ArticleBMC emergency medicine2021
Does Case Management Provide Support for Staff Facing Frequent Users of Emergency Departments? A Comparative Mixed-Method Evaluation of ED Staff Perception.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health mediation does not reduce the readmission rate of frequent users of emergency departments living in precarious conditions: what lessons can be learned from this randomised controlled trial?BMC emergency medicine · 2024Trial
- Health mediation: an intervention mode for improving emergency department care and support for patients living in precarious conditions.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Article
- Methodological approaches to study context in intervention implementation studies: an evidence gap map.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFrequent users of emergency departments (FUED) account for a disproportionate number of emergency department (ED) visits and contribute to a wide range of challenges for ED staff. While several research has documented that case management (CM) tailored to FUED leads to a reduction in ED visits and a better quality of life (QoL) among FUED, whether there is added value for ED staff remains to be explored. This study aimed to compare, among staff in two academic EDs in Switzerland (one with and one without CM), the FUED-related knowledge, perceptions of the extent of the FUED issue, FUED-related work challenges and FUEDs' legitimacy to use ED.
methodMixed methods were employed. First, ED physicians and nurses (N = 253) of the two EDs completed an online survey assessing their knowledge and perceptions of FUEDs. Results between healthcare providers working in an ED with CM to those working in an ED without CM were compared using independent two-sided T-tests. Next, a sample of participants (n = 16) took part in a qualitative assessment via one-to-one interviews (n = 6) or focus groups (n = 10).
resultsBoth quantitative and qualitative results documented that the FUED-related knowledge, the extent FUED were perceived as an issue and perceived FUEDs' legitimacy to use ED were not different between groups. The level of perceived FUED-related challenges was also similar between groups. Quantitative results showed that nurses with CM experienced more challenges related to FUED. Qualitative exploration revealed that lack of psychiatric staff within the emergency team and lack of communication between ED staff and CM team were some of the explanations behind these counterintuitive findings.
conclusionDespite promising results on FUEDs' QoL and frequency of ED visits, these preliminary findings suggest that CM may provide limited support to ED staff in its current form. Given the high burden of FUED-related challenges encountered by ED staff, improved communication and FUED-related knowledge transfer between ED staff and the CM team should be prioritized to increase the value of a FUED CM intervention for ED staff.
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.