ArticleDer Anaesthesist2004
[Assessment of psychiatric emergencies by physicians in the pre-hospital emergency medical system. A re-evaluation after 7 years].
Article in Der Anaesthesist, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Analysis of the German state medical examination regarding psychiatrically relevant topics].Der Nervenarzt · 2017Article
- Stress-coping styles of 459 emergency care physicians in Germany : A pilot study.Der Anaesthesist · 2016Article
- [The situation of emergency psychiatry in Germany].Der Nervenarzt · 2015Review
- [Necessity for treatment of psychiatric emergencies in the emergency medical service. Evaluation of the "indicator for psychiatric pharmacotherapy"].Der Anaesthesist · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn the German emergency medical system (EMS) psychiatric emergency situations (PES) are now responsible for up to 15% of all calls for the emergency physician (EP). A survey which was first conducted in 1996 to reveal knowledge about PES, reported a significant need for training. Seven years later it is interesting to investigate whether different conditions in the EMS may have changed assessments and attitudes.
methodsThe questionnaire of 1996 was modified to enable a comparison of PES and other frequent emergency situations with respect to the estimated number and the subjective stress. Open and multiple-choice questions or visual analogue scales were used to obtain the following data: demographic data, frequency of and stress by PES and other medical emergencies, own knowledge, and interest about training programs.
resultsOf the EPs 274 responded (male/female: 74/26%, mean age: 38 years, mean experience as an EP 6 years, anaesthesiologists 69%). The frequency of PES was estimated at 5% and 44% of EPs thought that there had been an increase in recent years. Personal knowledge was judged to be good by only 24%. The interest in training programs even increased slightly compared to the first survey; of particular interest was training in drug abuse disorders. Subsequent to internal, neurological and surgical emergencies, PES are considered to rank fourth in frequency, however the strain imposed by PES is significantly higher than for these other emergency situations. DISCUSSION: The results indicate an increase of relevance of PES in the German EMS, however, assessments made by the EP only changed marginally over the time period. The subjective awareness of the frequency of PES underestimates the reality in emergency medicine. The importance of training programs remains high to improve knowledge and to reduce feelings of incapability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15197466What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.