Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39300552›Full record

ArticleScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2024

Patients' use of Danish emergency medical services before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a register-based study.

Tim Alex Lindskou, Søren Bie Bogh, Torben Anders Kløjgaard, Marianne Fløjstrup, Fredrik Folke, Ulla Væggemose, Helle Collatz Christensen, Erika Frischknecht Christensen, Mikkel Brabrand, Søren Mikkelsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2024. 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. Article
  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

10 authors.

Tim Alex LindskouCentre for Prehospital and Emergency Research, Aalborg University and Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Søren Bie BoghOdense Patient Exploratory Network (OPEN), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Syddanmark, Denmark.
Torben Anders KløjgaardCentre for Prehospital and Emergency Research, Aalborg University and Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Marianne FløjstrupDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Fredrik FolkeEmergency Medical Services, Capital Region of Denmark, Ballerup, Denmark.
Ulla VæggemoseDepartment of Research & Development, Prehospital Emergency Medical Services, Central Denmark Region, Aarhus, Denmark.
Helle Collatz ChristensenDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Prehospital Center, Næstved, Denmark.
Erika Frischknecht ChristensenCentre for Prehospital and Emergency Research, Aalborg University and Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Mikkel BrabrandDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Søren MikkelsenDepartment of Anaesthesiol. Intens. Care Med., The Prehospital Research Unit, Region of Southern Denmark, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. Soeren.mikkelsen@rsyd.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5187-7027

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, disturbing images of ambulances unable to respond to the demands for prehospital assistance appeared from several parts of the world. In Denmark, however, a notion occurred that the demands for emergency medical assistance declined. The purpose of this study was to compare the patients' use of the Danish Emergency Medical Services (EMS) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, we investigated the overall mortality of the ambulance population, the main reason for calling the emergency medical dispatch centre, and the diagnosis assigned to the admitted patients.

methodsThe study was a nationwide registry-based cohort study based on the national prehospital medical records and the Danish National Patient Registry. The primary outcome was the requested number of ambulances. Secondary outcomes included the primary reason for contact with the dispatch centre (reflected by the dispatch criteria), patient mortality, and the diagnoses assigned to the patients transported to the hospital by ambulance during the COVID-19 pandemic in Denmark in March-December 2020. Comparisons were made using a similar period in 2019 before the pandemic.

resultsIn comparison with the baseline values before the pandemic, the total number of patients treated by the EMS was reduced by 4.5% during the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of patients transported to the hospital during the pandemic was similarly reduced by 3.5%. Compared with baseline values, fewer were patients hospitalised with respiratory diseases during the pandemic (a reduction of 53.3% from April 2019 to April 2020). Compared to the baseline period, there were significant increases in both the 48-h mortality (from 1.4% to 1.5%) and the 30-day mortality (from 4.9% to 5.4%) (p < 0.03 and p < 0.001, respectively), in patients hospitalised during the pandemic.

conclusionDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Danish EMS experienced an overall reduction in the requests for and the use of ambulances and, especially, in the number of patients admitted to hospitals for respiratory diseases. Despite the overall reduction in EMS requests, the mortality of the ambulance population increased, indicating that despite the reduced ambulance use, the prehospital population was more severely ill during the pandemic.

Indexed as

AmbulancesCOVID-19Emergency Medical ServicesRegistriesAdultAgedDenmarkFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID39300552
PMCPMC11414125

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.