Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine 1/2018

Open Access 01.12.2018 | Review

The accuracy of medical dispatch - a systematic review

verfasst von: K. Bohm, L. Kurland

Erschienen in: Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine | Ausgabe 1/2018

Abstract

Background

It is a challenge to dispatch Emergency medical Services (EMS) appropriately with limited resources and maintaining patient safety; this requires accurate dispatching systems. The objective of the current systematic review was to examine the evidence, according to GRADE, for medical dispatching systems to accurately dispatch EMS according to level of acuity and in recognition of specific conditions.
A systematic search was performed trough PubMed, Web of Science, Embase (free text in all fields), Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to 16th of May, 2017. A combination of keywords and Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms relevant to “emergency medical dispatch criteria” were used, to search for articles published between 2012 and 2017. Publications were included according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria using the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol. Level of evidence was evaluated in accordance with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Articles included were those that provided evidence for at least one of the measures of dispatch system accuracy; i.e. sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive and/or over- and under-triage. The search identified 1445 articles. After the removal of duplicates, 382 titles were reviewed for relevance and an additional 359 articles were excluded based on manuscript title and abstract. An additional five articles were excluded after review of the full text versions of the remaining articles. The current review included 18 publications which all were based on primary research.

Conclusions

The 18 articles addressed the identification of cardiac arrest, stroke, medical priority and major trauma using different dispatching systems. The results of the current review show that there is a very low to low overall level of evidence for the accuracy of medical dispatching systems. We suggest that it is necessary to create a consensus on common standards for reporting before consensus can be reached for the level of accuracy in medical dispatching systems.
Abkürzungen
CBD
Criteria-Based Dispatch
EMS
Emergency medical services
GRADE
Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation
HEMS
Helicopter emergency services
MeSH
Medical Subject Heading
METTS-A
Emergency Triage and Treatment System-A
MPDS
Medical Priority Dispatch system
NACA
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics
NPV
Negative predictive value
PPV
Positive predictive value
PRISMA
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
PROSPERO
International prospective register of systematic reviews

Background

The objective for the telecommunicator at the dispatch center is - based on the information obtained during a telephone call – to evaluate whether emergency medical services (EMS) are needed and with which priority the resource needs to be dispatched [1]. The challenge is to dispatch EMS appropriately with limited resources and still be safe for the patients; this requires accurate dispatching systems.
There are several types of dispatching systems but they can be categorized as two types of systems; the Medical Priority Dispatch system (MPDS) [2, 3] mainly used in Anglo-Saxon countries, and the criteria-based dispatch (CBD) [4, 5] used in Nordic and European countries. Common for both systems is that the telecommunicator allocates each call to one of the listed chief complaints. While MPDS is based on codes and scripted questions to put to the caller, the CBD system relies on the experience of the telecommunicator to conduct the interview. In addition to the different systems for medical dispatching, there are also different systems for the EMS response. The EMS organization can have e.g. advanced and/or basic life support ambulances, first responders or pre-hospital emergency physicians and helicopter emergency services (HEMS). However, the accuracy of EMS systems, which per definition includes both dispatching and the response to dispatching are not systematically described.
Dispatching accuracy, or effectiveness, relates to the ability of the dispatching system to discriminate between the required EMS resources and the priority of these. Measures of accuracy are both discriminative, e.g. sensitivity and specificity, and predictive, e.g. positive predictive value and negative predictive value [6]. Other relevant measures of performance of dispatching systems are over- and under-triage [7]. While our systems are geared towards over-triage so as not to miss critical patients in need of medical interventions, i.e. to avoid under-triage, over-triage consumes resources and increases the risk for occupational injuries of health care personnel. There is, however, no consensus on levels for over-and under-triage or dispatching accuracy.
The objective of the current systematic review was to examine the evidence, according to GRADE, for medical dispatching systems to accurately dispatch EMS according to level of acuity and in recognition of specific conditions. Accuracy was measured as sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value in addition to over- and under-triage.

Methods

Search strategy

The current systematic review includes the identification of articles according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria [8]. The identification of publications included in the current review was made through a systematic search of the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase (free text in all fields), Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to 16th of May, 2017. A combination of keywords and Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms relevant to “emergency medical dispatch criteria”, published in the last 5 years, was used with the assistance of a librarian (Table 1).
Table 1
Search string.
PubMed
 1
(medical[all fields] AND dispatch*[all fields]) OR (emergency[all fields] AND dispatch*[all fields]) OR “Emergency Medical Dispatch”[all fields] OR dispatch centres[all fields]
 2
triage[all fields]
 3
Criteria based[all fields]
 4
Physician based[all fields]
 5
“emergency medicine” [all fields]
 6
2 OR 3 OR 4 OR 5
 7
1 AND 6
 8
English, year> = 2012
Web of Science (Indexes = SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI, ESCI Timespan = All years)
 1
Topic = (Emergency OR Medical OR centres) AND Dispatch*
 2
Topic = triage
 3
Topic = criteria based
 4
Topic = physician based
 5
Topic “emergency medicine”
 6
2 OR 3 OR 4 OR 5
 7
1 AND 6
 8
7 AND English, year > = 2012, Article, Review
Embase (free text in all fields)
 1
(emergency OR medical OR centres) AND dispatch*
 2
Triage
 3
criteria based
 4
physician based
 5
“emergency medicine”
 6
2 OR 3 OR 4 OR 5
 7
1 AND 6
 8
7 AND English, year > = 2012, article, review, article in press
CRD - Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, York
 1
Dispatch*, english, year > = 2012
Cochrane
 1
(emergency OR medical OR centres) AND dispatch*
 2
Triage OR criteria OR physician OR “emergency medicine”
 3
1 AND 2
 4
3 AND english, year > = 2012, NOT conference

Inclusion- and exclusion criteria

Publications were included in the systematic review if they presented primary data which evaluated the accuracyof medical dispatch systems in current use and provided evidence for at least one of the measures of dispatch system accuracy; i.e. sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) and/or over- and under-triage. Publications evaluating dispatch/ triage for military resources, mass casualty/disaster and inter-facility transfers were excluded. The search was limited to studies on humans, published in English.

