Table 5: Impact of Advanced Access Implementation on Emergency Department/Urgent Care Visits^a.

Study	Results
Subramanian et al (28)	The mean number of all-cause ED and urgent care visits (per patient) did not change in either the OA (1.1 visits in both periods) or non-OA clinics (0.9 visits in both periods) between the pre- and post-implementation periods Rate ratio, OA clinics to non-OA clinics = 0.97 (95% CI, 0.92–1.02)b
Solberg et alc (24)	Diabetes: The percentage of patients who had 1+ ED visits increased nonsignificantly between the pre- and post-implementation periods, from 14.4% to 15.1% (P = 0.08)d CHD: The percentage of patients who had 1+ ED visits decreased nonsignificantly between the pre- and post-implementation periods, from 51.5% to 50.9% (P = 0.07)d
Sperl-Hillen et alc (25)	The percentage of patients who had 1+ ED or urgent care visits decreased significantly between the pre- and post-implementation periods, from 41.0% to 37.6% (P < 0.001) The decline between the pre-implementation and implementation periods was not significant (41.0% to 40.1%, P = 0.26); no comparison was made between the implementation and post-implementation periods

Abbreviations: CAD, coronary artery disease; CI, confidence interval; ED, emergency department; OA, open access.

^aThe table is ordered to reflect the quality of the included studies.

^bBased on multivariate modelling adjusted for patient and clinic characteristics.

^cSolberg et al (24) and Sperl-Hillen et al (25) reported on findings from the same study but used different outcome measures.

^dRates were adjusted for age, sex, and modified Charlson score.