Skip to main content

Table 1 Study characteristics

From: Structure and processes of emergency observation units with a geriatric focus: a scoping review

Study

Country

Study design

Population

Sample

Agea

Care model name

Anpalahan 2002 [36]

Australia

Retrospective, record review study; monocentre

≥ 70 years

General medical patients

n = 500

NR

Rapid assessment medical unit

Bruun 2018 [32]

Denmark

Prospective, two-way factorial randomised clinical trial; monocentre

≥ 65 years

Non-trauma patients

at risk of functional decline

Group I; n = 82 Group II; n = 84 Group III; n = 86 Group IV; n = 84

78 (72–85)

SSU

Chu 2007 [26]

UK

Prospective, observational study; monocentre

≥ 60 years

n = 120

77 (60–96)

Short-stay medical unit

Conroy 2014 [27]

UK

Prospective, pre-post study (historical cohort); monocentre

≥ 85 years

n = 6895 (CG) n = 9035 (IG)

NR

Emergency Frailty Unit

Edmans 2013 [28]

UK

Prospective, randomised controlled trial; multicentre (2 locations)

≥ 70 years

Length of stay ≤72 h

ISAR score ≥ 2/6

n = 217 (CG)

n = 216 (IG)

83 (±7)

Acute Medical Assessment Unit

Foo 2012 [38]

Singapore

Prospective, pre-post study; monocentre

≥ 65 years

Community-dwelling

No poor premorbid cognition or functionality

n = 172 (CG)

n = 315 (IG)

75 (NR) in CG

76 (NR) in IG

Emergency Department Observation Unit

Khan 1997 [29]

UK

Retrospective, observational study; monocentre

≥ 65 years

n = 502

NR

Short-stay ward

Leung 2019 [39]

Hong Kong

Retrospective, parallel group study; monocentre

≥ 65 years

Living alone

n = 40 (CG)

n = 150 (IG)

82.1 (±8.2) in CG

83.5 (±7.7) in IG

Frailty unit

Misch 2014 [40]

Switzerland

Prospective, observational delayed type cross-sectional diagnostic study; monocentre

Non-trauma patients

emergency severity index score 2 or 3

non-specific complaints

n = 669

81 (72–87)

Emergency Department Observation Unit

Nielsen 2018 [33]

Denmark

Prospective, non-randomised quasi-experimental trial; monocentre

≥ 65 years

Non-trauma

Community-dwelling

n = 231 (CG)

n = 144 (IG)

78 (±9) in CG

81 (±8) in IG

SSU

Ong 2012 [37]

Australia

Retrospective, case-control study; monocentre

≥ 65 years

4 most common diagnosis-related groups

n = 42 (CG)

n = 47 (IG)

80 (±8) in CG

84 (±8) in IG

Medical Assessment Unit

Silvester 2012 [30]

UK

Prospective system redesign study; monocentre

≥ 75 years

n = 16,953

NR

Frailty unit

Southerland 2018 [41]

USA

Retrospective, chart review study; monocentre

≥ 65 years

n = 221

73 (±7)

Emergency Department Observation Unit

Strøm 2017 [34]

Denmark

Prospective, observational study; monocentre

≥ 75 years

Non-emergent triage score internal medicine disease

n = 225 (SSU)

n = 225 (IMW)

82 (78–86) in SSU

82 (78–86) in IMW

SSU

Strøm 2018 [35]

Denmark

Prospective, pragmatic randomised clinical trial; monocentre

≥ 75 years

Less urgent triage score internal medicine disease

n = 208 (SSU)

n = 210 (IMW)

81 (77–86) in SSU

82 (78–86) in IMW

SSU

Taylor 2016 [31]

UK

Retrospective, pre-post study; monocentre

>  75 years

Medical patients

n = 398 (CG)

n = 413 (IG)

85 (75–101) in CG

84 (75–101) in IG

Comprehensive Older Person’s Evaluation Zone

  1. CG Control group, IG Intervention group, IMW Internal medicine ward, NR Not reported, ISAR Identification of Senior At Risk, SSU Short-stay unit, UK United Kingdom, USA United States of America
  2. amedian (range) or mean (±standard deviation) in years