ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2025
Implementation of a 3-Tier Priority System for Emergency Department Patients' Follow-up in Orthopaedic Surgery.
Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIncreasing demand for emergency department (ED) services and strained specialty-care access requires referral precision and was the impetus for a collaborative redesign of referrals between the Department of Emergency Medicine and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery.
methodsGuided by root cause analysis of delays in post-emergency department (ED) specialty follow-up in our academic health system, the intervention targeted the finding that all ED referrals were marked "urgent" without differentiation by acuity of orthopedic issues. After implementation, referrals were triaged into three tiers-immediate, urgent, and routine-with stipulated follow-up timeframes. We evaluated differences in completion of scheduling and realized visits, across five calendar months (July-November) pre- and post-implementation (2021 vs 2022). Logistic regression assessed the relationship between patient demographics and outcomes. We report medians and interquartile ranges.
resultsCompared to the 393 urgent referrals to the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery pre-implementation, there were 463 total referrals post-implementation as follows: 11/463 (2.4%) marked as immediate; 123/463 (26.6%) urgent; and 329/463 (71.1%) routine. Similar proportions successfully scheduled pre- and post-implementation (41.5% vs 45.1%; P = .28). On average, immediate referrals completed scheduling within 1.0 (0.0 - 1.0) day and were seen in 4.0 (2.0 - 8.0) days, urgent referrals completed scheduling within 2.0 (1.0 - 4.0) and 7.0 (5.0 - 15.0) days, and routine within 3.0 (1.0 - 6.0) and 12.0 (6.0 - 19.5) days. Race/ethnicity and insurance were related to odds of successful scheduling; Black patients had lower odds than all other groups (odds ratio [OR] 0.3 - 0.4). All insurance categories had higher odds of successful scheduling relative to Medicaid out-of-network (OR 3.5 - 7.2).
conclusionA three-tier ED-to-orthopedics referral triage system was quickly adopted and differentiated referrals by urgency but did not impact time to follow-up or loss to follow-up. Structural inequities in access to follow-up care remain.
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.