ArticleBMJ open2025
Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the unplanned patient flow in a Danish healthcare region, focusing on emergency departments: a multicentre cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding the impact of COVID-19 on the unplanned patient flow within hospitals is crucial for future preparedness planning and response strategies. We examined the impact of COVID-19 on the unplanned patient flow in a Danish healthcare region, with particular focus on emergency departments (EDs).
methodsA descriptive multicentre cohort study was conducted comparing unplanned patient contacts during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (1 March 2020-28 February 2021) with the previous year (1 March 2019-29 February 2020). The study examined changes in patient flow and key flow variables-number of contacts, length of stay (LOS), triage, re-contacts, mortality, International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes, isolations and SARS-CoV-2-positive patients-and compared differences between five EDs in the Central Denmark Region.
resultsThe overall number of unplanned patient contacts decreased 3.6% from the previous period (257 657) to the COVID-19 period (248 706). The decrease was lowest in EDs compared with other departments and was primarily detected during lockdowns, which were followed by months of increased ED contacts.Although overall patient contacts decreased, an increase in proportions was observed in contacts with a LOS <12 hours compared with the year prior to COVID-19 in both EDs (63.9%-64.2%) and other departments (36.0%-37.7%).Moreover, patients tended to be older, ED contacts triggered a higher triage level and an increase in ED re-contacts was observed. The ICD-10 pattern changed, with fewer contacts with injuries and diseases of the respiratory and digestive systems compared with the year before. Finally, one ED experienced a considerably higher number of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients at the start of the pandemic, reflecting infection fluctuations within the region.
conclusionOur results demonstrate changes in unplanned patient flow and patient characteristics in hospital contacts during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings are relevant for national, regional and local healthcare agencies and policy makers to prepare for and respond to future pandemics and large-scale healthcare crises.
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.