ArticleBMJ open2025
Care accessibility and reasons for non-urgent emergency department visits in South Tyrol (Italy): protocol of the multicentre cross-sectional CARES 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEmergency departments (EDs) suffer from crowding due to patients with low urgency whose treatment is often inappropriate in many cases. Crowding in the ED may indicate inefficiencies in the primary care infrastructure. According to the literature, it is associated with individual and system-related factors, such as younger age, convenience of visiting the ED and a negative perception of care outside the hospital. However, patients' motives driving decision-making for non-urgent visits to the ED in this post-pandemic period require further exploration. Therefore, this study aims to describe the proportion of potentially avoidable, non-urgent ED visits and to explore the associations between socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, patients' motives, and potentially avoidable, non-urgent visits to the ED. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentre cross-sectional study will be conducted in the ED of seven public hospitals in the South Tyrolean Health Service in the northern Italian Province of Bolzano-Bozen. A consecutive sample of 1000 adult patients (≥18 years) with clinical conditions that are triaged as 'non-urgent' (ie, Manchester Triage System priority level 'blue' or 'green') and consent to participate in the study will be included. Data will be collected in each ED over two full working weeks (24 hours, weekdays and weekends) between 1 September 2024 and 30 November 2024. For each patient, triage nurses and medical doctors will fill out a data collection sheet, including the triage code, diagnosis at discharge and avoidability of the ED visit. Patients will be surveyed using a structured questionnaire with standardised instruments (eg, the Patient Activation Measure and Mental Health Inventory) and self-developed items (eg, motives for ED visits and previous use of community care services). Data analysis will involve descriptive and inferential analyses (ie, χ ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Medical Ethics Committee of the South Tyrolean Health Service (Nr. 41-2024). The results will be published in relevant scientific journals and communicated to the public and relevant institutions through dissemination activities, including press releases and stakeholder meetings. The findings will inform recommendations aimed at refining health policies and optimising access to primary and emergency care services. REGISTRATION DETAILS: ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN17355506).
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.