Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24398290›Full record

ArticleScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2014

Variations in contact patterns and dispatch guideline adherence between Norwegian emergency medical communication centres--a cross-sectional study.

Eirin N Ellensen, Steinar Hunskaar, Torben Wisborg, Erik Zakariassen

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Frequent callers contacting the Norwegian national emergency medical number 113: a retrospective study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Observational
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. The difficult medical emergency call: A register-based study of predictors and outcomes.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2017
    Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Eirin N EllensenDepartment of Research, Norwegian Air Ambulance Foundation, P,O, Box 94, N-1441, Drøbak, Norway. eirin.nybo.ellensen@norskluftambulanse.no.
Steinar Hunskaar
Torben Wisborg
Erik Zakariassen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 19 Norwegian Emergency medical communication centres (EMCCs) use Norwegian Index for medical emergency assistance (Index) as dispatch guidelines. Little is known about the use of Index, nor its validity. We aimed to document the epidemiology of contacts made to the public emergency medical phone number and the operators' self-reported use of Index as a first step towards a validation study.

methodsWe registered all medical emergency calls to the EMCCs during a 72 h period in a national cross sectional study. We subsequently sent a questionnaire to all EMCC operators in Norway, asking how they use Index. A combined outcome variable "use of Index" was computed through a Likert scale, range 1-5. Regression models were used to examine factors influencing use.

results2 298 contacts were included. National contact rate was 56/1,000 inhabitants per year, range between EMCCs 34 - 119. Acute contact (life-threatening situations) rate was 21/1,000 per year, range between EMCCs 5 - 31. Index criteria 6 - 'Unresolved problem' accounts for 20% of the 113 contacts, range between EMCCs 10 - 42%. The mean use of Index was 3.95 (SD 0.39), corresponding to "more than 75% of emergency calls". There were differences in use of Index on EMCC level, range 3.7 - 4.4, and a multi regression model explained 23.4% of the variation in use. Operators working rotation with ground ambulance services reported reduced use of Index compared to operators not working in rotation, while distinct EMCC focus on Index increased use of Index compared to EMCCs with no focus on Index. Use of electronic records and operators experience were the main reasons given for not using Index.

conclusionsThere is a large variation between the EMCCs with regard to both contact patterns and use of Index. There is a relatively high overall self-reported use of Index by the operators, with variations on both individual and EMCC level.

Indexed as

AmbulancesCommunicationGuideline AdherenceCross-Sectional StudiesEmergenciesEmergency Medical Service Communication SystemsEmergency Medical ServicesHumansNorwayRetrospective StudiesSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID24398290
PMCPMC3892008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.