Title and abstract screening

The titles and abstracts were screened independently by the two authors. Inclusion in the subsequent full-text review was made through discussion and consensus.

Full text screening for relevance

The selected full-text articles were reviewed independently on the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Relevant articles were reviewed to determine whether they provided evidence for at least one of the measures of dispatch system accuracy; i.e. sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) and/or over- and under-triage.

Level of evidence according to GRADE

Publications were reviewed in detail and the overall quality of evidence was based on the recommendations of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group [9]. The level of evidence was categorized as ‘very low’, ‘low’, ‘moderate’, ‘high’ or ‘very high’ in accordance with GRADE [10] with special emphasis on diagnostic tests [10]. Briefly; retrospective studies are graded as very low or low, while high or very high require a prospective study design [10]. Factors that determine and can decrease the quality of evidence are study design, risk of bias, indirectness, inconsistency in study results, imprecise evidence and publication bias [10].

Measurement of inter-rater agreement

The kappa coefficient was calculated to study the agreement between the observers ability to classify titles and abstracts (yes/no) [11].

Results

Study selection

The search identified 1445 publications. After the removal of duplicates, 382 titles were reviewed for relevance and an additional 359 citations were excluded based on manuscript title and abstract. An additional five articles were excluded (three non-dispatch studies and two with no primary data) after review of full text of the remaining publications. The current review included 18 publications. The PRISMA flow diagram summarizes the inclusion/exclusion process, Fig. 1.

Inter-rater agreement

The k values, were 0.53 (95% CI; 0.45–0.62) for comparison of titles and 0.68 (95% CI; 0.50–0.86) for comparison of abstracts. The latter is considered as ‘substantial’ agreement between the raters [12].

Characteristics of included articles

Characteristics of the 18 included publications are presented in Table 2. All included publications were primary research. It was not possible to perform a meta-analysis due to the heterogeneity of the studies included in the current systematic review. The results are presented below in relation to their study populations and main objectives, i.e. identification of cardiac arrest, stroke, medical priority and helicopter medical services dispatching for major trauma.
Table 2
Study characteristics included in systematic review
First author (year of publication)
Design
GRADE Rating
Area and/or Country of publication
Population
Number of patients/incidents
Dispatching system category
Additional information
Clawson J. J. et al. (2016) [25].
Retrospective descriptive
Very low
Salt Lake City, USA
EMD identified strokes
4712 hospital confirmed strokes
Medical Priority Dispatch System
Final inhospital diagnosis as stroke was reference
Dami F. et al. (2017) [22].
Retrospective observational
Very low
Region of Vaud, Switzerland
Identification of acute stroke, onset within 5 h
427 patients
Criteria Based Dispatch
Final inhospital diagnosis as stroke was reference
Malekzadeh J. et al. (2015) [24].
“Quasi empirical design”
Moderate
Mashhad, Iran
Suspected stroke among callers
246 patients
CPSS vs. “Regional system”
Final inhospital diagnosis as stroke was reference
Krebes S. et al. (2012) [26].
Retrospective observational
Low
Berlin, Germany
Emergency calls due to stroke
207 patients
MPDS with a new developed algorithm
Final inhospital diagnosis as stroke was reference
Viereck S. et al. (2016) [23].
Retrospective observational
Very low
EMS Copenhagen
Emergency calls due to stroke
2653 patients
Criteria Based Dispatch
Final inhospital diagnosis as stroke/TIA was reference
Deakin C. D. et al. (2017) [17].
Retrospective observational
Very low
United Kingdom
Emergency calls due to CA, adult
469,400/8830 emergency calls, adult
NHS Pathways
Using ambulance crew’s decision as reference
Moller T. P. et al. (2016) [18].
Retrospective observational
Very low
Denmark and Sweden
Patients from national cardiac arrest registers and connected emergency calls
776 patients from Denmark and 346 from Sweden
Criteria Based Dispatch
The information from the ambulance crew (cardiac arrest register) was reference
Fukushima H. et al. (2015) [19].
Before/after comparison
Very low
Japan
Patients from national cardiac arrest register and connected emergency calls
478 patients (before) and 427 (after)
“Regional system”
The information from the ambulance crew (cardiac arrest register) was reference
Tanaka Y. et al. (2014) [20].
Prospective observational
Very low
Japan
Emergency calls due to CA and connected ambulance records
2747 emergency calls with dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation attempt
“Regional system”
The information from the fire department crew (cardiac arrest register) was reference
Vaillancourt C. et al. (2015) [16].
Retrospective observational
Very low
Canada
Emergency calls due to CA
2260/1536 emergency calls
DPCI
The information from the ambulance crew (cardiac arrest register) was reference
Gellerstedt M. et al. (2016) [21].
Retrospective observational
Low
Vätragötland, Sweden
Emergency calls due to chest pain
2285 consecutive patients dialed 112 with chest pain
Criteria Based Dispatch
Inhospital diagnosis as acute coronary syndrome was reference
Giannakopoulos G. F. et al. (2012) [15].
Retrospective
Very low
Netherlands
Trauma-related dispatch
420 trauma patients
Based on MOI
Identification of major trauma due to definitions
Wilmer I. et al. (2015) [27].
Retrospective observational
Low
London’s Air Ambulance
Major trauma
2203 helicopter activations
Closest to CBD, but there is no formal protocol
Identification of patients with serious injury due to definitions
Ball S. J. et al. (2016) [28].
Retrospective observational
Low
Australia, Perth Western Australia
Consecutive cases of ambulance dispatch
211,473 consecutive cases of ambualnce dispatch, “whole of population study”
Medical Priority Dispatch System
Time critical condition by paramedic-determined patient condition at the time of departing the scene was used as reference
Dami F. et al. (2015) [13].
Retrospective observational
Very low
Switzerland
Primary missions
29,008 ambulance missions
Criteria Based Dispatch
The severity of cases assessed by paramedics on site using the NACA-score was reference
Ek B. et al. (2013) [29].
Retrospective
Very low
Jämtland, Sweden
Consecutive cases of medical dispatch
4835 ambulance dispatches
Criteria Based Dispatch
METTS-A according to ambulance was reference
Leopardi M. and Sommacampagna M (2013) [30].
Retrospective observational
Very low
Italy
Emergency calls
53,606 emergency calls
“Regional system”
The sensitivity of subjective experience-based nurse dispatch in detecting the need for phycisian interventions
Moser A. et al. (2017) [14].
Before/after comparison
Very low
Switzerland
Emergency calls and connected ambulance records
27,886 (before) and 38,748(after)
Criteria Based Dispatch
Severity of cases assessed by paramedics on site using the NACA-score was used as reference
CA Cardiac arrest, CPSS Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Score, DPCI Dispatch Priority Card Index, HEMS Helicopter Emergency Medical Service, INT Paramedic interrogation of caller, MOI Mechanism of injury, NHS National Health System, REQ Land ambulance request
The main results; the accuracy for dispatching systems is presented in Table 3, along with the results for over- and under-triage. Three articles presented all measures [1315].
Table 3
Measures for dispatch accuracy per included study
Category
Author, year
Sensitivity % (95% CI)
Specificity % (95% CI)
PPV % (95% CI)
NPV % (95% CI)
Over-triage % (95% CI)
Under-triage
% (95% CI)
Stroke
Clawson et al., 2016
86.4
26.6
20.0
90.2
  
