ArticleGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2023
[Health Hotline 1450: Potentials in Urban Areas of Lower Austria. A Retrospective Analysis.]
Article in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSocietal changes (in expectations), efficiency efforts in the health systems and, in some cases, a high need for individual counselling due to low health literacy are difficult to align. Triage hotlines that refer callers to best points of care (POC) are possible solutions. The aim of this study was to analyze the potentials of the Austrian triage hotline 1450 in order to recognize patterns and suggest improvements.
methodsData from 01.01.-31.12.2019 from two urban areas of Lower Austria with their top five system diagnoses and five most frequent best POC per city were retrospectively analysed and compared.
resultsThe five most common reasons for calling the hotline differed by city, resulting in six in the total sample (n=4376): vomiting (4,8%), back pain (3,0%), dizziness/vertigo (2,5%), abdominal pain (2,4%), chest pain (1,5%) and headache (1,4%). In absolute terms, the best POC was ambulance service with 38,7% (ambulance transport and emergency mission). In addition to the recommendation to visit an emergency department (18,5%), this resulted in a high proportion (57,2%) of patients being referred to ambulance service and hospitals. The best POC allocations in both cities (City A 89,8%/City B 92,0%) covered the available care points in urban areas to a large extent.
conclusionIn terms of the type of illness complaints, a more comprehensive referral to the primary care seems possible (headache, back pain, abdominal pain). Since the five most frequent reasons for calling only add up to 15,6% (n=682) of all documented counselling calls of the total sample, further investigations are necessary, taking into consideration the degree of urgency and the time the calls were made.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.