Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26131564›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Complaints and Diagnoses of Emergency Department Patients in the Netherlands: A Comparative Study of Integrated Primary and Emergency Care.

Wendy A M H Thijssen, Elske van Mierlo, Elske van Miero, Maartje Willekens, Jasper Rebel, Maro H Sandel, Paul Giesen, Michel Wensing

Erratum issuedAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Wendy A M H ThijssenEmergency Department, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands; IQ Scientific Institute for Quality of Health Care, Radboud University, Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Elske van Mierlo
Elske van MieroEmergency Department, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Maartje WillekensEmergency Department, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jasper RebelEmergency Department, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Maro H SandelEmergency Department, Haga Hospital, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Paul GiesenIQ Scientific Institute for Quality of Health Care, Radboud University, Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Michel WensingIQ Scientific Institute for Quality of Health Care, Radboud University, Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn the Netherlands, an increasing number of emergency departments (EDs) and general practitioner cooperatives collaborate by creating one Emergency-Care-Access-Point (ECAP). This has resulted in fewer patients at ECAP EDs. The objective of this study was to explore differences in patient characteristics, presented complaints and ED discharge diagnoses between EDs with an ECAP and EDs without an ECAP.

methodsA retrospective observational study was performed with 1800 consecutive patient records sampled from six EDs spread over the Netherlands in 2013. We extracted data on time and date of presentation, sex, age, presenting complaint, discharge diagnosis, origin and follow up.

resultsAt ECAP EDs, the mean age was 47.8 years (95%CI 46.1-49.4) compared to 41.3 (95%CI 39.7-42.9). Compared to non-ECAP EDs, more patients were referred by medical professionals (74.7% versus 46.8%), more patients received hospital admission (45.2% versus 29.0%) and fewer patients received GP follow-up (4.1% versus 16.9%). There was no significant difference in presenting complaints between ECAP and non-ECAP EDs. Most prevalent complaints were trauma (25.7% versus 29.7%), abdominal pain (12.1% versus 10.9%) and general symptoms (7.8% versus 4.8%). The most prevalent ED diagnoses significantly differed with fractures and dislocations (10.8%), sprains and strains (10.4%) and respiratory infections (6.8%) at ECAP EDs versus fractures and dislocations (10.7%), wounds (9.3%) and sprains and strains (8.9%) at non-ECAP EDs.

conclusionCompared to non-ECAP EDs, patients at ECAP EDs were older, medical professionals referred more patients and more patients received a hospital admission. We found some small differences in discharge diagnoses between ECAP EDs compared to non-ECAP EDs, but no difference in presented complaints.

Indexed as

Emergency Medical ServicesEmergency Service, HospitalAdolescentAdultChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHospitalizationHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMedical RecordsMiddle AgedNetherlandsPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID26131564
PMCPMC4488864

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.