Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39112973›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2024

Emergency department visits as a potential opportunity to promote primary care attachment and modify utilization patterns - results of a pilot study in Berlin, Germany.

Felix Holzinger, Lisa Kümpel, Rebecca Resendiz Cantu, Anja Alberter, Martin Möckel, Christoph Heintze

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
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

6 authors.

Felix HolzingerCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of General Practice, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. felix.holzinger@charite.de.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8400-7757
Lisa KümpelCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of General Practice, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Rebecca Resendiz CantuCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of General Practice, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Anja AlberterCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Division of Emergency Medicine, Campus Mitte and Virchow, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Martin MöckelCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Division of Emergency Medicine, Campus Mitte and Virchow, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Christoph HeintzeCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of General Practice, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUtilization by low acuity patients contributes to emergency department (ED) crowding. Both knowledge deficits about adequate care levels and access barriers in primary care are important promoters of such presentations. Concurrently, not having a general practitioner (GP) increases the likelihood of low-acuity ED utilization. This pilot study thus investigated feasibility, acceptance, and potential effects of an ED-delivered intervention for low-acuity patients with no regular primary care provider, consisting of an educational leaflet on acute care options and an optional GP appointment scheduling service.

methodsLow-acuity ED consulters not attached to a GP were given an information leaflet about alternative care offers for acute health problems and offered optional personal appointment scheduling at a local GP practice. Patients were surveyed on demographics, medical characteristics, health care utilization, valuation of the intervention, and reasons for not being attached to a GP and visiting the ED. A follow-up survey was conducted after twelve months. Trends in health and health care utilization were evaluated.

resultsBetween December 2020 and April 2022, n = 160 patients were enrolled, n = 114 were followed up. The study population was characterized by young age (mean 30.6 years) and predominantly good general health. Besides good health, personal mobility was a central reason for not being attached to a GP, but general preference for specialists and bad experiences with primary care were also mentioned. Most frequently stated motives for the ED consultation were subjective distress and anxiety, a belief in the superiority of the hospital, and access problems in primary care. The interventional offers were favorably valued, 52.5% (n = 84) accepted the GP appointment scheduling service offer. At follow-up, GP utilization had significantly increased, while there were no significant changes regarding utilization of other providers, including ED. An additional practice survey showed a 63.0% take-up rate for the appointment service.

conclusionsWith this pilot study, we were able to show that a personalized appointment scheduling service seems to be a promising approach to promote GP attachment and increase primary care utilization in patients without a regular GP in a highly urbanized setting. Further larger-scale studies are needed to investigate potential quantitative effects on ED visits.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00023480); date 2020/11/27.

Indexed as

Emergency Room VisitsEmergency Service, HospitalPrimary Health CareAdultAppointments and SchedulesBerlinFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePilot ProjectsSurveys and QuestionnairesEmergency departmentFollow-upHealth care utilizationPilot interventionPrimary care attachment

Identifiers

PMID39112973
PMCPMC11304799

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.