BACKGROUND: The illness and injury severity of patients in emergency situations is normally rated by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) score. Different issues seem to limit the validity of the NACA score, therefore, the aim of the present investigation was to analyse the association between rescue experience of pre-hospital emergency physicians and the estimated jeopardy of patients' vital functions using the NACA score. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, the emergency chart protocols of patients in a ground-based emergency system from 2004 to 2005 were evaluated concerning patients demographic, diagnosis, and related NACA score. Emergency physicians were divided into two groups according to their experience as pre-hospital emergency physicians (group 1: less than 3 years and group 2: 3 or more years). RESULTS: The patients in groups 1 and 2 were comparable concerning the mean age (58+/-24 years vs. 58+/-24 years) and the percentage of males (each 54%). The reasons for the emergency call in both groups were comparable with respect to disease, trauma, and the combination of both (both 77%, 18%, and 5%, resp.). A higher percentage of emergency physicians of group 1 estimated a lower illness and injury severity score in comparison to emergency physicians of group 2 with a longer working experience (NACA I-III: 56% vs. 48%; p<0.05). Accordingly, physicians in group 1 estimated a smaller percentage of patients to be in life-threatening situations (NACA IV-V: 33% vs. 40%; p<0.05). There were no significant differences in the NACA categories VI (2%) and VII (7%) between both groups. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate that emergency physicians with less rescue experience rated the severity of illness or injury relatively lower in comparison to colleagues who had worked in the pre-hospital setting for many years.
BACKGROUND: The illness and injury severity of patients in emergency situations is normally rated by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) score. Different issues seem to limit the validity of the NACA score, therefore, the aim of the present investigation was to analyse the association between rescue experience of pre-hospital emergency physicians and the estimated jeopardy of patients' vital functions using the NACA score. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, the emergency chart protocols of patients in a ground-based emergency system from 2004 to 2005 were evaluated concerning patients demographic, diagnosis, and related NACA score. Emergency physicians were divided into two groups according to their experience as pre-hospital emergency physicians (group 1: less than 3 years and group 2: 3 or more years). RESULTS: The patients in groups 1 and 2 were comparable concerning the mean age (58+/-24 years vs. 58+/-24 years) and the percentage of males (each 54%). The reasons for the emergency call in both groups were comparable with respect to disease, trauma, and the combination of both (both 77%, 18%, and 5%, resp.). A higher percentage of emergency physicians of group 1 estimated a lower illness and injury severity score in comparison to emergency physicians of group 2 with a longer working experience (NACA I-III: 56% vs. 48%; p<0.05). Accordingly, physicians in group 1 estimated a smaller percentage of patients to be in life-threatening situations (NACA IV-V: 33% vs. 40%; p<0.05). There were no significant differences in the NACA categories VI (2%) and VII (7%) between both groups. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate that emergency physicians with less rescue experience rated the severity of illness or injury relatively lower in comparison to colleagues who had worked in the pre-hospital setting for many years.
Authors: M Bernhard; T Hilger; M Sikinger; C Hainer; S Haag; K Streitberger; E Martin; A Gries Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: M Bernhard; N Freerksen; C Hainer; J Rom; R Schreckenberger; C Sohn; E Martin; H Maul Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 1.041