ArticlePloS one2021
The economic impact of rostering junior doctors to triage to assist nursing staff in the early part of the patient journey through the emergency department.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to determine whether redeploying junior doctors to assist at triage represents good value for money and a good use of finite staffing resources.
methodsWe undertook a cost-minimisation analysis to produce new evidence, from an economic perspective, about the costs associated with reallocating junior doctors in the emergency department. We built a decision-analytic model, using a mix of prospectively collected data, routinely collected administrative databases and hospital costings to furnish the model. To measure the impact of uncertainty on the model's inputs and outputs, probabilistic sensitivity analysis was undertaken, using Monte Carlo simulation.
resultsThe mean costs for usual care were $27,035 (95% CI $27,016 to $27,054), while the mean costs for the new model of care were $25,474, (95% CI $25,453 to $25,494). As a result, the mean difference was -$1,561 (95% CI -$1,533 to -$1,588), with the new model of care being a less costly approach to managing staffing allocations, in comparison to the usual approach.
conclusionOur study shows that redeploying a junior doctor from the fast-track area of the department to assist at triage provides a modest reduction in cost. Our findings give decision-makers who seek to maximise benefit from their finite budget, support to reallocate personnel within the ED.
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.