Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17652676›Full record

ArticleEmergency medicine journal : EMJ2007

Short stay emergency admissions to a West Midlands NHS Trust: a longitudinal descriptive study, 2002 2005.

E Sibly, C M Wiskin, R L Holder, M W Cooke

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Emergency medicine journal : EMJ, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

E SiblyBirmingham Medical School, Birmingham, UK.
C M Wiskin
R L Holder
M W Cooke

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe changes and characteristics in emergency admissions to a West Midlands National Health Service Trust, 2002-2005, with a focus on short stay emergency admissions.

methodsA longitudinal descriptive study using retrospective analysis of routine admissions data. Admissions were categorised as short (0/1 day) or long (>or=2 days) and examined separately using a General Linear Model. Factors favouring short stays as opposed to long stays were examined using multivariable logistic regression.

resultsThere were 151 478 emergency admissions to the Trust between 1 April 2002 and 31 December 2005, of which 2910 (1.92%) had no discharge date recorded. Adjusted means showed a 7.76% increase in emergency admissions in winter months (October-January) and a 14.50% increase across the study period. Increases were greater in short stay (34.03%) than long stay emergency admissions (8.38%). Odds of short stays in admitted patients increased by 25%. Higher odds of short stays were also associated with younger age, winter month and medical admitting specialty (p<0.001).

conclusionsIncreases in emergency admissions were greater in short stay than long stay cases. Reasons for this may be both appropriate (increased use of clinical protocols and falling average length of stay) and detrimental (pressure to meet 4 h emergency department target, changing primary care provision). Further research is needed before generalising findings to other Trusts.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionChildChild, PreschoolEmergency Service, HospitalHumansInfantInfant, NewbornLength of StayLogistic ModelsLongitudinal StudiesMiddle AgedMultivariate Analysis

Identifiers

PMID17652676
PMCPMC2660078

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.