Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28655309›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

The effectiveness of emergency nurse practitioner service in the management of patients presenting to rural hospitals with chest pain: a multisite prospective longitudinal nested cohort study.

Tina E Roche, Glenn Gardner, Leanne Jack

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The FRISK (Fracture Risk)-A New Tool to Indicate the Probability of Fractures.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tina E RocheSchool of Nursing, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, QLD, 4059, Australia. tina.roche@hdr.qut.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-7553-1306
Glenn GardnerQueensland University of Technology, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation Victoria Park Road, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, QLD, 4059, Australia.
Leanne JackQueensland University of Technology, School of Nursing Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, QLD, 4059, Australia.
Queensland University of Technology · AUMater Health Services · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth reforms in service improvement have included the use of nurse practitioners. In rural emergency departments, nurse practitioners work to the full scope of their expanded role across all patient acuities including those presenting with undifferentiated chest pain. Currently, there is a paucity of evidence regarding the effectiveness of emergency nurse practitioner service in rural emergency departments. Inquiry into the safety and quality of the service, particularly regarding the management of complex conditions is a priority to ensure that this service improvement model meets health care needs of rural communities.

methodsThis study used a prospective, longitudinal nested cohort study of rural emergency departments in Queensland, Australia. Sixty-one consecutive adult patients with chest pain who presented between November 2014 and February 2016 were recruited into the study cohort. A nested cohort of 41 participants with suspected or confirmed acute coronary syndrome were identified. The primary outcome was adherence to guidelines and diagnostic accuracy of electrocardiograph interpretation for the nested cohort. Secondary outcomes included service indicators of waiting times, diagnostic accuracy as measured by unplanned representation rates, satisfaction with care, quality-of-life, and functional status. Data were examined and compared for differences for participants managed by emergency nurse practitioners and those managed in the standard model of care.

resultsThe median waiting time was 8.0 min (IQR 20) and length-of-stay was 100.0 min (IQR 64). Participants were 2.4 times more likely to have an unplanned representation if managed by the standard service model. The majority of participants (91.5%) were highly satisfied with the care that they received, which was maintained at 30-day follow-up measurement. In the evaluation of quality of life and functional status, summary scores for the SF-12 were comparable with previous studies. No differences were demonstrated between service models.

conclusionsThere was a high level of adherence to clinical guidelines for the emergency nurse practitioner service model and a concomitant high level of diagnostic accuracy. Nurse practitioner service demonstrated comparable effectiveness to that of the standard care model in the evaluation of the service indicators and patient reported outcomes. These findings provide a foundation for the beginning evaluation of rural emergency nurse practitioner service in the delivery of safe and effective beyond the setting of minor injury and illness presentations.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12616000823471 (Retrospectively registered).

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalHospitals, RuralNurse PractitionersOutcome Assessment, Health CareQuality of Health CareAcute Coronary SyndromeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaChest PainFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedAdherence to guidelinesChest painCohortEmergency treatmentNested cohortNurse practitionerPatient satisfactionQuality of careQuality of lifeRural health services

Identifiers

PMID28655309
PMCPMC5488347
OpenAlexW2732378462

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.