Theresa Foster

NHS emergency response to 999 calls: alternatives for cases that are neither life threatening nor serious

Ambulance services and emergency departments are under increasing pressure as the number of emergency calls continues to rise—but in many cases, patients do not need immediate clinical care. Helen Snooks and colleagues consider the alternatives to the standard NHS response and review the current literature The number of emergency (999) calls received by ambulance services in the United Kingdom has risen consistently over recent years. Ambulance services must respond to calls immediately by sending vehicles staffed by paramedics, with flashing lights and sirens. All patients have to be taken to an accident and emergency department. This response is not always appropriate, and it can resultin inefficient use of resources and unnecessary risks to the general public, patients, and paramedics. The NHS Plan and the recent consultation document Reforming Emergency Care have emphasised the importance of trying new approaches to deliver appropriate care. 1 2 They highlight the need to consider new ways to integrate the ambulance response to 999 calls into the overall system that deals with emergencies. ### Summary points Demands on emergency services and inappropriate requests for emergency ambulances are increasing Ambulance services must respond to calls immediately by sending vehicles with flashing lights and sirens, staffed by paramedics Many ambulance services want to develop alternatives to the standard response to all 999 calls Evidence about the safety and effectiveness of alternatives is weak and few rigorous trials have been reported Studies show that alternative responses are needed but that the work involved in their development is complex In England, demand through the 999 telephone system for services has risen by 40% since 1990.3 Problems of overcrowding and high attendance have also been noted in emergency departments and in primary care. Concerns have been expressed over the number of home visits requested at night and whether all such visits are …

Safety of telephone consultation for “non-serious” emergency ambulance service patients

Objective: To assess the safety of nurses and paramedics offering telephone assessment, triage, and advice as an alternative to immediate ambulance despatch for emergency ambulance service callers classified by lay call takers as presenting with “non-serious” problems (category C calls). Design: Data for this study were collected as part of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial reported elsewhere. The intervention arm of the trial comprised nurse or paramedic telephone consultation using a computerised decision support system to assess, triage, and advise patients whose calls to the emergency ambulance service had been classified as “non-serious” by call takers applying standard priority despatch criteria. A multidisciplinary expert clinical panel reviewed data from ambulance service, accident and emergency department, hospital inpatient and general practice records, and call transcripts for patients triaged by nurses and paramedics into categories that indicated that despatch of an emergency ambulance was unnecessary. All cases for which one or more members of the panel rated that an emergency ambulance should have been despatched were re-reviewed by the entire panel for an assessment of the “life risk” that might have resulted. Setting: Ambulance services in London and the West Midlands, UK. Study population: Of 635 category C patients assessed by nurses and paramedics, 330 (52%) cases that had been triaged as not requiring an emergency ambulance were identified. Main outcome measures: Assessment of safety of triage decisions. Results: Sufficient data were available from the routine clinical records of 239 (72%) subjects to allow review by the specialist panel. For 231 (96.7%) sets of case notes reviewed, the majority of the panel concurred with the nurses’ or paramedics’ triage decision. Following secondary review of the records of the remaining eight patients, only two were rated by the majority as having required an emergency ambulance within 14 minutes. For neither of these did a majority of the panel consider that the patient would have been at “life risk” without an emergency ambulance being immediately despatched. However, the transcripts of these two calls indicated that the correct triage decision had been communicated to the patient, which suggests that the triage decision had been incorrectly entered into the decision support system. Conclusions: Telephone advice may be a safe method of managing many category C callers to 999 ambulance services. A clinical trial of the full implementation of this intervention is needed, large enough to exclude the possibility of rare adverse events.

Computer assisted assessment and advice for "non-serious" 999 ambulance service callers : the potential impact on ambulance despatch

