ArticleInternational journal of emergency medicine2023
Do patients referred to emergency departments after being assessed in primary care differ from other ED patients? Retrospective analysis of a random sample from two German metropolitan EDs.
Article in International journal of emergency medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Emergency department service utilisation of older patients with urgent conditions: a cross-sectional observational study.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess differences between patients referred to emergency departments by a primary care physician (PCP) and those presenting directly and the impact of referral on the likelihood of admission. DESIGN OF STUDY: Retrospective cohort study.
settingEDs of two nonacademic general hospitals in a German metropolitan region.
participantsRandom sample of 1500 patients out of 80,845 presentations during the year 2019.
resultsAge was 55.8 ± 22.9 years, and 51.4% was female. A total of 34.7% presented by emergency medical services (EMS), and 47.7% were walk-ins. One-hundred seventy-four (11.9%) patients were referred by PCPs. Referrals were older (62.4 ± 20.1 vs 55.0 ± 23.1 years, p < .001) and had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (3 (1-5) vs 2 (0-4); p < .001). Referrals received more ultrasound examinations independently from their admission status (27.6% vs 15.7%; p < .001) and more CT and laboratory investigations. There were no differences in sex, Manchester Triage System (MTS) category, or pain-scale values. Referrals presented by EMS less often (9.2% vs 38.5%; p < .001). Admission rates were 62.6% in referrals and 37.1% in non-referrals (p < .001). Referral (OR 3.976 95% CI: 2.595-6.091), parenteral medication in ED (OR 2.674 (1.976-3.619)), higher MTS category (1.725 (1.421-2.093)), transport by EMS (1.623 (1.212-2.172)), abnormal vital parameters (1.367 (0.953-1.960)), higher CCI (1.268 (1.196-1.344)), and trauma (1.268 (1.196-1.344)) were positively associated with admission in multivariable analysis, whereas ultrasound in ED (0.450 (0.308-0.658)) and being a nursing home resident (0.444 (0.270-0.728)) were negatively associated.
conclusionReferred patients were more often admitted. They received more laboratory investigations, ultrasound examinations, and computed tomographies. Difficult decisions regarding the necessity of admission requiring typical resources of EDs may be a reason for PCP referrals.
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.