Literature DB >> 12879391

Emergency calls not requiring an urgent ambulance response: expert consensus.

Malcolm Woollard1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study sought expert consensus about which categories of patients from 248 Medical Priority (MPDS) ambulance dispatch codes might be appropriate for a nonemergency response or for whom dispatch of an ambulance might be appropriately denied if the patient were referred to a more suitable health care provider.
METHODS: A Delphi technique was used. Ten physicians, from the specialities of emergency medicine, general practice, and pre-hospital care formed the expert panel but were blinded to each other's identity. Participants received a written description of the operation of the MPDS and the Delphi technique and voted independently by mail.
RESULTS: Using majority voting, 54 dispatch codes (22%) were recommended for a nonemergency response/referral. This equates to 12.44% of annual emergency calls in a typical UK ambulance service (n = 9,021; 95% confidence interval, 12.21 to 12.69%). The kappa statistic (chance-corrected proportional agreement) between members of the expert panel was 0.62 (substantial).
CONCLUSIONS: The recommended dispatch codes for non-emergency response or referral represent a significant proportion of emergency ambulance calls. Theoretically, the implementation of nonemergency responses could have the benefit of reducing accidents involving emergency ambulances and could lead to improved response times for critically ill patients by freeing up resources. It could also support the targeting of patients to appropriate health care providers on first contact with the health service. However, given the poor reliability of expert opinion, further research using clinical outcome data is required to validate the recommendations made in this article before changing existing ambulance response systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12879391     DOI: 10.1080/10903120390936626

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care        ISSN: 1090-3127            Impact factor:   3.077


  5 in total

Review 1.  A review on ambulance offload delay literature.

Authors:  Mengyu Li; Peter Vanberkel; Alix J E Carter
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2018-07-07

2.  Redirecting emergency medical services patients with unmet primary care needs: the perspective of paramedics on feasibility and acceptance of an alternative care path in a qualitative investigation from Berlin, Germany.

Authors:  Sarah Oslislo; Lisa Kümpel; Rebecca Resendiz Cantu; Christoph Heintze; Martin Möckel; Felix Holzinger
Journal:  BMC Emerg Med       Date:  2022-06-11

3.  Diverting less urgent utilizers of emergency medical services to primary care: is it feasible? Patient and morbidity characteristics from a cross-sectional multicenter study of self-referring respiratory emergency department consulters.

Authors:  Felix Holzinger; Sarah Oslislo; Rebecca Resendiz Cantu; Martin Möckel; Christoph Heintze
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2021-03-24

4.  An exploration of the use of simple statistics to measure consensus and stability in Delphi studies.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Holey; Jennifer L Feeley; John Dixon; Vicki J Whittaker
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  Consensus on items and quantities of clinical equipment required to deal with a mass casualties big bang incident: a national Delphi study.

Authors:  Edward A S Duncan; Keith Colver; Nadine Dougall; Kevin Swingler; John Stephenson; Purva Abhyankar
Journal:  BMC Emerg Med       Date:  2014-02-22
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.