ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2024
Extending emergency care beyond discharge: Piloting a virtual after care clinic.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2024. 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.
- Extending emergency care beyond discharge: Piloting a virtual after care clinic.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Many unscheduled return visits to the emergency department (ED) stem from insufficient access to outpatient follow-up. We piloted an emergency medicine-staffed, on-demand, virtual after care clinic (VACC) as an alternative for discharged ED patients. Methods: Prospective cohort study of discharged ED patients who scheduled VACC appointments within 72 hours of index ED visit. We performed descriptive analyses and compared risks of ED return at 72 hours and 30 days between patients who did/did not attend their appointment. Results: From March to December 2022, 309 patients scheduled VACC appointments and 210 (68%) attended them. Patients who scheduled appointments were young (median 37 years), non-Hispanic white (80%), females (75%) with a primary care physicians (PCP) (90%), and commercial insurance (72%). Most VACC visits reinforced ED testing and/or treatment (64%) or adjusted medications (26%). VACC attendees were less likely to return to the ED within 72 h (3.3% vs. 13.1%; risk difference 9.3% [95% confidence interval, CI 2.7%‒19.8%]) and 30 days (16.2% vs. 30.3%; risk difference 14.1% [95% CI 3.8%‒24.4%]) compared to those who scheduled but did not attend a VACC appointment. VACC attendance was associated with lower odds of 72-h (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.0; 95% CI 0.0‒0.4) and 30-day (aOR 0.4; 95% CI 0.2‒0.7) return ED visits. Conclusions: In this pilot study, younger, white, female, commercially insured patients with a PCP preferentially scheduled VACC appointments. Among patients who scheduled VACC appointments, those who attended their appointments were less likely to return to the ED within 72 hours and 30 days than those who did not.
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.