Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26446671›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2015

Use of emergency care services by immigrants—a survey of walk-in patients who attended the Oslo Accident and Emergency Outpatient Clinic.

Sven Eirik Ruud, Ruth Aga, Bård Natvig, Per Hjortdahl

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Sven Eirik RuudDepartment of General Practice, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. s.e.ruud@medisin.uio.no.
Ruth AgaSection for Orthopaedic Emergency, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. ruth.aga@gmail.com.
Bård NatvigDepartment of General Practice, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. bard.natvig@medisin.uio.no.
Per HjortdahlDepartment of General Practice, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. per.hjortdahl@medisin.uio.no.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Oslo Accident and Emergency Outpatient Clinic (OAEOC) experienced a 5-6% annual increase in patient visits between 2005 and 2011, which was significantly higher than the 2-3% annual increase among registered Oslo residents. This study explored immigrant walk-in patients' use of both the general emergency and trauma clinics of the OAEOC and their concomitant use of regular general practitioners (RGPs) in Oslo.

methodsA cross-sectional survey of walk-in patients attending the OAEOC during 2 weeks in September 2009. We analysed demographic data, patients' self-reported affiliation with the RGP scheme, self-reported number of OAEOC and RGP consultations during the preceding 12 months. The first approach used Poisson regression models to study visit frequency. The second approach compared the proportions of first- and second-generation immigrants and those from the four most frequently represented countries (Sweden, Pakistan, Somalia and Poland) among the patient population, with their respective proportions within the general Oslo population.

resultsThe analysis included 3864 patients: 1821 attended the Department of Emergency General Practice ("general emergency clinic"); 2043 attended the Section for Orthopaedic Emergency ("trauma clinic"). Both first- and second-generation immigrants reported a significantly higher OAEOC visit frequency compared with Norwegians. Norwegians, representing 73% of the city population accounted for 65% of OAEOC visits. In contrast, first- and second-generation immigrants made up 27% of the city population but accounted for 35% of OAEOC visits. This proportional increase in use was primarily observed in the general emergency clinic (42% of visits). Their proportional use of the trauma clinic (29%) was similar to their proportion in the city. Among first-generation immigrants only 71% were affiliated with the RGP system, in contrast to 96% of Norwegians. Similar finding were obtained when immigrants were grouped by nationality. Compared to Norwegians, immigrants from Sweden, Pakistan and Somalia reported using the OAEOC significantly more often. Immigrants from Sweden, Poland and Somalia were over-represented at both clinics. The least frequent RGP affiliation was among immigrants from Sweden (32%) and Poland (65%).

conclusionsIn Norway, immigrant subgroups use emergency health care services in different ways. Understanding these patterns of health-seeking behaviour may be important when designing emergency health services.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAmbulatory Care FacilitiesChildChild, PreschoolCross-Sectional StudiesEmergency Medical ServicesEmigrants and ImmigrantsFemaleGeneral PracticeHealth Care SurveysHumansInfantInfant, Newborn

Identifiers

PMID26446671
PMCPMC4596368

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.