ArticlePLoS medicine2016
Associations between Extending Access to Primary Care and Emergency Department Visits: A Difference-In-Differences Analysis.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
60 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- How do interventions in primary care or in emergency departments impact less urgent patients' emergency care utilization? A systematic review.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Emergency department crowding: A systematic review of causes, consequences and solutions.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Short Delays in Time to First Contact With Community Health Services and Risk of Emergency Hospital Attendance: Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Observational
- What do we mean by urgent care? Definitional confusion and its consequences.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
- Digitalization of Access to Primary Care: Is There an Equity-Efficiency Trade-Off?Health economics · 2025Article
- Negative control-calibrated difference-in-difference analyses: addressing unmeasured confounding in RWD with application to racial/ethnic differences.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of blastocysts without blastocoele re-expansion in FET patients: are they of clinical value?Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Urgent care centres for reducing the demand on emergency departments: a scoping review of published quantitative and qualitative studies.The Medical journal of Australia · 2025Article
- Did a national extended access scheme translate to improvements in patient experience to GP services in England? A retrospective observational study using patient-level data from the English GP patient survey.BMC health services research · 2025Observational
- Internet use and healthcare utilization among older adults in China: a nationally representative cross-sectional study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- IVF/ICSI treatment for patients with diminished ovarian reserve with or without Kuntai capsule pretreatment: a retrospective cohort study stratified by a controlled ovarian stimulation regimen.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- The need for a broad perspective when assessing value-for-money for out-of-hours primary care.Primary health care research & development · 2024Review
- Emergency department visits as a potential opportunity to promote primary care attachment and modify utilization patterns - results of a pilot study in Berlin, Germany.BMC emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Non-emergency department (ED) interventions to reduce ED utilization: a scoping review.BMC emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Telephone advice lines for adults with advanced illness and their family carers: a qualitative analysis and novel practical framework.Palliative medicine · 2024Article
- One-year emergency department visits for children < 18 years of age, associated factors and frequency of primary general practitioner or pediatrician visits before: a French observational study (2018-19).BMC primary care · 2024Observational
- Modelling NHS England 111 demand for primary care services: a discrete event simulation.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Applying a data-driven population segmentation approach in German claims data.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Addressing Social Determinants of Vision Health.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealth services across the world increasingly face pressures on the use of expensive hospital services. Better organisation and delivery of primary care has the potential to manage demand and reduce costs for hospital services, but routine primary care services are not open during evenings and weekends. Extended access (evening and weekend opening) is hypothesized to reduce pressure on hospital services from emergency department visits. However, the existing evidence-base is weak, largely focused on emergency out-of-hours services, and analysed using a before-and after-methodology without effective comparators. METHODS AND
findingsThroughout 2014, 56 primary care practices (346,024 patients) in Greater Manchester, England, offered 7-day extended access, compared with 469 primary care practices (2,596,330 patients) providing routine access. Extended access included evening and weekend opening and served both urgent and routine appointments. To assess the effects of extended primary care access on hospital services, we apply a difference-in-differences analysis using hospital administrative data from 2011 to 2014. Propensity score matching techniques were used to match practices without extended access to practices with extended access. Differences in the change in "minor" patient-initiated emergency department visits per 1,000 population were compared between practices with and without extended access. Populations registered to primary care practices with extended access demonstrated a 26.4% relative reduction (compared to practices without extended access) in patient-initiated emergency department visits for "minor" problems (95% CI -38.6% to -14.2%, absolute difference: -10,933 per year, 95% CI -15,995 to -5,866), and a 26.6% (95% CI -39.2% to -14.1%) relative reduction in costs of patient-initiated visits to emergency departments for minor problems (absolute difference: -£767,976, -£1,130,767 to -£405,184). There was an insignificant relative reduction of 3.1% in total emergency department visits (95% CI -6.4% to 0.2%). Our results were robust to several sensitivity checks. A lack of detailed cost reporting of the running costs of extended access and an inability to capture health outcomes and other health service impacts constrain the study from assessing the full cost-effectiveness of extended access to primary care.
conclusionsThe study found that extending access was associated with a reduction in emergency department visits in the first 12 months. The results of the research have already informed the decision by National Health Service England to extend primary care access across Greater Manchester from 2016. However, further evidence is needed to understand whether extending primary care access is cost-effective and sustainable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.