Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31661006›Full record

Observational studyScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2019

Variation in accessibility of the population to an Emergency Medical Communication Centre: a multicentre observational study.

Yann Penverne, Brice Leclere, Eric Lecarpentier, Jean-Sébastien Marx, Benjamin Gicquel, Laurent Goix, Paul-Georges Reuter

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Factors affecting communication time in an emergency medical communication centers.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

7 authors.

Yann PenverneSamu 44, Department of Emergency Medicine, University Hospital of Nantes, Nantes, France.
Brice LeclereDepartment of Medical Evaluation and Epidemiology, Nantes University Hospital, Nantes, France.
Eric LecarpentierSAMU 94, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, F-94000, Creteil, France.
Jean-Sébastien MarxSAMU 75, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Universitaire Necker-Enfants-Malades, 75730, Paris, France.
Benjamin GicquelSAMU 85, Centre hospitalier départemental Vendée, La Roche Sur Yon, France.
Laurent GoixSAMU 93, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Paris-Seine-Saint-Denis, Hôpital Avicenne, 93009, Bobigny, France.
Paul-Georges ReuterSAMU 92, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Raymond Poincaré, 104, Boulevard Raymond Poincaré, 92380, Garches, France. paul-georges.reuter@aphp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9022-5876

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccess to an Emergency Medical Communication Centre is essential for the population in emergency situations. Handling inbound calls without delay requires managing activity, process and outcome measures of the Emergency Medical Communication Centre to improve the workforce management and the level of service. France is facing political decisions on the evolution of the organisation of Emergency Medical Communication Centres to improve accessibility for the population. First, we aim to describe the variation in activity between Emergency Medical Communication Centres, and second, to explore the correlation between process measures and outcome measures.

methodsUsing telephone activity data extraction, we conducted an observational multicentre study of six French Emergency Medical Communication Centres from 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017. We described the activity (number of incoming calls, call rate per 1000 inhabitants), process measure (agent occupation rate), and outcome measure (number of calls answered within 20 s) by hourly range and estimated the correlation between them according to the structural equation methods.

resultsA total of 52,542 h of activity were analysed, during which 2,544,254 calls were received. The annual Emergency Medical Communication Centre call rate was 285.5 [95% CI: 285.2-285.8] per 1000 inhabitants. The average hourly number of calls ranged from 29 to 61 and the call-handled rate from 75 to 98%. There are variations in activity between Emergency Medical Communication Centres. The mean agent occupation rate was correlated with the quality of service at 20 s (coefficient at - 0.54). The number of incoming calls per agent was correlated with the mean occupation rate (coefficient at 0.67). Correlation coefficients varied according to the centres and existed between different process measures.

conclusionsThe activity dynamics of the six Emergency Medical Communication Centres are not identical. This variability, illustrating the particularity of each centre, must be accurately assessed and should be taken into account in managerial considerations. The call taker occupation rate is the leverage in the workforce management to improve the population accessibility.

Indexed as

Call CentersEmergency Medical Service Communication SystemsFranceHumansOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareQuality Indicators, Health CareAccessibilityEmergency Medical Communication CentreScheduling processWork force management

Identifiers

PMID31661006
PMCPMC6819458

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.