Dami et al., 2017
67.8 (54.3–79.4)
98.6 (98.4–98.7)
9.4 (6.6–12.
99.9 (99.9–99.9)
  
Malekzadeh et al., 2015
    
11.6 vs 20.8
10.7 vs 13.6
Krebes et al., 2012
Stroke: 53.3 (47.0–59.0)
97 (97–98)
Stroke: 47.8 (42.0–54.0)
98 (97–98)
  
Viereck et al., 2016
66.2 (64.4–68.0)
 
30.2 (29.1–31.4)
   
Cardiac arrest
Deakin et al., 2017
75.9 (74.3–77.3)
98.6 (98.6–98.7)
26.8 (25.88–27.7)
99.8 (99.82–99.85)
  
Möller et al., 2016
Copenhagen 80.7 (77.7–84.3),
Skåne 86.0 (81.3–89.8)
     
Fukushima et al., 2015
93
50
    
Tanaka et al., 2014
72.9 (71.7–74.1)
99.6 (99.6–99.6)
    
Vaillancourt et al., 2015
65.9 (63.5–68.2)
32.3 (29.0–35.9)
67.4
30.9
  
Acute coronary syndrome
Gellerstedt et al., 2016
82.6
     
Major trauma
Giannokopoulos et al., 2012
87.7
45.3
48.4
86.3
44
20.6
Wilmer et al., 2015
MOI + INT: 80.2
   
MOI: 41.2
REQ/all: 19.7
INT: 30.2
REQ: 27.7
Medical priority
Ball et al., 2016
93.32 (92.71–93.89)
48.6 (48.45–48.89)
    
Dami et al., 2015
86 (85.6–86.4)
48 (47.4–48.6)
21.7 (21.2–22-2)
95.4 (95.2–95.6)
78
4.6
Ek et al., 2013
93.32
15.4
    
Leopardi et al., 2013
78.0 (76.9–79.1)
83.8 (83.4–84.1)
36.6 (35.8–37.5)
96.9 (96.8–97.1)
  
Moser et al., 2017
A + B 86.8 (86.5–87.1)
A + B 67.4 (66.9–67.9)
29.2 (28.7–29.7)
97.0 (70.3–71.3)
After 70.8 (70.3–71.3)
After 3.0 (2.8–3.2)
CI Confidence Interval, DPCI Dispatch Priority Card Index, HEMS Helicopter Emergency Medical Service, INT Paramedic interrogation of caller, MPDS Medical Priority Dispatch System, MOI Mechanism of injury, NHS National Health System, NPV Negative Predicted Value, PPV Positive Predicted Value, REQ Land ambulance request

Identification of cardiac arrest

The overall sensitivity for identifying cardiac arrest was 65.9% [16], 75.9% [17], 80.7 and 86.0% at two different sites [18], respectively. In two studies, the sensitivity was 93.0% [19] and 72.9% [20] after implementation of modified protocols. These five organizations used five different systems/protocols; NHS Pathways [Deakin], Criteria Based Dispatch (CBD) [20] and Dispatch Priority Card Index (DPCI) [16], and two different Japanese protocols [19, 20]. The corresponding specificity was 32.3% [16], 50.0% [19], 98.6% [17], and 99.6% [20] respectively. The PPV was reported in one of the cardiac arrest-studies as 26.8% (95% CI 25.9–27.7%) [17]. In these five studies the sensitivity and specificity relate to identification of cardiac arrest among patients that the ambulance personnel reported as cardiac arrest, not to a sample of unselected calls.

