-
- Jessica Moe, Scott Kirkland, Maria B Ospina, Sandy Campbell, Rebecca Long, Alan Davidson, Patrick Duke, Tomo Tamura, Lisa Trahan, and Brian H Rowe.
- RCPS Emergency Medicine Residency Program, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
- Emerg Med J. 2016 Mar 1; 33 (3): 230-6.
ObjectiveThis systematic review examines whether frequent emergency department (ED) users experience higher mortality, hospital admissions and outpatient visits than non-frequent ED users.DesignWe published an a priori study protocol in PROSPERO. Our search strategy combined terms for 'frequent users' and 'emergency department'. At least two independent reviewers screened, selected, assessed quality and extracted data. Third-party adjudication resolved conflicts. Results were synthesised based on median effect sizes.Data SourcesWe searched seven electronic databases with no limits and performed an extensive grey literature search.Eligibility Criteria For Selecting StudiesWe included observational analytical studies that focused on adult patients, had a comparison group of non-frequent ED users and reported deaths, admissions and/or outpatient outcomes.ResultsThe search strategy identified 4004 citations; 374 were screened by full text and 31 cohort and cross-sectional studies were included. Authors used many different definitions to describe frequent users; the overall quality of the included studies was moderate. Across seven studies examining mortality, frequent users had a median 2.2-fold increased odds of mortality compared with non-frequent users. Twenty-eight studies assessing hospital admissions found a median increased odds of admissions per visit at 1.16 and of admissions per patient at 2.58. Ten studies reported outpatient visits with a median 2.65-fold increased risk of having at least one outpatient encounter post-ED visit.ConclusionsFrequent ED users appear to experience higher mortality, hospital admissions and outpatient visits compared with non-frequent users, and may benefit from targeted interventions. Standardised definitions to facilitate comparable research are urgently needed.Review Registration NumberPROSPERO (CRD42013005855).Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.