Table 1.
An analysis comparing the distribution and characteristics of included EDs to all Dutch EDs, focusing on regional, urban and hospital type differences and adherence to opioid prescription guidelines
| All Dutch EDs (total n = 67) n (%) |
Included EDs (total n = 33) n (%) |
Use of guideline for opioid prescription (total n = 19) n (%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Region | |||
| North | 7 (10) | 4 (12) | 2 (50) |
| East | 16 (24) | 8 (24) | 7 (88) |
| West | 29 (43) | 13 (39) | 8 (62) |
| South | 15 (22) | 8(24) | 2 (25) |
| Urbanization level | |||
| Urban | 52 (78) | 25 (76) | 16 (64) |
| Rural | 15 (22) | 8 (24) | 3 (38) |
| Hospital type | |||
| Academic | 7 (10) | 3 (9) | 1 (33) |
| Small, non-academic | 60 (90) | 12 (36) | 5 (42) |
| Large, non-academic | 17 (52) | 12 (71) | |
| Missing | 1 (3) | 1 (-) |
Region: The classification into regions was based on the NUTS 1 regions [19]. Urbanization: The classification into urban and rural followed the CBS classification [20]. For clarity, the five categories were consolidated into two. Hospital type: EDs with an annual patient volume < 25.000 were classified as ‘small’, EDs with an annual patient volume > 25.00 were classified as ‘large’. Due to the lack of national data on annual patient volumes per ED, these categories were merged