ArticleBMC emergency medicine2026
Emergency medicine physician-led care at the patient's residence: a cohort study of a mobile emergency unit.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmergency departments (EDs) are often overcrowded. Older adults, who are frequently multimorbid and resource-intensive, represent a growing share of acute care demand. In Denmark, mobile emergency units (MEUs) provide emergency physician-led assessment and initial treatment in the patient's residence to potentially reduce avoidable hospital transfers. However, data on real-world service delivery and medium-term outcomes after MEU contacts remain limited.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective, single-centre cohort study of MEU contacts within the Esbjerg Hospital catchment area (Region of Southern Denmark) from 1 September 2023 to 31 December 2024. Using the hospital's electronic health record, we extracted demographics, comorbidities, on-scene diagnostics and treatments, and patient disposition, and descriptively summarised immediate disposition at the index encounter, service delivery, and 180-day all-cause mortality without risk adjustment.
resultsThe cohort comprised 1,987 MEU contacts corresponding to 1,336 unique patients, with a median (interquartile range) age of 80.9 (71.1-87.9) years. Nearly one-third had ≥ 3 comorbidities. Point-of-care testing and ultrasound were used frequently (60.5% and 24.8%, respectively), and on-scene therapies were commonly administered (antibiotics 31.6%, intravenous fluids 18.0%, and analgesia 9.0%). 82.7% of contacts were managed at home without hospital conveyance at the index encounter, while the remaining contacts were directly admitted to hospital from the scene. 443 (33.2%) of the 1,336 unique patients died within 180 days.
conclusionsMEU home visits involved bedside diagnostics and on-scene treatments, and most contacts were managed at home without conveyance at the index encounter. Mortality over 180 days was substantial and should be interpreted cautiously in this older, multimorbid cohort. The descriptive, unadjusted design precludes causal inference regarding safety or effectiveness.
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.