| Literature DB >> 29065643 |
Isibor Osebor1, Sanjay Misra1,2, Nicholas Omoregbe1, Adewole Adewumi1, Luis Fernandez-Sanz3.
Abstract
In an emergency, a prompt response can save the lives of victims. This statement generates an imperative issue in emergency medical services (EMS). Designing a system that brings simplicity in locating emergency scenes is a step towards improving response time. This paper therefore implemented and evaluated the performance of an SMS-based emergency geolocation notification system with emphasis on its SMS delivery time and the system's geolocation and dispatch time. Using the RAS metrics recommended by IEEE for evaluation, the designed system was found to be efficient and effective as its reliability stood within 62.7% to 70.0% while its availability stood at 99% with a downtime of 3.65 days/year.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29065643 PMCID: PMC5603145 DOI: 10.1155/2017/7695045
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1System diagram for locating the nearest healthcare center [17].
Figure 2System architecture.
Figure 3System activity diagram showing the movement and flow of activities from when the notification SMS is composed and sent.
Table used for deductions that compares the availability and the corresponding downtime [28].
| Availability | Downtime |
|---|---|
| 90% (1 nine) | 36.5 days/year |
| 99% (2 nines) | 3.65 days/year |
| 99.9% (3 nines) | 8.76 hours/year |
| 99.99% (4 nines) | 52 minutes/year |
| 99.999% (5 nines) | 5 minutes/year |
| 99.9999% (6 nines) | 31 seconds/year |
Frequency table showing the delivery time analysis of the 13,500 SMSs sent during implementation.
| Time in seconds between sending SMS and receipt of confirmation ( | Frequency for each time recorded ( |
|
|---|---|---|
| 3 | 2526 | 7578 |
| 4 | 10,135 | 40,540 |
| 5 | 302 | 1510 |
| 6 | 211 | 1266 |
| 8 | 58 | 464 |
| 9 | 41 | 369 |
| 10 | 117 | 1170 |
| 11 | 110 | 1210 |
| ∑ | ∑ |
Frequency table showing the dispatch time analysis for the 13,500 simulations.
| Time in seconds taken by system to determine SMS origin geolocation and dispatch closest ambulance to scene ( | Frequency for each time recorded ( |
|
|---|---|---|
| 6 | 787 | 4722 |
| 7 | 622 | 4354 |
| 8 | 11,338 | 90,704 |
| 9 | 291 | 2619 |
| 10 | 173 | 1730 |
| 12 | 171 | 2052 |
| 16 | 118 | 1888 |
| ∑ | ∑ |
A comparison of the proposed SMS notification application with others.
| Functionalities | Emergency SMS [ | POLINT-112-SMS [ | MEHM-DESIGN [ | The proposed application |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) Making silent calls during risky emergencies | Yes | Yes | Not applicable | Yes |
| (2) Automatic transmission of geolocation from an emergency scene by SMS to the nearest ambulance point automatically | No | No | No | Yes |
| (3) Ease of use and time-saving functionality during use | Yes | No | Partially | Yes |
| (4) GPS technology required | Yes | No | No | No |
| (5) SMS gateway to improve SMS reliability and delivery time | No | Yes | Uses telephony server daemon | Yes |
| (6) Strictly designed for reporting emergencies in real time | Yes | Partially | No | Yes |
| (7) Swift emergency geolocation transmission due to automatic geolocation transmission functionality | No | No | No | Yes |
| (8) Has information management support capability | Yes | Yes | Yes | Partially |
| (9) Receives patients' bio, medical, and scene crisis report data by SMS | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| (10) Sends healthcare-related information apart from geolocation to the patients/users | Yes | No | Yes | No |