Table.
Monitoring for Unintended Consequences of the Rural Emergency Hospital Care Model
| Domain | Anticipated benefit | Potential unintended consequences | Early signs of unintended consequences |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ensuring access | Preserve outpatient and emergency services | Greater travel burden for patients to obtain inpatient care Delays in patients receiving inpatient care |
Changes in patient travel distance to care Rates of emergency presentations for access-sensitive conditions |
| Facilitating transfers | Align patient care needs with facility resources | Difficulty for rural hospitals to identify an accepting hospital with inpatient services Overburden nonrural hospitals with increased inpatient volume |
Increased rates of delayed or rejected transfers Limited bed capacity at receiving hospitals |
| Strengthening continuity of care | Strengthen relationships and disseminate expertise | Fragmented care across multiple sites and multiple clinicians Redundant care leading to higher care utilization |
Patients with care across sites without interoperable electronic health records Duplicate testing across sites of care |
| Maintaining a rural workforce | Maintain outpatient and emergency workforce | Difficulty recruiting outpatient clinicians who also need inpatient resources Less overall infrastructure to recruit outpatient clinicians |
Loss of clinicians who provide inpatient and outpatient services Increase vacancies for outpatient clinicians |