A real-world evaluation of the effectiveness and Sufficiency of Current Emergency Department Preventative Strategies for Reducing Emergency Department revisits in a Canadian children’s hospital: a retrospective cohort study

Table 1 Patient characteristics associated with odds of future acute asthma visits

	Adjusted Odds Ratios
Effect	Odds Ratio	95% Confidence Interval		p-value
Age	0.96	0.92	1.00	0.07
Sex (Male vs. female)	0.94	0.70	1.26	0.69
PRAM score (moderate vs. mild)*	1.48	0.98	2.21	0.06
PRAM score (severe vs. mild)*	1.96	1.31	2.92	< 0.01
Prior diagnosis of asthma	1.61	1.10	2.37	0.02
Second hand smoke exposure	1.42	0.79	2.53	0.24
Primary care provider	2.04	1.26	3.31	< 0.01
Allergy: Nut vs. other allergies absent**	1.17	0.78	1.76	0.46
Allergy: Food vs. other allergies absent**	1.06	0.70	1.62	0.78
Allergy: Other vs. other allergies absent**	1.11	0.78	1.59	0.56
Prior ED visit within previous year	1.54	1.09	2.17	0.01
Received EDPS	0.82	0.56	1.18	0.28

PRAM = pediatric respiratory assessment measure, EDPS = emergency department preventative strategies. Definition of EDPS is having documentation of Asthma Action Plan (AAP) or controller inhaler prescribed or referral to specialist
* PRAM severity was defined as follows: Mild = 0–3; Moderate = 4–7; Severe = 8–12
***Allergies were defined as follows: Nuts = all nuts including peanuts and tree nuts; Food = all foods excluding nuts; Other = all reported allergies that were not to nuts or food types, e.g. pollen, dust, etc.

ISSN: 1710-1492