Initial emergency medical dispatching and prehospital needs assessment: a prospective study of the Swedish ambulance service

2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 134-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lena Hj??lte ◽  
Bj??rn-Ove Suserud ◽  
Johan Herlitz ◽  
Ingvar Karlberg
Diabetologia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (10) ◽  
pp. 1868-1879 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie Villani ◽  
Arul Earnest ◽  
Karen Smith ◽  
Dimitra Giannopoulos ◽  
Georgia Soldatos ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e027741 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Faisal ◽  
Binish Khatoon ◽  
Andy Scally ◽  
Donald Richardson ◽  
Sally Irwin ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo compare the performance of a validated automatic computer-aided risk of mortality (CARM) score versus medical judgement in predicting the risk of in-hospital mortality for patients following emergency medical admission.DesignA prospective study.SettingConsecutive emergency medical admissions in York hospital.ParticipantsElderly medical admissions in one ward were assigned a risk of death at the first post-take ward round by consultant staff over a 2-week period. The consultant medical staff used the same variables to assign a risk of death to the patient as the CARM (age, sex, National Early Warning Score and blood test results) but also had access to the clinical history, examination findings and any immediately available investigations such as ECGs. The performance of the CARM versus consultant medical judgement was compared using the c-statistic and the positive predictive value (PPV).ResultsThe in-hospital mortality was 31.8% (130/409). For patients with complete blood test results, the c-statistic for CARM was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.69 to 0.81) versus 0.72 (95% CI: 0.66 to 0.78) for medical judgements (p=0.28). For patients with at least one missing blood test result, the c-statistics were similar (medical judgements 0.70 (95% CI: 0.60 to 0.81) vs CARM 0.70 (95% CI: 0.59 to 0.80)). At a 10% mortality risk, the PPV for CARM was higher than medical judgements in patients with complete blood test results, 62.0% (95% CI: 51.2 to 71.9) versus 49.2% (95% CI: 39.8 to 58.5) but not when blood test results were missing, 50.0% (95% CI: 24.7 to 75.3) versus 53.3% (95% CI: 34.3 to 71.7).ConclusionsCARM is comparable with medical judgements in discriminating in-hospital mortality following emergency admission to an elderly care ward. CARM may have a promising role in supporting medical judgements in determining the patient’s risk of death in hospital. Further evaluation of CARM in routine practice is required.


Injury ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (5) ◽  
pp. 1007-1011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruben te Grotenhuis ◽  
Pierre M. van Grunsven ◽  
Wim M.J.M. Heutz ◽  
Edward C.T.H. Tan

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruben te Grotenhuis ◽  
Pierre M. van Grunsven ◽  
Wim M.J.M. Heutz ◽  
Edward C.T.H. Tan

2017 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 186
Author(s):  
J. Newberry ◽  
C. Bills ◽  
E. Pirrotta ◽  
G. RamanaRao ◽  
S. Mahadevan ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document