Cargando…
A comparison of two emergency medical dispatch protocols with respect to accuracy
BACKGROUND: Emergency medical dispatching should be as accurate as possible in order to ensure patient safety and optimize the use of ambulance resources. This study aimed to compare the accuracy, measured as priority level, between two Swedish dispatch protocols – the three-graded priority protocol...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5747276/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29284542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0464-z |
_version_ | 1783289256222916608 |
---|---|
author | Torlén, Klara Kurland, Lisa Castrén, Maaret Olanders, Knut Bohm, Katarina |
author_facet | Torlén, Klara Kurland, Lisa Castrén, Maaret Olanders, Knut Bohm, Katarina |
author_sort | Torlén, Klara |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Emergency medical dispatching should be as accurate as possible in order to ensure patient safety and optimize the use of ambulance resources. This study aimed to compare the accuracy, measured as priority level, between two Swedish dispatch protocols – the three-graded priority protocol Medical Index and a newly developed prototype, the four-graded priority protocol, RETTS-A. METHODS: A simulation study was carried out at the Emergency Medical Communication Centre (EMCC) in Stockholm, Sweden, between October and March 2016. Fifty-three voluntary telecommunicators working at SOS Alarm were recruited nationally. Each telecommunicator handled 26 emergency medical calls, simulated by experienced standard patients. Manuscripts for the scenarios were based on recorded real-life calls, representing the six most common complaints. A cross-over design with 13 + 13 calls was used. Priority level and medical condition for each scenario was set through expert consensus and used as gold standard in the study. RESULTS: A total of 1293 calls were included in the analysis. For priority level, n = 349 (54.0%) of the calls were assessed correctly with Medical Index and n = 309 (48.0%) with RETTS-A (p = 0.012). Sensitivity for the highest priority level was 82.6% (95% confidence interval: 76.6–87.3%) in the Medical Index and 54.0% (44.3–63.4%) in RETTS-A. Overtriage was 37.9% (34.2–41.7%) in the Medical Index and 28.6% (25.2–32.2%) in RETTS-A. The corresponding proportion of undertriage was 6.3% (4.7–8.5%) and 23.4% (20.3–26.9%) respectively. CONCLUSION: In this simulation study we demonstrate that Medical Index had a higher accuracy for priority level and less undertriage than the new prototype RETTS-A. The overall accuracy of both protocols is to be considered as low. Overtriage challenges resource utilization while undertriage threatens patient safety. The results suggest that in order to improve patient safety both protocols need revisions in order to guarantee safe emergency medical dispatching. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5747276 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57472762018-01-03 A comparison of two emergency medical dispatch protocols with respect to accuracy Torlén, Klara Kurland, Lisa Castrén, Maaret Olanders, Knut Bohm, Katarina Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Original Research BACKGROUND: Emergency medical dispatching should be as accurate as possible in order to ensure patient safety and optimize the use of ambulance resources. This study aimed to compare the accuracy, measured as priority level, between two Swedish dispatch protocols – the three-graded priority protocol Medical Index and a newly developed prototype, the four-graded priority protocol, RETTS-A. METHODS: A simulation study was carried out at the Emergency Medical Communication Centre (EMCC) in Stockholm, Sweden, between October and March 2016. Fifty-three voluntary telecommunicators working at SOS Alarm were recruited nationally. Each telecommunicator handled 26 emergency medical calls, simulated by experienced standard patients. Manuscripts for the scenarios were based on recorded real-life calls, representing the six most common complaints. A cross-over design with 13 + 13 calls was used. Priority level and medical condition for each scenario was set through expert consensus and used as gold standard in the study. RESULTS: A total of 1293 calls were included in the analysis. For priority level, n = 349 (54.0%) of the calls were assessed correctly with Medical Index and n = 309 (48.0%) with RETTS-A (p = 0.012). Sensitivity for the highest priority level was 82.6% (95% confidence interval: 76.6–87.3%) in the Medical Index and 54.0% (44.3–63.4%) in RETTS-A. Overtriage was 37.9% (34.2–41.7%) in the Medical Index and 28.6% (25.2–32.2%) in RETTS-A. The corresponding proportion of undertriage was 6.3% (4.7–8.5%) and 23.4% (20.3–26.9%) respectively. CONCLUSION: In this simulation study we demonstrate that Medical Index had a higher accuracy for priority level and less undertriage than the new prototype RETTS-A. The overall accuracy of both protocols is to be considered as low. Overtriage challenges resource utilization while undertriage threatens patient safety. The results suggest that in order to improve patient safety both protocols need revisions in order to guarantee safe emergency medical dispatching. BioMed Central 2017-12-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5747276/ /pubmed/29284542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0464-z Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Torlén, Klara Kurland, Lisa Castrén, Maaret Olanders, Knut Bohm, Katarina A comparison of two emergency medical dispatch protocols with respect to accuracy |
title | A comparison of two emergency medical dispatch protocols with respect to accuracy |
title_full | A comparison of two emergency medical dispatch protocols with respect to accuracy |
title_fullStr | A comparison of two emergency medical dispatch protocols with respect to accuracy |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of two emergency medical dispatch protocols with respect to accuracy |
title_short | A comparison of two emergency medical dispatch protocols with respect to accuracy |
title_sort | comparison of two emergency medical dispatch protocols with respect to accuracy |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5747276/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29284542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0464-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT torlenklara acomparisonoftwoemergencymedicaldispatchprotocolswithrespecttoaccuracy AT kurlandlisa acomparisonoftwoemergencymedicaldispatchprotocolswithrespecttoaccuracy AT castrenmaaret acomparisonoftwoemergencymedicaldispatchprotocolswithrespecttoaccuracy AT olandersknut acomparisonoftwoemergencymedicaldispatchprotocolswithrespecttoaccuracy AT bohmkatarina acomparisonoftwoemergencymedicaldispatchprotocolswithrespecttoaccuracy AT torlenklara comparisonoftwoemergencymedicaldispatchprotocolswithrespecttoaccuracy AT kurlandlisa comparisonoftwoemergencymedicaldispatchprotocolswithrespecttoaccuracy AT castrenmaaret comparisonoftwoemergencymedicaldispatchprotocolswithrespecttoaccuracy AT olandersknut comparisonoftwoemergencymedicaldispatchprotocolswithrespecttoaccuracy AT bohmkatarina comparisonoftwoemergencymedicaldispatchprotocolswithrespecttoaccuracy |