Trial reportCJEM2026
Primary contact physiotherapy versus standard emergency physician care in the emergency department: a Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing analysis.
Trial report in CJEM, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesCompare the average cost of an emergency department (ED) visit between three ED care models, namely emergency physician-led management (usual care), management by a primary contact physiotherapist and an emergency physician (intervention), and physiotherapist-led management (sensitivity analysis).
methodsCost study (Canadian Public Payer perspective) based on data collected during a pragmatic randomized clinical trial (2018-2019) conducted in an urban Canadian academic ED (CHUL, Quebec City, Canada; n = 78, 18-80 years old). Costs incurred for the management of persons presenting to the ED for a minor musculoskeletal disorder were calculated using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing, in which time invested with a patient determines care costs. The main outcome measure was the average cost of an ED visit. Generalized linear models with Gamma distributions and log links were used to assess whether there were significant differences in average costs between the care models.
resultsMean ED visit cost was $267.08 (2019 $CAD, 95% CI 212.75 to 346.40) for physiotherapist and emergency physician management, compared with $245.14 for emergency physician-led management (169.46 to 336.72), resulting in a non-significant absolute difference of 21.94 CAD/patient (- 87.33 to 132.63) between models. Sensitivity analyses showed that the average cost of physiotherapist-led ED management could be $194.38 (161.50 to 234.34), representing an average saving of 50.76 CAD/patient that was not statistically significant (- 156.91 to 37.54) compared to emergency physician-led management.
conclusionThis study is a first step towards a better understanding of the costs incurred by the Canadian Public Payer for the management of persons presenting with musculoskeletal disorders in the ED using different care models. In EDs, physiotherapists may have the potential to help manage persons presenting with a musculoskeletal disorder without significantly increasing healthcare costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41708955What 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.