Which Patients and Where: A Qualitative Study of Patient Transfers from Community Hospitals
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Interhospital transfer of patients is a routine part of the care at community hospitals, but the current process may lead to suboptimal patient outcomes. A microlevel analysis of the processes of patient transfer has not earlier been carried out. RESEARCH DESIGN: We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with care providers at 3 purposively sampled community hospitals to describe patient transfer mechanisms, focusing on perceptions of transfers and transfer candidates, choice of transfer destination, and perceived process. We interviewed physicians, nurses, and care technicians from emergency departments and intensive care units at the hospitals, and analyzed the resultant transcripts by content analysis. RESULTS: Appropriate triage and the transfer of patients was a highly valued skill at the community hospitals. On the basis of participant accounts, the transfer process had 4 components: (1) Identifying transfer-eligible patients; (2) Identifying a destination hospital; (3) Negotiating the transfer; and (4) Accomplishing the transfer. There were common challenges at each component across hospitals. Protocolization of care was perceived to substantially facilitate transfers. Informal arrangements played a key role in the identification of the receiving hospital, but patient preferences and hospital quality were not discussed as important in decision making. The process of arranging a patient transfer placed a significant burden on the staff of community hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: The patient transfer process is often cumbersome, varies by condition, and may not be focused on optimizing patient outcomes. Development of a more fluid transfer infrastructure may aid in implementing policies such as selective referral and regionalization.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The decision to admit a patient versus transfer them to a higher-level center depends on providers' discretion about illness severity and clinical needs, logistical and administrative concerns such as bed availability at the referral hospital, and the patient's own preferences.
“Instead, the decision to admit a patient versus transfer them to a higher-level center depends on providers' discretion about their illness severity and clinical needs, logistical and administrative concerns such as the availability of beds at the referral hospital, and the patient's own preferences.”
From Racial and ethnic disparities in interhospital transfer for complex emergency general surgical disease across the United States (2023) · cites this paper as [9]
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 42 · Cited by 138
- Authors
- Bosk, E. A., Veinot, T., & Iwashyna, T. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Bosk, Emily A.
- Venue
- Medical Care
- Published
- 2011-06
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 592-598
- ISSN
- 0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3103266
- OpenAlex
- W1995788111
- Cited by
- 138
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 13.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Medical Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Rutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K08HL091249)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
- Keywords
- interhospital transfer, community hospitals, triage, emergency department, intensive care unit, employee perceptions, regionalization, selective referral, patient preferences
- MeSH terms
- Emergency Service, Hospital, Health Services Accessibility, Hospitals, Community, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Patient Admission, Transportation of Patients, Triage, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Quality Indicators, Health Care, Qualitative Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review