Objective: To investigate the potential impact for ambulance services of telephone assessment and triage for callers who present with non-serious problems (Category C calls) as classified by ambulance service call takers. Design: Pragmatic controlled trial. Calls identified using priority dispatch protocols as non-serious were allocated to intervention and control groups according to time of call. Ambulance dispatch occurred according to existing procedures. During intervention sessions, nurses or paramedics within the control room used a computerised decision support system to provide telephone assessment, triage and, if appropriate, offer advice to permit estimation of the potential impact on ambulance dispatch. Setting: Ambulance services in London and the West Midlands. Subjects: Patients for whom emergency calls were made to the ambulance services between April 1998 and May 1999 during four hour sessions sampled across all days of the week between 0700 and 2300. Main outcome measures: Triage decision, ambulance cancellation, attendance at an emergency department. Results: In total, there were 635 intervention calls and 611 controls. Of those in the intervention group, 330 (52.0%) were triaged as not requiring an emergency ambulance, and 119 (36.6%) of these did not attend an emergency department. This compares with 55 (18.1%) of those triaged by a nurse or paramedic as requiring an ambulance (odds ratio 2.62; 95% CI 1.78 to 3.85). Patients triaged as not requiring an emergency ambulance were less likely to be admitted to an inpatient bed (odds ratio 0.55; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.93), but even so 30 (9.2%) were admitted. Nurses were more likely than paramedics to triage calls into the groups classified as not requiring an ambulance. After controlling for age, case mix, time of day, day of week, season, and ambulance service, the results of a logistic regression analysis revealed that this difference was significant with an odds ratio for nurses:paramedics of 1.28 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.47). Conclusions: The findings indicate that telephone assessment of Category C calls identifies patients who are less likely to require emergency department care and that this could have a significant impact on emergency ambulance dispatch rates. Nurses were more likely than paramedics to assess calls as requiring an alternative response to emergency ambulance despatch, but the extent to which this relates to aspects of training and professional perspective is unclear. However, consideration should be given to the acceptability, reliability, and cost consequences of this intervention before it can be recommended for full evaluation.

Results of an evaluation of the effectiveness of triage and direct transportation to minor injuries units by ambulance crews

Objective: To evaluate triage and transportation to a minor injury unit (MIU) by emergency ambulance crews. Methods: Ambulance crews in two services were asked to transport appropriate patients to MIU during randomly selected weeks of one year. During all other weeks they were to treat such patients according to normal practice. Patients were followed up through ambulance service, hospital and/or MIU records, and by postal questionnaire. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with crews (n = 15). Cases transferred from MIU to accident and emergency (A&E) were reviewed. Results: 41 intervention cluster patients attended MIU, 303 attended A&E, 65 were not conveyed. Thirty seven control cluster patients attended MIU, 327 attended A&E, 61 stayed at scene. Because of low study design compliance, outcomes of patients taken to MIU were compared with those taken to A&E, adjusted for case mix. MIU patients were 7.2 times as likely to rate their care as excellent (95% CI 1.99 to 25.8). Ambulance service job-cycle time and time in unit were shorter for MIU patients (−7.8, 95% CI −11.5 to −4.1); (−222.7, 95%CI −331.9 to −123.5). Crews cited patient and operational factors as inhibiting MIU use; and location, service, patient choice, job-cycle time, and handover as encouraging their use. Of seven patients transferred by ambulance from MIU to A&E, medical reviewers judged that three had not met the protocol for conveyance to MIU. No patients were judged to have suffered adverse consequences. Conclusions: MIUs were only used for a small proportion of eligible patients. When they were used, patients and the ambulance service benefited.

Support and assessment for fall emergency referrals (SAFER 1) : cluster randomised trial of computerised clinical decision support for paramedics

Objective To evaluate effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of Computerised Clinical Decision Support (CCDS) for paramedics attending older people who fall. Design Cluster trial randomised by paramedic; modelling. Setting 13 ambulance stations in two UK emergency ambulance services. Participants 42 of 409 eligible paramedics, who attended 779 older patients for a reported fall. Interventions Intervention paramedics received CCDS on Tablet computers to guide patient care. Control paramedics provided care as usual. One service had already installed electronic data capture. Main Outcome Measures Effectiveness: patients referred to falls service, patient reported quality of life and satisfaction, processes of care. Safety Further emergency contacts or death within one month. Cost-Effectiveness Costs and quality of life. We used findings from published Community Falls Prevention Trial to model cost-effectiveness. Results 17 intervention paramedics used CCDS for 54 (12.4%) of 436 participants. They referred 42 (9.6%) to falls services, compared with 17 (5.0%) of 343 participants seen by 19 control paramedics [Odds ratio (OR) 2.04, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.72]. No adverse events were related to the intervention. Non-significant differences between groups included: subsequent emergency contacts (34.6% versus 29.1%; OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.72); quality of life (mean SF12 differences: MCS −0.74, 95% CI −2.83 to +1.28; PCS −0.13, 95% CI −1.65 to +1.39) and non-conveyance (42.0% versus 36.7%; OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.52). However ambulance job cycle time was 8.9 minutes longer for intervention patients (95% CI 2.3 to 15.3). Average net cost of implementing CCDS was £208 per patient with existing electronic data capture, and £308 without. Modelling estimated cost per quality-adjusted life-year at £15,000 with existing electronic data capture; and £22,200 without. Conclusions Intervention paramedics referred twice as many participants to falls services with no difference in safety. CCDS is potentially cost-effective, especially with existing electronic data capture. Trial Registration ISRCTN Register ISRCTN10538608

Implementation and use of computerised clinical decision support (CCDS) in emergency pre-hospital care: a qualitative study of paramedic views and experience using Strong Structuration Theory

