Is emergency medicine as a new specialty cost effective: Our experience after 19 years?

Shlomo Hareli, Hisam Zaidani, Fuad Basis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Background: On 2001, we have Emergency Medicine as a new specialty, following the AngloAmerican Model. Because of shortage Emergency Physicians (EPs), EPs run our ED only in the morning shift, and in the rest of the day, the ED residents from other Departments run the ED, as before. Until these days, we do not know if EM specialty rendered our ED more efficient.
Objectives: To compare the consultation use and evaluation time done by EPs vs. non-EPs staff, working in the same ED, and suggest ideas for improvement.
Materials and Methods: Using the data from the Business Intelligence system, we compared the consultations consumption and the length of evaluation time, using the Chi square test and the
T-test respectively.
Results: For 99,020 admitted patients, 68,681 consultations were invited (1.392 per patient), 49.82% of the 99,020 (49,331) underwent at least one consultation. The rate of consultations per patient used by EPs vs. non-EPs (1.366 vs. 1.406), and evaluation time (M=4.43, SD=3.82 vs. M=5.07, SD=3.22),
are significantly lower among EPs (P=0.017 and P=0.011) respectively.
Discussion: It seems that EPs are more efficient. However, we have to consider that half of them are senior physicians in comparison to resident in the evening shift. We assume that, if consultants are not part of the ED staff, EPs will become more self-dependent. A policy of self-dependence by
writing criteria for consultations need should be implemented, and EPs should run the ED 24/7.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages3
JournalAnnals of Trauma and Acute Care
StatePublished - 2020


Dive into the research topics of 'Is emergency medicine as a new specialty cost effective: Our experience after 19 years?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this