Identification of acute coronary syndrome (ACS)

Among patients calling with chest pain, Gellerstedt et al. demonstrated a sensitivity of 82.6 and 17.4% false negatives when identifying acute coronary syndrome [21].

Identification of stroke

The sensitivity for identifying stroke was 67.8% [22], 66.2% [23] and 77.7% [24], all three articles using local adaptations of the Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Score, and 86.4% [25] using the MPDS Stroke Diagnostic Tool. While the specificity was 26.6% [25] for the Stroke Diagnostic Tool. Krebes et al. implemented a new algorithm based on the MPDS algorithm, and reported a sensitivity of 53.3% [26].
The PPV was 20.0% and the NPV 90.2% for the Stroke Diagnostic Tool [25], and 30.2% PPV for the adapted Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Score [23]. The PPV was 47.8% with the new algorithm by Krebes [26].
Over-triage was 11.6% for the adapted Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Score and 20.8% for the National Guidelines for Telephone Triage Tool and under-triage 10.7 and 13.6% respectively [24].
In these five articles the sensitivity and specificity relate to identification of stroke among patients with the hospital diagnosis of stroke, not to a general population of unselected calls.

Identification of major trauma

Only publications addressing the use of HEMS in the context of major trauma met with the inclusion criteria, which is why other publications addressing major trauma were not included in the current review. The dispatch criteria for HEMS had a sensitivity 87.7%, a specificity of 45.3%, a PPV of 48.4%, and a NPV of 86.3% for the HEMS dispatch criteria to identify major trauma patients [15]. Wilmer et al. described the different dispatching methods within the same dispatching system to study the accuracy of the systems for dispatching HEMS for major trauma [27]. Mechanism of injury together with the paramedic interrogation had a sensitivity of 80.2% and under-triage of 19.7%.
Two studies [15, 21] are in part derivation studies; i.e. studies with the aim of deriving a more accurate dispatching system. The data included in the current review from these articles is that reflecting the dispatching system in use, not the derived and unevaluated new dispatching system.

Identification according to medical priority

The overall sensitivity of identifying time critical conditions defined as ambulance dispatch priority 1 was 93.32% [28], for dispatching priority 1 and 2 in accordance with the standard of Medical Emergency Triage and Treatment System-A, METTS-A, red, orange and yellow, 95.9% [29]. In two studies, using Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) score, the overall sensitivity was 87% [14], and 86% [12] respectively. The sensitivity was 78.0% [30] using local criteria. While the specificity was 48% [13], 48.67% [29], 67% [14], 83.8%, and [30]. Ek et al. showed a specificity of 15.4% for priority 3 dispatching in accordance with METTS-A green and blue [29].
The reported predicted values were; PPV of 36.6% (CI 35.8–37.5%) and NPV of 96.9% (95% CI 96.8–97.1%) [30]. In Dami et al. PPV was 21.7% (21.2–22.2%) and NPV was 95.4 (95.2–95.6%) [12]. Ball et al. reported PPV of 5.85% (CI 5.71–5.99%) and NPV of 0.47% (95% CI 0.43–0.51%) [28]. Over-triage rate was 78% [13] and 71% [14] and under-triage rate was 4.6% [13] and 3% [14] respectively.

Discussion

The results of the current study show that there is a very low to low overall level of evidence for the accuracy of medical dispatching systems. Although all the articles included in the current systematic review are primary research, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis due to the heterogeneity of the sample. Moreover, it is striking that only two of the 18 articles included in the current review presents information on all measures of dispatching accuracy together with over-and under-triage, and there was only one prospective study [24]. We suggest that it may be necessary to create a consensus on common standards for reporting before consensus can be formed for the level of accuracy in medical dispatching systems.

Identification of cardiac arrest

Identification of cardiac arrest is based on the recognition that the patient is unconscious and has abnormal or no breathing. Two studies in the review reported higher sensitivity following the implementation of new protocols [19, 20]. Interestingly, both these new protocols included keywords that reflect cardiac arrest in the call between the caller and the telecommunicator. Other more novel approaches are to focus on the communication in the emergency call [31]. The observation that it is important to evaluate the communication even when measuring accuracy, was demonstrated in the study by Möller et al., the sensitivity of identifying cardiac arrest was increased by listening to the actual calls [18].

Identification of stroke

Identification of stroke has several challenges and as a result about half of the patients with stroke are identified by the medical dispatcher [32, 33]. Firstly the symptoms are often non-specific, as demonstrated by Clawson et al., in that more than one in ten patients have the chief complaint “sick person” and an additional one in ten have fallen [25]. Secondly, the objective for medical dispatching is not absolute. What is more important? Whether it is to identify an acute stroke [2326], to identify that a patient needs to be directed to a stroke center or to identify the patient that is benefited by specific treatment, e.g. thrombolysis [22] or thrombectomy, remains undetermined. It is not possible to suggest a dispatching system which is superior based on the results of the current review since the level of evidence is very low and the outcome measures are different for the five included articles focusing on stroke identification.

Identification of major trauma

Only publications addressing the use of HEMS in the context of major trauma met with the inclusion criteria, which is why other publications addressing major trauma were not included in the current review. HEMS is part of the chain of care for major trauma in resource strong settings. There is evidence that HEMS is of value for multitrauma patients and patients with traumatic brain injury [3437] and is dispatched when medical intervention is thought to be needed [15]. However, over-triage is a problem. Up to every other deployment is cancelled, predominantly by ground EMS [15]. The accuracy of the medical dispatching could be increased by including vital signs and anatomical location of injury to the mechanism of injury which is the basis for the routine HEMS dispatching system [15]. While Wilmer et al. could show that the accuracy of HEMS dispatching was superior and comparable for paramedical interrogation of caller and the assessment of need by land ambulance crew as compared to the dispatching by mechanism of injury [38]. The results of these studies lead us to believe that mechanism of injury are insufficient criteria for HEMS dispatching for major trauma, although these results need to be interpreted with caution since the level of evidence is (very) low.

Identification according to medical priority

Patients present to the telecommunicator with a wide range of symptoms, and the ultimate question is how to identify what resources are best needed for the given caller/ patient. Ball et al. considered the effect of the chief complaint in relation to over-and under-triage. The results showed that while some of the most common chief complaints are under-triaged, e.g. convulsions/ seizures and breathing problems, others are over-triaged e.g. chest pain, heart problems/ automatic defibrillator, collapse and headache. While systems with a large proportion of non-specific presentations will not be able to evaluate the system in detail [13]. Although more than half of the calls are dispatched as priority 1 - only approximately 5% of these calls are critical [27], demonstrating the large over-triage in systems, and at the same time, revealing the lack of consensus on what level over-triage level is reasonable.
There is scant evidence concerning the necessary skills and competence for the telecommunicator. An exception is the study by Leopardi et al., demonstrating that experienced nurses could assess the patients’ need for advanced care as well as a medical doctor [30]. The required level of competence of telcommunicators is an area in need of further research.

Over-and under-triage and the accuracy of medical dispatching systems

We gear our emergency response systems so as not to miss patients in need of medical intervention -i.e. to avoid under-triage - and compensate by creating over-triage, i.e. “unnecessary” dispatching. Dispatching systems are e.g. “front loaded”, i.e. over-triage is used as a safety rule and we assume that by creating over-triage we are “safe”. However, that this is not the case is illustrated by HEMS having an over-triage of 44% and simultaneously, in the same dispatching system, an under-triage of 20% [15]. It is therefore clear that although we need to understand and set cut-off levels for over-triage (so as to avoid waste of resources and risk for personnel) and under-triage (so as to avoid potentially lifesaving interventions not being given), they are - as measures of a dispatching system – insufficient on their own.
Measures of accuracy for dispatching systems are needed as a step in the direction of getting the right treatment to the right patient at the right time. However, there is an inherent challenge to identify the subset of patients that benefit from a specific intervention e.g. HEMS or acute coronary syndrome [21, 31]. In addition to making sure that e.g. the patient with a stroke can arrive in a timely fashion to the stroke center, this will also allow for telephonic support for interventions e.g. stopping a major bleeding or to perform CPR. Such studies are designed with the aim of including parameters that increase the accuracy of identification of specific conditions or diagnoses.
In addition to identifying specific conditions, it is also important to identify time critical conditions among patients presenting with a broad range of symptom presentations and to dispatch according to medical priority, i.e. without a definite diagnosis. There are no obvious answers to the best way forward. However, to agree on how to measure and report on dispatching systems is necessary in order to be able to compare different systems between different populations and settings. There are suggestions [38, 39], but these consensus documents have not been applied in the current literature, and it is time to take this a step further.

Limitations

In 2011 Fevang et al. published a consensus report on the top five research priorities in pre-hospital care [40]. Among suggested topics was dispatch system accuracy. The choice of this was based on dispatching accuracy being a well-defined aim, with defined outcome measures, pertinent operational ramifications, and an area where there was a sufficient number of published articles which made the systematic review possible. It is possible that the search was additionally limited by using specific search terms, however, the search was broad as presented in Table 1.
The definitions of the measures of accuracy and over-and under-triage are not the same in the included articles, which limits comparisons of the results from the different articles. Although sensitivity was defined as the probability of the medical dispatching system identifying a specific condition given that this condition is present; specificity and the predictive values did not have the same definition. Specificity was often defined in relation to a specific condition, and not in relation to an unselected sample of callers without this specific condition. Also, the definition of over- and under-triage differed between the articles. That the definition of the measures varies makes comparisons of the results difficult.
Additional factors making comparisons between the different studies difficult are e.g. that there are two in principal different categories of dispatching systems/protocols; i.e. the MPDS and the CBDS. Moreover, the responding EMS has different tiers and organizations, again; leading to a lack with respect to a golden standard for outcome measures.
The level of evidence was categorized in accordance with GRADE, and in accordance with GRADE, retrospective studies are in general very low level of evidence. Although the overall level of evidence in the articles included in the current review was very low to low; the studies are informative and often necessary in order to design future studies. Following standards e.g. those set by STARD [41] should increase the quality of evidence.
It is imperative that the data collected from the electronic health care records is both valid and reliable before we can use this data in the design of clinical decision systems for medical dispatching. None of the reviewed studies analyzed the quality of data from the health records.

Conclusions

There were 18 articles addressing the identification of cardiac arrest, stroke, medical priority and major trauma using different dispatching systems. The results of the current study show that there is an overall very low to low level of evidence for the accuracy of medical dispatching systems. We suggest that it is necessary to create a consensus on common standards for reporting before consensus can be reached for the level of accuracy in medical dispatching systems.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the librarian Christina Lindberg and statistician Hans Pettersson at Södersjukhuset, KISÖS for their help and contribution.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analyzed during this review can be found in the included articles.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.

Competing interests

KB has a position as consultant at SOS Alarm Sverige AB. There are no other competing interests and sources of funding.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://​creativecommons.​org/​publicdomain/​zero/​1.​0/​) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Snooks H, Evans A, Wells B, Peconi J, Thomas M, Woolard M, et al. What are the highest priorities for research in emergency prehospital care? Emerg Med J. 2009;26:549–50.CrossRef Snooks H, Evans A, Wells B, Peconi J, Thomas M, Woolard M, et al. What are the highest priorities for research in emergency prehospital care? Emerg Med J. 2009;26:549–50.CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Sporer KA, Johnson NJ, Yeh CC, Youngblood GM. Can emergency medical dispatch codes predict prehospital interventions for common 9-1-1 call types? Prehosp Emerg Care. 2008;12(4):470–8.CrossRef Sporer KA, Johnson NJ, Yeh CC, Youngblood GM. Can emergency medical dispatch codes predict prehospital interventions for common 9-1-1 call types? Prehosp Emerg Care. 2008;12(4):470–8.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Andersen MS, Johnsen SP, Sörensen JN, Jepsen SB, Hansen JB, Christensen EF. Implementing a nationwide criteria-based emergency medical dispatch system: a register based follow-up study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013;21:53.CrossRef Andersen MS, Johnsen SP, Sörensen JN, Jepsen SB, Hansen JB, Christensen EF. Implementing a nationwide criteria-based emergency medical dispatch system: a register based follow-up study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013;21:53.CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Stipulante S, Tubes R, El Fassi M, Donneau AF, Van Troyen B, Hartstein G, et al. Implemention of the ALERT-algorithm, a new dispatcher-assisted cardio pulmonary resuscitation protocol, in non-advanced medical priority dispatch system (AMPDS) emergency medical services centres. Resuscitation. 2014;85:177–81.CrossRef Stipulante S, Tubes R, El Fassi M, Donneau AF, Van Troyen B, Hartstein G, et al. Implemention of the ALERT-algorithm, a new dispatcher-assisted cardio pulmonary resuscitation protocol, in non-advanced medical priority dispatch system (AMPDS) emergency medical services centres. Resuscitation. 2014;85:177–81.CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Press W, Teukolsky S, Vetterling W, Flannery B. Modeling of data. Numerical recipes 3rd edition: the art of scientific computing, vol. 812. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2007. Press W, Teukolsky S, Vetterling W, Flannery B. Modeling of data. Numerical recipes 3rd edition: the art of scientific computing, vol. 812. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
7.
Zurück zum Zitat American College of Surgeons-COT. Resources for optimal care of injured patient. Chicago: American college of surgions-COT; 2006. American College of Surgeons-COT. Resources for optimal care of injured patient. Chicago: American college of surgions-COT; 2006.
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preffered reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Br Med J. 2009;339:b2535.CrossRef Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preffered reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Br Med J. 2009;339:b2535.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Visit GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Br Med J. 2008;336:924–6.CrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Visit GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Br Med J. 2008;336:924–6.CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Fleiss JL, Cohen J, Everitt BS. Large sample standard errors of kappa and weighted kappa. Psychol Bull. 1969;72:323–7.CrossRef Fleiss JL, Cohen J, Everitt BS. Large sample standard errors of kappa and weighted kappa. Psychol Bull. 1969;72:323–7.CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Landis JR. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. In: Koch GG, editor. Biometrics. Raleigh, North Carolina: The Biometric Society; 1977. Landis JR. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. In: Koch GG, editor. Biometrics. Raleigh, North Carolina: The Biometric Society; 1977.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Dami F, Golay C, Pasquier M, Fuchs V, Carron PN, Hugli O. Prehospital triage accuracy in a criteria based dispatch Centre. BMC Emerg Med. 2015;15:32.CrossRef Dami F, Golay C, Pasquier M, Fuchs V, Carron PN, Hugli O. Prehospital triage accuracy in a criteria based dispatch Centre. BMC Emerg Med. 2015;15:32.CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Moser A, Mettler A, Fuchs V, Hanhart W, Robert CF, Della Santa V, et al. Merger of two dispatch centres: does it improve quality and patient safety? Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017;25(1):40.CrossRef Moser A, Mettler A, Fuchs V, Hanhart W, Robert CF, Della Santa V, et al. Merger of two dispatch centres: does it improve quality and patient safety? Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017;25(1):40.CrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Giannakopoulos GF, Bloemers FW, Lubbers WD, Christiaans HM, van Exter P, de Lange-de Klerk ES, et al. Criteria for cancelling helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) dispatches. Emerg Med J. 2012;29(7):582–6.CrossRef Giannakopoulos GF, Bloemers FW, Lubbers WD, Christiaans HM, van Exter P, de Lange-de Klerk ES, et al. Criteria for cancelling helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) dispatches. Emerg Med J. 2012;29(7):582–6.CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Vaillancourt C, Charette M, Kasaboski A, Hoad M, Larocque V, Crete D, et al. Cardiac arrest diagnostic accuracy of 9-1-1 dispatchers: a prospective multi-center study. Resuscitation. 