ArticleBMJ open2020
Differences between frequent emergency department users in a secondary rural hospital and a tertiary suburban hospital in central Japan: a prevalence study.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health Statuses of People in Poverty Receiving Public Assistance in Japan: A Scoping Review.JMA journal · 2024Article
- Patients' impressions of after-hours house-call services during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: a questionnaire-based observational study.BMC family practice · 2021Observational
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAlthough frequent emergency department (ED) use is a global issue, little research has been conducted in a country like Japan where universal health insurance is available. The study aims to (1) document the proportion of ED visits that are by frequent users and (2) describe the differences in characteristics of frequent ED users and other ED users including expenditures between a secondary and a tertiary hospital.
designA prevalence study for a period of 1 year.
settingA secondary hospital and a tertiary hospital in central Japan.
participantsAll patients who presented to the EDs. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We defined frequent ED user as a patient who visited the ED≥5 times/year. The main outcome measures were the proportion of frequent ED users among all ED users and the proportion of healthcare expenditures by the frequent ED users among all ED expenditures.
resultsOf 25 231 ED visits over 1 year, 134 frequent ED users accounted for 1043 visits-0.66% of all ED users, comprised 4.1% of all ED visits, and accounted for 1.9% of total healthcare expenditures. Median ED visits per one frequent ED user was 7.9. At the patient level, after adjusting for age, gender and receiving public assistance, older age (OR 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.02) and receiving public assistance (OR 7.19, 95% CI 2.87 to 18.07) had an association with frequent ED visits. At the visit-level analysis, evaluation by internal medicine (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.57), psychiatry (OR 124.69, 95% CI 85.89 to 181.01) and obstetrics/gynaecology (OR 2.77, 95% CI 2.09 to 3.67) were associated with frequent ED visits.
conclusionThe proportion of frequent ED users, of total visits, and of expenditures attributable to them-while still in the low end of the distribution of published ranges-are lower in this study from Japan than in reports from many other countries.
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.