ArticleBMJ open2026
Clinical outcomes of adults accessing acute medical same-day emergency care in the NHS: a retrospective cohort study across two hospitals.
Article in BMJ open, 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
objectivesSame-day emergency care (SDEC) has been rolled out as a model of care in England with a limited evidence base. This study examined conversion to inpatient admission, 30-day reattendance and 30-day mortality, among adults managed through SDEC compared with those admitted for ≤48 hours, as a proxy for low acuity, over a 4-year period, to assess safety and effectiveness in a real-world operational setting across two acute hospital sites.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingTwo acute hospital sites within one National Health Service (NHS) trust in England, UK.
participantsAdults aged ≥18 years attending acute medical services between April 2021 and March 2025, managed via SDEC or admitted for ≤48 hours (n=43 970). OUTCOME MEASURES: Conversion to inpatient admission, 30-day reattendance and 30-day mortality.
resultsThe crude conversion rate from SDEC to inpatient admission was 5.8%. In the multivariable model, increasing age (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.02), male sex (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.57) and attendance at the Boston site (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.55 to 1.90) were associated with higher odds of admission.30-day prefix-concordant reattendance occurred in around 10% of patients in both pathways. After adjustment, SDEC patients had substantially lower odds of reattendance than those admitted for ≤48 hours (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.36). The effect of SDEC varied by age (interaction OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.02) and site, with a weaker protective effect at Lincoln compared with Boston (interaction OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.74 to 2.60). Age was associated with a reduction in reattendance (OR 0.99 per year increase, 95% CI 0.98 to 0.99).30-day mortality was lower in SDEC than in short-stay admission (0.6% vs 8.2%), with pathway remaining a strong predictor after adjustment (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.07). Younger age was protective, while male sex was associated with higher mortality. Pathway by sex interaction indicated a less pronounced protective effect of SDEC in men.
conclusionsSDEC was associated with very low conversion to inpatient admission and substantially better short-term outcomes than short-stay admission, including markedly reduced diagnosis-concordant reattendance and lower 30-day mortality. These findings indicate that SDEC is a safe and effective model for managing selected acute medical patients. The consistently favourable outcomes among SDEC attenders suggest that patient selection and operational factors within the emergency pathway may be directing lower-risk patients towards SDEC, highlighting the need to review how SDEC capacity is targeted to ensure alignment with its intended clinical role.
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.