Observational studyEmergency medicine journal : EMJ2018
Thirty-day hospital readmissions among mechanically ventilated emergency department patients.
Observational study in Emergency medicine journal : EMJ, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intubation Setting, Aspiration, and Ventilator-Associated Conditions.American journal of critical care : an official publication, American Association of Critical-Care Nurses · 2020Trial
- Management of Mechanical Ventilation in Emergency Medicine: A Scoping Review.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2026Review
- Data-driven insights into interhospital care fragmentation: Implications for health policy and equity among older adults.PloS one · 2025Article
- Risk factors of readmission and the impact of outpatient management in heart failure patients: A national study in Japan.ESC heart failure · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUnplanned 30-day readmissions have a negative impact on patients and healthcare systems. Mechanically ventilated ED patients are at high risk for complications, but factors associated with readmission are unknown.
objective(1) Determine the rate of 30-day hospital readmission for ED patients receiving mechanical ventilation. (2) Identify associations between ED-based risk factors and readmission.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingTertiary-care, academic medical centre. PATIENTS: Adult ED patients receiving mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS: Baseline demographics, comorbid conditions, illness severity and treatment variables were collected, as were clinical outcomes occurring during the index hospitalisation. The primary outcome was 30-day hospital readmission rate. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with the primary outcome.
resultsA total of 1262 patients were studied. The primary outcome occurred in 287 (22.7%) patients. There was no association between care in the ED and readmission. During the index hospitalisation, readmitted patients had shorter ventilator, hospital and intensive care unit duration (P<0.05 for all). The primary outcome was associated with African-American race (adjusted OR 1.34 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.78)), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (adjusted OR 1.52 (95% CI 1.12 to 2.06)), diabetes mellitus (adjusted OR 1.34 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.78)) and higher illness severity (adjusted OR 1.03 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.05)).
conclusionsAlmost one in four mechanically ventilated ED patients are readmitted within 30 days, and readmission is associated with patient-level and institutional-level factors. Strategies must be developed to identify, treat and coordinate care for the most at-risk patients.
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.