Reasons Patients Choose the Emergency Department over Primary Care: a Qualitative Metasynthesis
To enhance the acute care delivery system, a comprehensive understanding of the patient’s perspectives for seeking care in the emergency department (ED) versus primary care (PC) is necessary.
We conducted a qualitative metasynthesis on reasons patients seek care in the ED instead of PC. A comprehensive literature search in PubMed, CINAHL, Psych Info, and Web of Science was completed to identify qualitative studies relevant to the research question. Articles were critically appraised using the McMaster University Critical Review Form for Qualitative Studies. We excluded pediatric articles and nonqualitative and mixed-methods studies. The metasynthesis was completed with an interpretive approach using reciprocal translation analyses.
Nine articles met criteria for inclusion. Eleven themes under four domains were identified. The first domain was acuity of condition that led to the ED visit. In this domain, themes included pain: “it’s urgent because it hurts,” and concern for severe illness. The second domain was barriers associated with PC, which included difficulty accessing PC when ill: “my doctor said he was booked up and he instructed me to go to the ED.” The third domain was related to multiple advantages associated with ED care: “my doctor cannot do X-rays and laboratory tests, while the ED has all the technical support.” In this domain, patients also identified 24/7 accessibility of the ED and no need for an immediate copay at the ED as advantageous. The fourth domain included fulfillment of medical needs. Themes in this domain included the alleviation of pain and the perceived expertise of the ED healthcare providers.
In this qualitative metasynthesis, reasons patients visit the ED over primary care included (1) urgency of the medical condition, (2) barriers to accessing primary care, (3) advantages of the ED, and (4) fulfillment of medical needs and quality of care in the ED.
KEY WORDSprimary care healthcare delivery access to care qualitative research metasynthesis patient preferences patient-centered care
There are no contributors to the manuscript that did not meet authorship criteria. Specific contributions were as follows: study concept and design: JAV, JJ, and EPH; acquisition of data: JAV, KLR, JJ, and MLB; analysis and interpretation of data: JAV, KLR, JJ, MLB, AAG, and EPH; drafting of the manuscript: JAV; critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: JAV, KLR, JJ, MLB, AAG, and EPH; statistical analysis: JAV, KLR, JJ, and MLB; obtained funding: JAV; administrative, technical, or material support: JAV and EPH.
This study was supported in part by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (Dr. Jody Vogel [K08HS023901]).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.
- 3.Chen PW. Where have all the primary care doctors gone? New York Times. Available at: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/where-have-all-the-primary-care-doctors-gone/. Accessed May 8, 2019.Google Scholar
- 7.White House. President Barack Obama. Remarks by the president on health care reform. 2010. Available at: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-health-care-reform. Accessed May 8, 2019.
- 8.Starfield B. Primary Care: Balancing Health Needs, Services, and Technology. Rev. ed. New York (NY): Oxford University Press: 1998, p. 55–74.Google Scholar
- 15.Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chiasm: a New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2001;p. 5–6.Google Scholar
- 16.Sandelowski M, Barroso J. Handbook for Synthesizing Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2007.Google Scholar
- 21.Letts L, Wilkins S, Law M, Stewart D, Bosch J, Westmorland M: Guidelines for Critical Review Form: Qualitative Studies (Version 2.0). Hamilton: McMaster University; 2007. Available at http://srs-mcmaster.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Guidelines-for-Critical-Review-Form-Qualitative-Studies.pdf. Accessed May 8, 2019.
- 34.Ramlakhan S, Mason S, O’Keeffe C, Ramtahal A, Ablard S. Primary care services located with EDs: a review of effectiveness. Emerg Med J. 2016;p33:495–503.Google Scholar
- 35.Cooke M, Fisher J, Dale J, et al. Reducing Attendances and Waits in Emergency Departments: a Systematic Review of Present Innovations. Warwick. The University of Warwick, 2004.Google Scholar
- 36.Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar