JRSM > Volume 95, Number 5 > Pp. 270

This Article Full Text (PDF) Send a Quick Comment Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Quick Comments are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Marks, P. Articles by Daniel, T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Emergency ambulance triage

Peter Marks   Tim Daniel

Division of Public Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK
North Nottinghamshire Health Authority

Mr Thakore and colleagues (March 2002 JRSM¹) conclude that 55% of calls for emergency ambulances did not merit an immediate response. As they acknowledge, the design of the study was not ideal. The initial reason for the request was determined from ambulance crew and accident and emergency (A&E) data after the patient had been seen. This will almost inevitably introduce bias when applying the triage criteria, and the assessment should have been blinded. Also, it is much easier to make such determinations in hindsight, with additional time and clinical information, than when faced with a real call when one has to consider the consequences of the decision reached.

It is surprising that this paper makes no reference to priority-based dispatch systems, such as the Advanced Medical Priority Dispatch System (AMPDS), as these are currently used by most ambulance services in the UK. These systems have been shown to have a low risk of serious under-prioritization of life-threatening episodes². However, work that we have undertaken in Nottingham suggests that they may not be very effective in predicting low-priority 999 calls³.

The NHS Executive has stressed the importance of developing telephone prioritization systems that will free ambulance services from having to respond to ‘patients who dialled 999 but who do not need emergency care’⁴. We believe this may be difficult to achieve. Appropriate and effective telephone triage on non-emergency 999 calls requires a greater understanding of the relationship between the initial telephone assessment by ambulance control and the subsequent outcome of the individual call. Without these data we will not be able to ensure that such a system could operate safely and we endorse the authors' views that prospective studies are essential to assess the feasibility of accurately identifying lower priority calls.

REFERENCES

1. Thakore S, McGugan EA, Morrison W. Emergency ambulance dispatch: is there a case for triage? J R Soc Med2002; 95:126 -9[Abstract/Free Full Text]

2. Nicholl J, Coleman P, Parry G, et al. Emergency priority dispatch systems—a new era in the provision of ambulance services in the UK. Pre-hospital Emerg Care1999; 3:71 -5

3. Marks PJ, Daniel TD, Afolabi O, Spiers G, Nguyen Van-Tam JS. Emergency (999) calls to the ambulance service that do not result in the patient being transported to hospital: an epidemiological study. Emerg Med J (in press)

4. Department of Health. Reforming Emergency Care. London: Stationery Office, 2001

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This Article Full Text (PDF) Send a Quick Comment Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Quick Comments are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Marks, P. Articles by Daniel, T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Social Bookmarking                      What's this?