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 3 Patient characteristics associated with odds of receiving Emergency Department Prevention Strategies

	Adjusted Odds Ratios
Predictor	OR	95% Confidence Interval		p-value
Age	0.97	0.93	1.01	0.10
Sex (Male vs. female)	1.08	0.78	1.49	0.64
PRAM (moderate vs. mild)*	3.67	2.49	5.42	< 0.01
PRAM (severe vs. mild)*	3.69	2.50	5.45	< 0.01
Prior diagnosis of asthma	1.05	0.68	1.62	0.82
Second hand smoke exposure	0.83	0.41	1.68	0.60
Primary care provider	0.96	0.60	1.54	0.88
Allergy: Nut vs. other allergies absent**	0.85	0.54	1.36	0.50
Allergy: Food vs. other allergies absent**	1.05	0.64	1.71	0.86
Allergy: Other vs. other allergies absent**	0.80	0.55	1.17	0.26
Prior ED visit within previous year	0.98	0.66	1.48	0.94

PRAM = pediatric respiratory assessment measure, EDPS = emergency department preventative strategies. Definition of EDPS is having documentation of Asthma Action Plan (AAP) or controller inhaler prescription or referral to asthma 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