Patients' understanding of blood tests and attitudes to HIV screening in the emergency department of a Swiss teaching hospital: a cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: In Switzerland, patients may undergo "blood tests" without being informed what these are screening for. Inadequate doctor-patient communication may result in patient misunderstanding. We examined what patients in the emergency department (ED) believed they had been screened for and explored their attitudes to routine (non-targeted) human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening. METHODS: Between 1st October 2012 and 28th February 2013, a questionnaire-based survey was conducted among patients aged 16-70 years old presenting to the ED of Lausanne University Hospital. Patients were asked: (1) if they believed they had been screened for HIV; (2) if they agreed in principle to routine HIV screening and (3) if they agreed to be HIV tested during their current ED visit. RESULTS: Of 466 eligible patients, 411 (88%) agreed to participate. Mean age was 46 ± 16 years; 192 patients (47%) were women; 366 (89%) were Swiss or European; 113 (27%) believed they had been screened for HIV, the proportion increasing with age (p ≤0.01), 297 (72%) agreed in principle with routine HIV testing in the ED, and 138 patients (34%) agreed to be HIV tested during their current ED visit. CONCLUSION: In this ED population, 27% believed incorrectly they had been screened for HIV. Over 70% agreed in principle with routine HIV testing and 34% agreed to be tested during their current visit. These results demonstrate willingness among patients concerning routine HIV testing in the ED and highlight a need for improved doctor-patient communication about what a blood test specifically screens for.

Trends and characteristics of attendance at the emergency department of a Swiss university hospital: 2002-2012.

BACKGROUND: The numbers of people attending emergency departments (EDs) at hospitals are increasing. We aimed to analyse trends in ED attendance at a Swiss university hospital between 2002 and 2012, focussing on age-related differences and hospital admission criteria. METHODS: We used hospital administrative data for all patients aged ≥16 years who attended the ED (n = 298,306) at this university hospital between 1 January 2002, and 31 December 2012. We descriptively analysed the numbers of ED visits according to the admission year and stratified by age (≥65 vs <65 years). RESULTS: People attending the ED were on average 46.6 years old (standard deviation 20 years, maximum range 16‒99 years). The annual number of ED attendances grew by n = 6,639 (27.6%) from 24,080 in 2002 to 30,719 in 2012. In the subgroup of patients aged ≥65 the relative increase was 42.3%, which is significantly higher (Pearson's χ2 = 350.046, df = 10; p = 0.000) than the relative increase of 23.4% among patients <65 years. The subgroup of patients ≥65 years attended the ED more often because of diseases (n = 56,307; 85%) than accidents (n = 9,844; 14.9%). This subgroup (patients ≥65 years) was also more often admitted to hospital (Pearson's χ2 = 23,377.190; df = 1; p = 0.000) than patients <65 years. CONCLUSIONS: ED attendance of patients ≥65 years increased in absolute and relative terms. The study findings suggest that staff of this ED may want to assess the needs of patients ≥65 years and, if necessary, adjust the services (e.g., adapted triage scales, adapted geriatric screenings, and adapted hospital admission criteria).