2015;90:116–20.CrossRef Vaillancourt C, Charette M, Kasaboski A, Hoad M, Larocque V, Crete D, et al. Cardiac arrest diagnostic accuracy of 9-1-1 dispatchers: a prospective multi-center study. Resuscitation. 2015;90:116–20.CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Deakin CD, England S, Diffey D. Ambulance telephone triage using ‘NHS Pathways’ to identify adult cardiac arrest. Heart. 2017;103(10):761–5.CrossRef Deakin CD, England S, Diffey D. Ambulance telephone triage using ‘NHS Pathways’ to identify adult cardiac arrest. Heart. 2017;103(10):761–5.CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Moller TP, Andrell C, Viereck S, Todorova L, Friberg H, Lippert FK. Recognition of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest by medical dispatchers in emergency medical dispatch centres in two countries. Resuscitation. 2016;109:1–8.CrossRef Moller TP, Andrell C, Viereck S, Todorova L, Friberg H, Lippert FK. Recognition of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest by medical dispatchers in emergency medical dispatch centres in two countries. Resuscitation. 2016;109:1–8.CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Fukushima H, Imanishi M, Iwami T, Kitaoka H, Asai H, Seki T, et al. Implementation of a dispatch-instruction protocol for cardiopulmonary resuscitation according to various abnormal breathing patterns: a population-based study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2015;23:64.CrossRef Fukushima H, Imanishi M, Iwami T, Kitaoka H, Asai H, Seki T, et al. Implementation of a dispatch-instruction protocol for cardiopulmonary resuscitation according to various abnormal breathing patterns: a population-based study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2015;23:64.CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Tanaka Y, Nishi T, Takase K, Yoshita Y, Wato Y, Taniguchi J, et al. Survey of a protocol to increase appropriate implementation of dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Circulation. 2014;129(17):1751–60.CrossRef Tanaka Y, Nishi T, Takase K, Yoshita Y, Wato Y, Taniguchi J, et al. Survey of a protocol to increase appropriate implementation of dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Circulation. 2014;129(17):1751–60.CrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Gellerstedt M, Rawshani N, Herlitz J, Bang A, Gelang C, Andersson JO, et al. Could prioritisation by emergency medicine dispatchers be improved by using computer-based decision support? A cohort of patients with chest pain. Int J Cardiol. 2016;220:734–8.CrossRef Gellerstedt M, Rawshani N, Herlitz J, Bang A, Gelang C, Andersson JO, et al. Could prioritisation by emergency medicine dispatchers be improved by using computer-based decision support? A cohort of patients with chest pain. Int J Cardiol. 2016;220:734–8.CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Dami F, Emeryb A, Pasquierb M, Carronb P-N, Fuchsa V, et al. Proposition and operational characteristics of a new dispatch scale to specifically identify acute strokes. Eur J Emerg Med. 2017;24:202–7.CrossRef Dami F, Emeryb A, Pasquierb M, Carronb P-N, Fuchsa V, et al. Proposition and operational characteristics of a new dispatch scale to specifically identify acute strokes. Eur J Emerg Med. 2017;24:202–7.CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Viereck S, Moller TP, Iversen HK, Christensen H, Lippert F. Medical dispatchers recognise substantial amount of acute stroke during emergency calls. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2016;24:89.CrossRef Viereck S, Moller TP, Iversen HK, Christensen H, Lippert F. Medical dispatchers recognise substantial amount of acute stroke during emergency calls. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2016;24:89.CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Malekzadeh J, Shafaee H, Behnam H, Mirhaghi A. The effect of Cincinnati prehospital stroke scale on telephone triage of stroke patients: evidence-based practice in emergency medical services. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(2):87–92.CrossRef Malekzadeh J, Shafaee H, Behnam H, Mirhaghi A. The effect of Cincinnati prehospital stroke scale on telephone triage of stroke patients: evidence-based practice in emergency medical services. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(2):87–92.CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Clawson JJ, Scott G, Gardett I, Youngquist S, Taillac P, Fivaz C, et al. Predictive ability of an emergency medical dispatch stroke diagnostic tool in identifying hospital-confirmed strokes. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2016;25(8):2031–42.CrossRef Clawson JJ, Scott G, Gardett I, Youngquist S, Taillac P, Fivaz C, et al. Predictive ability of an emergency medical dispatch stroke diagnostic tool in identifying hospital-confirmed strokes. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2016;25(8):2031–42.CrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Krebes S, Ebinger M, Baumann AM, Kellner PA, Rozanski M, Doepp F, et al. Development and validation of a dispatcher identification algorithm for stroke emergencies. Stroke. 2012;43(3):776–81.CrossRef Krebes S, Ebinger M, Baumann AM, Kellner PA, Rozanski M, Doepp F, et al. Development and validation of a dispatcher identification algorithm for stroke emergencies. Stroke. 2012;43(3):776–81.CrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Wilmer I, Chalk G, Davies GE, Weaver AE, Lockey DJ. Air ambulance tasking: mechanism of injury, telephone interrogation or ambulance crew assessment? Emerg Med J. 2015;32(10):813–6.CrossRef Wilmer I, Chalk G, Davies GE, Weaver AE, Lockey DJ. Air ambulance tasking: mechanism of injury, telephone interrogation or ambulance crew assessment? Emerg Med J. 2015;32(10):813–6.CrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Ball SJ, Williams TA, Smith K, Cameron P, Fatovich D, O'Halloran KL, et al. Association between ambulance dispatch priority and patient condition. Emerg Med Australas. 2016;28(6):716–24.CrossRef Ball SJ, Williams TA, Smith K, Cameron P, Fatovich D, O'Halloran KL, et al. Association between ambulance dispatch priority and patient condition. Emerg Med Australas. 