Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37081951›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2023

Appropriateness of frequent use of emergency departments: A retrospective analysis in Rome, Italy.

Giuseppe Furia, Antonio Vinci, Vittoria Colamesta, Paolo Papini, Adriano Grossi, Vittoria Cammalleri, Patrizia Chierchini, Massimo Maurici, Gianfranco Damiani, Corrado De Vito

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Short-Term Repeat Healthcare Visits and Area-Level Inequalities in a Primary Care-Centered Health System.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

10 authors.

Giuseppe FuriaDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Antonio VinciLocal Health Authority Roma 1, Borgo Santo Spirito, Rome, Italy.
Vittoria ColamestaLocal Health Authority Roma 1, Borgo Santo Spirito, Rome, Italy.
Paolo PapiniLocal Health Authority Roma 1, Borgo Santo Spirito, Rome, Italy.
Adriano GrossiLocal Health Authority Roma 1, Borgo Santo Spirito, Rome, Italy.
Vittoria CammalleriDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Patrizia ChierchiniLocal Health Authority Roma 1, Borgo Santo Spirito, Rome, Italy.
Massimo MauriciDepartment of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy.
Gianfranco DamianiSection of Hygiene, University Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Corrado De VitoDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Frequent users (FUs) are patients who repeatedly and inappropriately visit the emergency department (ED) for low-grade symptoms that could be treated outside the hospital setting. This study aimed to investigate the phenomenon of the FU in Rome by profiling such users and analyzing ED attendance by FUs. Methods: The analysis was carried out for attendance in 2021 at 15 EDs in the Local Health Authority Roma 1 geographical area. A digital app collected data, including information on the following variables: number of attendance, demographic characteristics, emergency medical service (EMS) usage, triage code, and appropriateness of attendance. COVID-19 diagnosis was also studied to analyze any possible influence on ED attendance. Differences between FUs and non-FUs were investigated statistically by Results: A total of 122,762 ED attendance and 89,036 users were registered. The FU category represented 2.9% of all users, comprising 11.9% of total ED attendance. There was a three times higher frequency of non-urgent codes in attendance of FU patients (FU: 9.7%; non-FU: 3.2%). FUs were slightly more likely to have used the EMS (13.6% vs. 11.4%) and had a lower frequency of appropriate ED attendance (23.8% vs. 27.0%). Multivariate logistic analysis confirmed a significant effect of triage code, gender, age, EMS usage, and COVID-19 diagnosis for the appropriateness of attendance. The results were statistically significant ( Conclusion: The FU profile describes mostly non-urgent and inappropriate attendance at the ED, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study represents an important tool for strengthening preventive policies outside the hospital setting. The Italian National Recovery and Resilience Plan represents an excellent opportunity for the development of new strategies to mitigate the phenomenon of FUs.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 TestingEmergency Service, HospitalHumansItalyPandemicsRetrospective StudiesRomeappropriatenessCOVID-19emergency departmentfrequent userItalyLocal Health AuthorityRome

Identifiers

PMID37081951
PMCPMC10110884

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.