Table 5. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis of the odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for engagement with the YVIP according to method and type of referral.
| Unadjusted OR (n = 490) | p-value | Adjusted OR a (n = 388) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mode of referral | ||||
| Face to face | 1 | 1 | ||
| Electronic | 0.47 (0.25–0.89) | 0.02 | 0.79 (0.35–1.80) | 0.581 |
| Hospital database | 0.25 (013–0.46) | <0.001 | 0.49 (0.56–4.28) | 0.520 |
| Telephone | 0.65 (0.32–1.32) | 0.238 | 0.64 (0.27–1.53) | 0.316 |
| Paperb | - | - | - | - |
| Weekend attendance | ||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 0.22 (0.14–0.34) | <0.001 | 0.26 (0.15–0.44) | <0.001 |
| Referrer | ||||
| Doctor | 1 | 1 | ||
| Nurse | 0.68 (0.38–1.22) | 0.197 | 0.68 (0.32–1.41) | 0.295 |
| Safeguarding team | 1.11 (0.25–4.85) | 0.893 | 0.93 (0.16–5.39) | 0.941 |
| Self | 0.26 (0.10–0.65) | 0.004 | 0.32 (0.03–3.34) | 0.346 |
| Hospital database | 0.33 (0.17–0.63 | 0.001 | 0.91 (0.10–8.21) | 0.930 |
| Other | 0.36 (0.07–1.98) | 0.245 | 0.14 (0.12–1.51) | 0.104 |
| Discharge outcome | ||||
| Admitted | 1 | 1 | ||
| Discharged from ED | 0.44 (0.29–0.67) | <0.001 | 0.84 (0.45–1.54) | 0.836 |
| Self-discharge/did not wait | 0.18 (0.40–0.84) | 0.029 | 0.21 (0.02–2.29) | 0.210 |
| Previous attendances | ||||
| Yes | 1 | 1 | ||
| No | 0.59 (0.38–0.94) | 0.026 | 0.63 (0.34–1.15) | 0.627 |
| Method of contact | ||||
| Face to face | 1 | 1 | ||
| Phone call | 0.21 (0.13–0.32) | <0.001 | 0.25 (0.14–0.47) | 0.001 |
| Text message or letter | 0.17 (0.36–0.78) | 0.023 | 0.18 (0.33–0.96) | 0.045 |
| Time from attendance to referral | ||||
| ≤24 hours | 1 | 1 | ||
| >24 hours | 0.38 (0.21–0.71) | 0.002 | 0.83 (0.38–1.79) | 0.642 |
| Multiple referrals | ||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 3.39 (1.59–7.24) | 0.002 | 2.82 (1.07–7.42) | 0.035 |
ED, Emergency Department
aadjusted for all other variables within table.
bpaper referrals dropped due to predicting failure perfectly.