Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1996
Randomised controlled trial of general practitioner versus usual medical care in an urban accident and emergency department: process, outcome, and comparative cost.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Primary care professionals providing non-urgent care in hospital emergency departments.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Reducing inappropriate accident and emergency department attendances: a systematic review of primary care service interventions.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013Pooled it
- Primary care professionals providing non-urgent care in hospital emergency departments.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Differences in emergency nurse triage between a simulated setting and the real world, post hoc analysis of a cluster randomised trial.BMJ open · 2022Trial
- Nurse management of patients with minor illnesses in general practice: multicentre, randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2000Trial
- Randomized controlled trial of general practitioner versus usual medical care in a suburban accident and emergency department using an informal triage system.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1999Trial
- Safety assessment of a redirection program using an electronic application for low-acuity patients visiting an emergency department.BMC emergency medicine · 2022Observational
- Patients' experiences of attending emergency departments where primary care services are located: qualitative findings from patient and clinician interviews from a realist evaluation.BMC emergency medicine · 2022Article
- Management of non-urgent paediatric emergency department attendances by GPs: a retrospective observational study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021Observational
- What determines diagnostic resource consumption in emergency medicine: patients, physicians or context?Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2020Observational
- Can Health Disparity Be Eliminated? The Role of Family Doctor Played in Shanghai, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- The impact of general practitioners working in or alongside emergency departments: a rapid realist review.BMJ open · 2019Review
- To GP or not to GP: a natural experiment in children triaged to see a GP in a tertiary paediatric emergency department (ED).BMJ quality & safety · 2018Article
- Self reported involvement in emergency medicine among GPs in Norway.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2018Article
- General practitioners providing non-urgent care in emergency department: a natural experiment.BMJ open · 2018Observational
- Article
- Self-referred patients at the Emergency Department: patient characteristics, motivations, and willingness to make a copayment.International journal of emergency medicine · 2014Article
- Walk-ins seeking treatment at an emergency department or general practitioner out-of-hours service: a cross-sectional comparison.BMC health services research · 2011Article
- Cost reduction strategies for emergency services: insurance role, practice changes and patients accountability.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2009Review
- Towards integration of general practitioner posts and accident and emergency departments: a case study of two integrated emergency posts in the Netherlands.BMC health services research · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo see whether care provided by general practitioners to non-emergency patients in an accident and emergency department differs significantly from care by usual accident and emergency staff in terms of process, outcome, and comparative cost.
designA randomised controlled trial.
settingA busy inner city hospital's accident and emergency department which employed three local general practitioners on a sessional basis. PATIENTS: All new attenders categorised by the triage system as "semiurgent" or "delay acceptable." 66% of all attenders were eligible for inclusion.
main outcome measuresNumbers of patients undergoing investigation, referral, or prescription; types of disposal; consultation satisfaction scores; reattendance to accident and emergency department within 30 days of index visit; health status at one month; comparative cost differences.
results4684 patients participated. For semiurgent patients, by comparison with usual accident and emergency staff, general practitioners investigated fewer patients (relative difference 20%; 95% confidence interval 16% to 25%), referred to other hospital services less often (39%; 28% to 47%), admitted fewer patients (45%; 32% to 56%), and prescribed more often (41%; 30% to 54%). A similar trend was found for patients categorised as delay acceptable and (in a separate analysis) by presenting complaint category. 393 (17%) patients who had been seen by general practitioner staff reattended the department within 30 days of the index visit; 418 patients (18%) seen by accident and emergency staff similarly reattended, 435 patients (72% of those eligible) completed the consultation satisfaction questionnaire and 258 (59% of those eligible) provided health status information one month after consultation. There were no differences between patients managed by general practitioners and those managed by usual staff regarding consultation satisfaction questionnaire scores or health status. For all patients seen by general practitioners during the study, estimated marginal and total savings were Ir1427 pounds and Ir117,005 pounds respectively.
conclusionGeneral practitioners working as an integral part of an accident and emergency department manage non-emergency accident and emergency attenders safely and use fewer resources than do usual accident and emergency staff.
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.