ReviewCureus2026
Factors Influencing Non-urgent Emergency Department Visits: A Review of the Causes and Impact.
Review in Cureus, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emergency departments (EDs) provide time-critical care for acute and potentially life-threatening conditions such as myocardial infarction, stroke, sepsis, severe trauma, and acute respiratory failure. However, increasing use of EDs for non-urgent conditions has been widely reported and is associated with operational pressure on emergency care systems. This systematic review examines key factors associated with adult use of EDs for non-urgent conditions and summarizes the reported impact on emergency care delivery and health systems. A structured literature search was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Scopus, and Google Scholar to identify English-language studies published between 2004 and 2024. Studies focusing on adult non-urgent ED utilization were selected based on predefined inclusion criteria and synthesized using a narrative approach due to heterogeneity in study designs, healthcare settings, and definitions of non-urgent visits. Across included studies, 44% of non-urgent ED visits were made by individuals aged 16-35 years, while elderly patients (>65 years) accounted for approximately 2-3%. Non-urgent attendance was commonly associated with low health literacy, such as the belief that EDs provide faster care than primary care, misunderstanding that EDs are the only option for uninsured patients, and a lack of awareness of urgent care clinics and limited awareness of alternative care options, such as telehealth alternatives. Geographic disparities, limited after-hours availability, and delays in primary care services significantly influence ED use. Socioeconomic factors, including low income, lack of insurance, and employment constraints, were also frequently reported. Non-urgent ED visits were seen to be associated with increased crowding and resource strain, potentially contributing to longer waiting times for higher-acuity patients and reduced efficiency of emergency care delivery. Reported strategies include expanding after-hours primary care services, improving public education on appropriate healthcare use, and optimizing ED resource management. Future research should prioritize standardized definitions of non-urgent visits and evaluate interventions across diverse healthcare systems.
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.