Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31036785›Full record

ArticleClinical and experimental emergency medicine2019

Large observational study on risks predicting emergency department return visits and associated disposition deviations.

Charles Huggins, Richard D Robinson, Heidi Knowles, Jennalee Cizenski, Rosalia Mbugua, Jessica Laureano-Phillips, Chet D Schrader, Nestor R Zenarosa, Hao Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and experimental emergency medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Critical revisits after discharge from the emergency department.International journal of emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Reduced left-without-being-seen rates and impact on disparities after guest services ambassadors implementation.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2025
    Observational
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors.

Charles HugginsDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Integrative Emergency Services, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Richard D RobinsonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Integrative Emergency Services, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Heidi KnowlesDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Integrative Emergency Services, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Jennalee CizenskiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Integrative Emergency Services, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Rosalia MbuguaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Integrative Emergency Services, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Jessica Laureano-PhillipsDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Integrative Emergency Services, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Chet D SchraderDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Integrative Emergency Services, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Nestor R ZenarosaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Integrative Emergency Services, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Hao WangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Integrative Emergency Services, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, TX, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveA common emergency department (ED) patient care outcome metric is 72-hour ED return visits (EDRVs). Risks predictive of EDRV vary in different studies. However, risk differences associated with related versus unrelated EDRV and subsequent EDRV disposition deviations (EDRVDD) are rarely addressed. We aim to compare the potential risk patterns predictive of related and unrelated EDRV and further determine those potential risks predictive of EDRVDD.

methodsWe conducted a large retrospective observational study from September 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016. ED Patient demographic characteristics and clinical metrics were compared among patients of 1) related; 2) unrelated; and 3) no EDRVs. EDRVDD was defined as obvious disposition differences between initial ED visit and return visits. A multivariate multinomial logistic regression was performed to determine the independent risks predictive of EDRV and EDRVDD after adjusting for all confounders.

resultsA total of 63,990 patients were enrolled; 4.65% were considered related EDRV, and 1.80% were unrelated. The top risks predictive of EDRV were homeless, patient left without being seen, eloped, or left against medical advice. The top risks predictive of EDRVDD were geriatric and whether patients had primary care physicians regardless as to whether patient returns were related or unrelated to their initial ED visits.

conclusionOver 6% of patients experienced ED return visits within 72 hours. Though risks predicting such revisits were multifactorial, similar risks were identified not only for ED return visits, but also for return ED visit disposition deviations.

Indexed as

Emergency service, hospitalPatient outcome assessmentReturn visit

Identifiers

PMID31036785
PMCPMC6614047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.