BACKGROUND: Emergencies such as road traffic accidents (RTAs), acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and cerebrovascular accident (CVA) are the most common causes of death and disability in India. Robust emergency medicine (EM) services and proper education on acute care are necessary. In order to inform curriculum design for training programs, and to improve the quality of EM care in India, a better understanding of patient epidemiology and case burden presenting to the emergency department (ED) is needed.METHODS: This study is a retrospective chart review of cases presenting to the ED at Kerala Institute of Medical Sciences (KIMS), a private hospital in Trivandrum, Kerala, India, from November 1, 2011 to April 21, 2012 and from July 1, 2013 to December 21, 2013. De-identified charts were systematically sampled and reviewed.RESULTS: A total of 1196 ED patient charts were analyzed. Of these patients, 55.35％ (n=662) were male and 44.7％ (n=534) were female. The majority (67.14％,n=803) were adults, while only 3.85％ (n=46) were infants. The most common chief complaints were fever (21.5％, n=257), renal colic (7.3％,n=87), and dyspnea (6.9％,n=82). The most common ED diagnoses were gastrointestinal (15.5％,n=185), pulmonary (12.3％,n=147), tropical (11.1％,n=133), infectious disease and sepsis (9.9％,n=118), and trauma (8.4％,n=101).CONCLUSION: The patient demographics, diagnoses, and distribution of resources identifi ed by this study can help guide and shape Indian EM training programs and faculty development to more accurately refl ect the burden of acute disease in India.

Objective. The present study aims to correlate the LGU list of PhilHealth Sponsored Members in a municipality of Batangas with the list of poor residents as identified by the Participatory Action Research (PAR) methodology. Method. Interview of key informants documented the processes utilized by the LGU in determining PhilHealth beneficiaries for the Sponsored Program and the Participatory Action Research (PAR) survey in the classification of households into poor, middle and rich in four barangays of the municipality. The list of LGU Sponsored members was then cross matched with the PAR household classification. Results. The comparison of the LGU list of Sponsored members and the household classification by the PAR survey showed a wide discrepancy: (1) 464 "Not Found" Sponsored households or 70% of the LGU's Sponsored list; (2) inclusion of the non-poor: 140 middle class families as classified by the PAR survey or 21.1% of the LGU's Sponsored list; and (3) exclusion of 413 or 87.5% of true poor families identified by the PAR Survey. Only 59 families or 8.9% of the LGU Sponsored list were classified as poor families by PAR. Conclusion. PAR offers communities, LGUs and the National Health Insurance Program a tool to validate the coverage of the Sponsored program. LGUs and the PhilHealth should consider such tool or similar tools to validate their identification, selection and enrollment of the poor, which is extremely vital in achieving universal coverage. Given the right tool, communities are in the best position to identify the poor for the Sponsored program. By way of collaboration with the underprivileged themselves, the academe has a role in assisting communities in acquiring collective awareness of their own situation and developing capacity for improving their lives. The academe also has a role in assisting LGUs in improving their health systems and national health programs in validating and improving their implementation. Further studies should be done to investigate the following: the identity of the "not found" SP members; the utilization of PhilHealth benefits by the poor; and the prospect of utilizing the PAR method by other non-academic institutions in monitoring the progress of community programs.
Human ; Male ; Female ; PUBLIC-PRIVATE SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS ; HEALTH SERVICES ; INSURANCE, HEALTH ; HEALTH CARE ECONOMICS AND ORGANIZATIONS ; ECONOMICS ; FINANCING, ORGANIZED ; INSURANCE