Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35016633›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2022

German emergency department measures in 2018: a status quo based on the Utstein reporting standard.

Florian Wallstab, Felix Greiner, Wiebke Schirrmeister, Markus Wehrle, Felix Walcher, Christian Wrede, Kirsten Habbinga, Wilhelm Behringer, Dominik Brammen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

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

9 authors.

Florian WallstabDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany. florian.wallstab@st.ovgu.de.
Felix GreinerDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Wiebke SchirrmeisterDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Markus WehrleDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Therapy, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Felix WalcherDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Christian WredeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Hospital Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany.
Kirsten HabbingaDepartment of Interdisciplinary Emergency Medicine, Pius-Hospital, Oldenburg, Germany.
Wilhelm BehringerDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Dominik BrammenDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Therapy, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCompelling data on clinical emergency medicine is required for healthcare system management. The aim of this survey was to describe the nationwide status quo of emergency care in Germany at the healthcare system level using the Utstein reporting template as the guideline to measure the data collected.

methodsThis cross-sectional survey collected standardized data from German EDs in 2018. All 759 of the EDs listed in a previously collected ED Directory were contacted in November 2019 using the online-survey tool SoSci Survey. Exclusively descriptive statistical analyses were performed. Absolute as well as relative frequencies, medians, means, ranges, standard deviations (SD) and interquartile ranges (IQR) were reported depending on distribution. MAIN

resultsA total of 150 questionnaires of contacted EDs were evaluated (response rate: 19.8%). Hospitals had a median of 403 inpatient beds (n=147). The EDs recorded a median of 30,000 patient contacts (n=136). Eighty-three EDs (55%) had observation units with a median of six beds. The special patient groups were pediatric patients (< 5 years) and older patients (> 75 years) with a median of 1.7% and 25%, respectively. Outpatients accounted for 55%, while 45% were admitted (intensive care unit 5.0%, standard care unit 32.3%, observation unit 6.3%) and 1.2% transferred to another hospital.

conclusionsThe use of the Utstein reporting template enabled the collection of ED descriptive parameters in Germany. The data can provide a baseline for upcoming reforms on German emergency medicine, and for international comparisons on admission rates, initial triage categories, and patient populations.

Indexed as

Clinical Observation UnitsEmergency Service, HospitalChildCross-Sectional StudiesHumansIntensive Care UnitsTriageEmergency department structuresEmergency medicineGermanyUtstein reporting standard

Identifiers

PMID35016633
PMCPMC8753932

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.