sanford SM. An analysis of frequent users of emergency care at an urban university hospital. Ann Emerg Med 1998;32:563-568.
28. Gindi RM, Cohen RA, Kirzinger WK. Emergency room use among adults aged 18-64: early release of estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, January-June 2011. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/emergency_room_use_january-june_2011.pdf. Published May 2012. Accessed July 3, 2015.
29. Schiller JS, Ward BW, Freeman G. Early release of selected estimates based on data from the 2013 National Health Interview Survey. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/earlyrelease201406.pdf. Published June 2014. Accessed July 3, 2015.
30. McWilliams A, Tapp H, Barker J, et al. Cost analysis of the use of emergency departments for primary care services in Charlotte, North Carolina. N C Med J 2011;72:265-271.
31. Navigator reduces readmissions, inappropriate ED visits. Hosp Case Manag 2014;22:166.
32. Morganti KG, Bauhoff S, Blanchard JC, et al. The evolving role of emergency departments in the United States. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR200/RR280/RAND_RR280.pdf. Published 2013. Accessed May 9, 2016.