2016;28(6):716–24.CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Ek B, Edstrom P, Toutin A, Svedlund M. Reliability of a Swedish pre-hospital dispatch system in prioritizing patients. Int Emerg Nurs. 2013;21(2):143–9.CrossRef Ek B, Edstrom P, Toutin A, Svedlund M. Reliability of a Swedish pre-hospital dispatch system in prioritizing patients. Int Emerg Nurs. 2013;21(2):143–9.CrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Leopardi M, Sommacampagna M. Emergency nursing staff dispatch: sensitivity and specificity in detecting prehospital need for physician interventions during ambulance transport in Rovigo emergency ambulance service, Italy. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2013;28(5):523–8.CrossRef Leopardi M, Sommacampagna M. Emergency nursing staff dispatch: sensitivity and specificity in detecting prehospital need for physician interventions during ambulance transport in Rovigo emergency ambulance service, Italy. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2013;28(5):523–8.CrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Riou M, Ball S, Williams TA, Whiteside A, et al. The linguistic and interactional factors impacting recognition and dispatch in emergency calls for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a mixed-method linguistic analysis study protocol. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e016510.CrossRef Riou M, Ball S, Williams TA, Whiteside A, et al. The linguistic and interactional factors impacting recognition and dispatch in emergency calls for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a mixed-method linguistic analysis study protocol. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e016510.CrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Buck BH, Starkman S, Eckstein M, et al. Dispatcher recognition of stroke using the National Academy Medical Priority Dispatch System. Stroke. 2009;40:2027–30.CrossRef Buck BH, Starkman S, Eckstein M, et al. Dispatcher recognition of stroke using the National Academy Medical Priority Dispatch System. Stroke. 2009;40:2027–30.CrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Chenaitia H, Lefevre O, Ho V, et al. Emergency medical service in the stroke chain of survival. Eur J Emerg Med. 2013;20:39–44.CrossRef Chenaitia H, Lefevre O, Ho V, et al. Emergency medical service in the stroke chain of survival. Eur J Emerg Med. 2013;20:39–44.CrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Thomas SH, Biddinger PD. Helicopter trauma transport: an overview of recent outcomes and triage literature. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2003;16:153e8.CrossRef Thomas SH, Biddinger PD. Helicopter trauma transport: an overview of recent outcomes and triage literature. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2003;16:153e8.CrossRef
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Kurola J, Wangel M, Uusaro A, et al. Paramedic helicopter emergency service in rural Finland do benefits justify the cost? Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2002;46:779e84.CrossRef Kurola J, Wangel M, Uusaro A, et al. Paramedic helicopter emergency service in rural Finland do benefits justify the cost? Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2002;46:779e84.CrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Oppe S, De Charro FT. The effect of medical care by a helicopter trauma team on the probability of survival and the quality of life of hospitalised victims. Accid Anal Prev. 2001;33:129e38.CrossRef Oppe S, De Charro FT. The effect of medical care by a helicopter trauma team on the probability of survival and the quality of life of hospitalised victims. Accid Anal Prev. 2001;33:129e38.CrossRef
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Frankema SP, Ringburg AN, Steyerberg EW, et al. Beneficial effect of helicopter emergency medical services on survival of severely injured patients. Br J Surg. 2004;91:1520e6.CrossRef Frankema SP, Ringburg AN, Steyerberg EW, et al. Beneficial effect of helicopter emergency medical services on survival of severely injured patients. Br J Surg. 2004;91:1520e6.CrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Mann NC, Schmidt TA, Cone DC. Defining research criteria to characterize medical necessity in emergency medical services: a consensus among experts at the Neely Conference. Prehospital Emerg Care Off J Natl Assoc EMS Physicians Natl Assoc State EMS Dir. 2004;8(2):138–53. Mann NC, Schmidt TA, Cone DC. Defining research criteria to characterize medical necessity in emergency medical services: a consensus among experts at the Neely Conference. Prehospital Emerg Care Off J Natl Assoc EMS Physicians Natl Assoc State EMS Dir. 2004;8(2):138–53.
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Castrén M, Karlsten R, Lippert F, Christensen EF, Bovim E, et al. Recommended guidelines for reporting on emergency medical dispatch when conducting research in emergency medicine: the Utstein style. Emergency Medical Dispatch expert group at the Utstein Consensus Symposium 2005. Resuscitation. 2008;79(2):193–7.CrossRef Castrén M, Karlsten R, Lippert F, Christensen EF, Bovim E, et al. Recommended guidelines for reporting on emergency medical dispatch when conducting research in emergency medicine: the Utstein style. Emergency Medical Dispatch expert group at the Utstein Consensus Symposium 2005. Resuscitation. 2008;79(2):193–7.CrossRef
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Fevang E, Lockey D, Thompson J, Lossius HM. Torpo Research Collaboration. The top five research priorities in physician-provided pre-hospital critical care: a consensus report from a European research collaboration. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 201;19:57. Fevang E, Lockey D, Thompson J, Lossius HM. Torpo Research Collaboration. The top five research priorities in physician-provided pre-hospital critical care: a consensus report from a European research collaboration. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 201;19:57.
Metadaten
Titel
The accuracy of medical dispatch - a systematic review
verfasst von
K. Bohm
L. Kurland
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2018
Verlag
BioMed Central
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-018-0528-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2018

Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine 1/2018 Zur Ausgabe