Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31750406›Full record

ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2019

Outcomes in children evaluated but not transported by ambulance personnel: retrospective cohort study.

Jelena Oulasvirta, Heli Salmi, Markku Kuisma, Eero Rahiala, Mitja Lääperi, Heini Harve-Rytsälä

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Why do infants need out-of-hospital emergency medical services? A retrospective, population-based study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2021
    Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jelena OulasvirtaDivision of Anaesthesiology, Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-6750-4615
Heli SalmiDivision of Anaesthesiology, Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Markku KuismaDepartment of Emergency Care and Services, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Eero RahialaNew Children's Hospital, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Mitja LääperiDepartment of Emergency Care and Services, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Heini Harve-RytsäläDepartment of Emergency Care and Services, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
University of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNot all children with an out-of-hospital emergency medical contact are transported by ambulance to the emergency department (ED). Non-transport means that after on-scene evaluation and possible treatment, ambulance personnel may advise the patient to monitor the situation at home or may refer the patient to seek medical attention by other means of transport. As selecting the right patients for ambulance transport is critical for optimising patient safety and resource use, we studied outcomes in non-transported children to identify possible risk groups that could benefit from ambulance transport.

methodsIn a population-based retrospective cohort study of all children aged 0-15 years encountered but not transported by ambulance in Helsinki, Finland, between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016, we evaluated (1) 12-month mortality, (2) intensive care admissions, (3) unscheduled ED contacts within the following 96 hours after the non-transport decision and (4) the clinical status of the child on presentation to ED in the case of a secondary ED visit.

resultsOf all children encountered by out-of-hospital emergency medical services, 3579/7765 (46%) were not transported to ED by ambulance. There was no mortality or intensive care admissions related to the non-transport. The risk factors for an unscheduled secondary ED visit after a non-transport decision were young age (p=0.001), non-transport decision during the early morning hours (p<0.001) and certain dispatch codes, including 'dyspnoea' (p<0.001), 'vomiting/diarrhoea' (p=0.030) and 'mental illness' (p=0.019). We did not detect deterioration in patients' clinical presentation at ED traceable to non-transport decisions.

conclusionsNot transporting all children by ambulance after an out-of-hospital emergency medical contact was not associated with deaths, intensive care admissions or significant deterioration in general condition in our study population and healthcare system. Special attention and a formal non-transport protocol are warranted in certain subgroups, including infants.

Indexed as

Accident & EmergencyHealth services researchOutcomes researchPaediatric Practice

Identifiers

PMID31750406
PMCPMC6830473
OpenAlexW2981395432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.