Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34797370›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2021

Association of Rural and Critical Access Hospital Status With Patient Outcomes After Emergency Department Visits Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

Margaret Greenwood-Ericksen, Neil Kamdar, Paul Lin, Naomi George, Larissa Myaskovsky, Cameron Crandall, Nicholas M Mohr, Keith E Kocher

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Margaret Greenwood-EricksenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
Neil KamdarInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Paul LinInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Naomi GeorgeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
Larissa MyaskovskyCenter for Healthcare Equity in Kidney Disease, Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque.
Cameron CrandallDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
Nicholas M MohrDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
Keith E KocherInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
University of New Mexico · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USUniversity of Iowa · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Rural US residents disproportionately rely on emergency departments (ED), yet little is known about patient outcomes after ED visits to rural hospitals or critical access hospitals (CAHs). Objective: To compare 30-day outcomes after rural vs urban ED visits and in CAHs, a subset of rural hospitals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This propensity-matched, retrospective cohort study used a 20% sample of national Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries from January 1, 2011, to October 31, 2015. Rural and urban ED visits were matched on demographics, patient prior use of EDs, comorbidities, and diagnoses. Thirty-day outcomes overall and stratified by 25 common ED diagnoses were evaluated, with similar analysis of CAHs vs non-CAHs. Data were analyzed from February 15, 2020, to May 17, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were ED revisits with and without hospitalization. Results: The matched cohort included 473 152 rural and urban Medicare beneficiaries with a mean (SD) age of 75.1 (7.9) years (59.1% and 59.3% women, respectively; 86.9% and 87.1% White, respectively). Medicare beneficiaries at rural vs urban EDs experienced similar all-cause 30-day mortality (3.9% vs 4.1%; effect size, 0.01), ED revisits (18.1% vs 17.8%; effect size, 0.00), and ED revisits with hospitalization (6.0% vs 8.1%; effect size, 0.00). Rural ED visits were associated with more transfer (6.2% vs 2.0%; effect size, 0.22) and fewer hospitalizations (24.7% vs 39.2; effect size, 0.31). Stratified by diagnosis, patients in rural EDs with life-threatening illnesses experienced more transfer with 30-day mortality similar to that of patients in urban EDs. In contrast, mortality differed for patients in rural EDs with symptom-based diagnoses, including chest pain (odds ratio [OR], 1.54 [95% CI, 1.25-1.89]), nausea and vomiting (OR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.26-2.24), and abdominal pain (OR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.42-2.10]). All findings were similar for CAHs. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study of rural ED care suggest that patient mortality for potentially life-threatening conditions is comparable to that in urban settings. Further research is needed to understand the sources of greater rural ED mortality for symptom-based conditions. These findings underscore the importance of ensuring access to treatment of life-threatening conditions at local EDs in rural communities, which are increasingly endangered by hospital closures.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesCritical CareEmergency Medical ServicesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHospitals, RuralHumansMaleMedicareRetrospective StudiesRural PopulationUnited StatesUrban Population

Identifiers

PMID34797370
PMCPMC8605483
OpenAlexW3213848719

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.