The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Frequent Overcrowding in U.S. Emergency Departments
Open accessAbstract
Abstract. Objective: To describe the definition, extent, and factors associated with overcrowding in emergency departments (EDs) in the United States as perceived by ED directors. Methods: Surveys were mailed to a random sample of EDs in all 50 states. Questions included ED census, frequency, impact, and determination of overcrowding. Respondents were asked to rank perceived causes using a five‐point Likert scale. Results: Of 836 directors surveyed, 575 (69%) responded, and 525 (91%) reported overcrowding as a problem. Common definitions of overcrowding (>70%) included: patients in hallways, all ED beds occupied, full waiting rooms >6 hours/day, and acutely ill patients who wait >60 minutes to see a physician. Overcrowding situations were similar in academic EDs (94%) and private hospital EDs (91%). Emergency departments serving populations ≤250,000 had less severe overcrowding (87%) than EDs serving larger areas (96%). Overcrowding occurred most often several times per week (53%), but 39% of EDs reported daily overcrowding. On a 1‐5 scale (±SD), causes of overcrowding included high patient acuity (4.3 ± 0.9), hospital bed shortage (4.2 ± 1.1), high ED patient volume (3.8 ± 1.2), radiology and lab delays (3.3 ± 1.2), and insufficient ED space (3.3 ± 1.3). Thirty‐three percent reported that a few patients had actual poor outcomes as a result of overcrowding. Conclusions: Episodic, but frequent, overcrowding is a significant problem in academic, county, and private hospital EDs in urban and rural settings. Its causes are complex and multifactorial.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Chalfin, D. B., Trzeciak, S., Likourezos, A., Baumann, B. M., & Dellinger, R. P. (2007) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000266585.74905.5a · Cited by 1,022
Trzeciak, S., & Rivers, E. P. (2003) · Emergency Medicine Journal · doi:10.1136/emj.20.5.402 · Cited by 834
Kushel, M. B., Perry, S., Bangsberg, D., Clark, R., & Moss, A. R. (2002) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.92.5.778 · Cited by 485
Coster, J. E., Turner, J. K., Bradbury, D., & Cantrell, A. (2017) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/acem.13220 · Cited by 379
Reliability and validity of scores on The Emergency Severity Index version 3
Tanabe, P., Gimbel, R., Yarnold, P. R., Kyriacou, D. N., & Adams, J. G. (2004) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1197/j.aem.2003.06.013 · Cited by 326
Metadata
- Authors
- Derlet, R. W., Richards, J. R., & Kravitz, R. L.
- Venue
- Academic Emergency Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-02
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 151-155
- ISSN
- 1069-6563 (ISSN-L)
- 1553-2712
- OpenAlex
- W2115668976
- Cited by
- 544
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 35.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Frequent Overcrowding in U.S. Emergency Departments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb01280.x
- The paper
- Derlet, R. W., Richards, J. R., & Kravitz, R. L. (2001). Frequent Overcrowding in U.S. Emergency Departments. Academic Emergency Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb01280.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.