ArticleClinical epidemiology2024
Emergency Call versus General Practitioner Requested Ambulances - Patient Mortality, Disease Severity and Pattern.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trends in urgency levels and risk of acute critical condition among prehospital patients. A seven-year observational historic register-based cohort study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Ambulance requests by general practitioners for primary care patients (GP-requested) are often omitted in studies on increased demand within emergency care but may comprise a substantial patient group. We aimed to assess acute severity, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and diagnostic pattern, including comorbidity, and mortality among GP-requested ambulance patients, compared to emergency call ambulance patients. Our hypothesis was that emergency call patients had more severe health issues than GP-requested ambulance patients. Methods: Historic population-based cohort study of ambulance patients in the North Denmark Region, 2016-2020. Hospital contact data including diagnoses, ambulance data, vital signs and vital status was linked using each patient's unique identification number. Primary outcome measure was mortality within 1, 7, and 30 days. Secondary outcomes were disease severity expressed as modified National Early Warning Score (NEWS2), and ICU admission. Admission status and hospital diagnostic pattern, including comorbidity were described and compared. Results: We included 255,487 patients. GP-requested patients (N = 119,361, 46.7%) were older (median years [IQR] 73 [58-83] versus 61 [37-76]) and more had moderate/severe comorbidity (11.9%, N = 13,806 versus 4.9%, N = 6145) than the emergency call patients. Prehospital mNEWS2 median scores were lower for GP-requested patients. For both groups, mNEWS2 was highest among patients aged 66+. GP-requested patients had higher 30-day mortality (9.0% (95% CI: 8.8-9.2), N = 8996) than emergency call patients (5.2% (95% CI: 5.1-5.4), N = 6727). Circulatory (12.0%, 11,695/97,112) and respiratory diseases (11.6%, 11,219/97,112) were more frequent among GP-requested patients than emergency call patients ((10.7%, 12,640/118,102) and (5.8%, 6858/118,102)). The highest number of deaths was found for health issues 'circulatory diseases' in the emergency call group and 'other factors' followed by "respiratory diseases" in the GP-requested group. Conclusion: GP-requested patients constituted nearly half of the EMS volume, they were older, with more comorbidity, had serious conditions with substantial acute severity, and a higher 30-day mortality than emergency call patients.
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.