Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33144351›Full record

Observational studyBMJ quality & safety2021

How sensitive are avoidable emergency department attendances to primary care quality? Retrospective observational study.

Beth Parkinson, Rachel Meacock, Kath Checkland, Matt Sutton

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ quality & safety, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Complements or substitutes? Associations between volumes of care provided in the community and hospitals.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2021
    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

4 authors.

Beth ParkinsonHealth, Organisation, Policy and Economics (HOPE) Group, Centre for Primary Care & Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, Greater Manchester, UK beth.parkinson@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4120-0933
Rachel MeacockHealth, Organisation, Policy and Economics (HOPE) Group, Centre for Primary Care & Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, Greater Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8933-5058
Kath ChecklandHealth, Organisation, Policy and Economics (HOPE) Group, Centre for Primary Care & Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, Greater Manchester, UK.
Matt SuttonHealth, Organisation, Policy and Economics (HOPE) Group, Centre for Primary Care & Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, Greater Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6635-2127

Funding

Wellcome Trust 208183/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImprovements in primary care quality are often proposed as a solution to rises in emergency department (ED) attendances. However, there is little agreement on what constitutes an avoidable attendance, and the relationship between primary care quality and ED demand remains poorly understood.

objectiveTo estimate the size of the associations between primary care quality and volumes of ED attendances classified as avoidable.

methodsRetrospective observational study of all attendances at EDs in England during 2015/2016, applying three definitions of avoidable attendance. We linked practice-level counts of attendances to seven measures of primary care access, patient experience and clinical quality for 7521 practices. We used count data regressions to associate attendance counts with levels of quality. We then calculated proportions of attendances associated with levels of primary care quality below the national average.

resultsAttendance volumes were negatively related to three of the seven quality measures. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for all attendances associated with 10 percentage-point differences in quality were 0.987 for clinical quality and 0.987 for easy telephone access and 0.978 for ability to get an appointment. These associations were relatively stronger for narrower definitions of avoidable attendances (for the narrowest definition, IRRs=0.966, 0.976 and 0.934, respectively) but represented fewer attendances in absolute terms. 341 000 (2.4%) attendances were associated with levels of primary care quality below the national average in 2015/2016.

conclusionED attendances are sensitive to primary care quality, but magnitudes of these associations are small. Attendances are much less responsive to differences in primary care quality than indicated by estimates of the prevalence of avoidable attendances. This may explain the failure of initiatives to reduce attendances through primary care improvements.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalPrimary Health CareAppointments and SchedulesEnglandHumansRetrospective Studiesemergency departmentgeneral practicehealth policy

Identifiers

PMID33144351
PMCPMC8543208

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.