BackgroundComputerised clinical decision support (CCDS) has been shown to improve processes of care in some healthcare settings, but there is little evidence related to its use or effects in pre-hospital emergency care. CCDS in this setting aligns with policies to increase IT use in ambulance care, enhance paramedic decision-making skills, reduce avoidable emergency department attendances and improve quality of care and patient experience. This qualitative study was conducted alongside a cluster randomised trial in two ambulance services of the costs and effects of web-based CCDS system designed to support paramedic decision-making in the care of older people following a fall. Paramedics were trained to enter observations and history for relevant patients on a tablet, and the CCDS then generated a recommended course of action which could be logged. Our aim was to describe paramedics’ experience of the CCDS intervention and to identify factors affecting its implementation and use.MethodsWe invited all paramedics who had been randomly allocated to the intervention arm of the trial to participate in interviews or focus groups. The study was underpinned by Strong Structuration Theory, a theoretical model for studying innovation based on the relationship between what people do and their context. We used the Framework approach to data analysis.ResultsTwenty out of 22 paramedics agreed to participate. We developed a model of paramedic experience of CCDS with three domains: context, adoption and use, and outcomes. Aspects of context which had an impact included organisational culture and perceived support for non-conveyance decisions. Experience of adoption and use of the CCDS varied between individual paramedics, with some using it with all eligible patients, some only with patients they thought were ‘suitable’ and some never using it. A range of outcomes were reported, some of which were different from the intended role of the technology in decision support.ConclusionImplementation of new technology such as CCDS is not a one-off event, but an ongoing process, which requires support at the organisational level to be effective.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry 10538608. Registered 1 May 2007. Retrospectively registered.

Patient and clinician factors associated with prehospital pain treatment and outcomes: cross sectional study

Objective: We aimed to identify how patient (age, sex, condition) and paramedic factors (sex, role) affected prehospital analgesic administration and pain alleviation. Methods: We used a cross‐sectional design with a 7‐day retrospective sample of adults aged 18years or over requiring primary emergency transport to hospital, excluding patients with Glasgow Coma Scale below 13, in two UK ambulance services. Multivariate multilevel regression using Stata 14 analysed factors independently associated with analgesic administration and a clinically meaningful reduction in pain (≥2 points on 0–10 numerical verbal pain score [NVPS]). Results: We included data on 9574 patients. At least two pain scores were recorded in 4773 (49.9%) patients. For all models fitted there was no significant relationship between analgesic administration or pain reduction and sex of the patient or ambulance staff. Reduction in pain (NVPS ≥2) was associated with ambulance crews including at least one paramedic (odds ratio [OR] 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14 to 2.04, p<0.01), with any recorded pain score and suspected cardiac pain (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.02 to 4.75). Intravenous morphine administration was also more likely where crews included a paramedic (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.93 to 4.13, P<0.01), attending patients aged 51 to 64years (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.45, p=0.01), in moderate to severe (NVPS 4–10) compared with lower levels of pain for any clinical condition group compared with the reference condition. Conclusion: There was no association between patient sex or ambulance staff sex or grade and analgesic administration or pain reduction.

PP29 Exploring factors increasing paramedics’ likelihood of administering analgesia in pre-hospital pain: cross sectional study (explain)

Background Paramedics play an important role in reducing pain in patients calling an ambulance. We aimed to identify how patient factors (age, sex), clinical condition and paramedic factors (sex, role seniority) affected pain treatment and outcomes. Methods We used a cross sectional design using routine retrospective data a one-week sample of all 999 ambulance attendances in two large regional UK ambulance services for all patients aged 18 years or over where pain was identified in people requiring primary transport to hospital. Exclusion criteria patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale score below 13, or patients not attended by a paramedic. We used a multilevel design, using a regression model to investigate which factors were independently associated with administration of analgesia and reduction in pain, taking into account confounders including patient demographics and other variables. Analysis was performed with Stata. Results We collected data on 9574 patients (service 1, 2; n=3344, 6230 respectively) including 4911 (51.3%) male and 4524 (47.3%) females (1.5% missing). Initial pain score was not recorded in 42.4% (4063/9574). The multilevel model suggested that the factors associated with use of strong opiates (morphine intravenously or orally) was a pain score of 7 or above, patient age 50–64 years and suspected fractured neck of femur. Reduction in pain score of 2 or more points was significant whatever the initial pain score and associated with age 50–84 years. There was no association between use of strong opiate analgesic or reduction in pain score and sex of patient and/or sex of paramedic or crew member. Conclusion Our initial analysis showed a high level of non-recording of pain scores. There was no association between use of strong opiate analgesics or reduction in pain score of 2 points or more with patient sex or crew sex or paramedic skill level.

Surveying young patients

The East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust (the Trust) was keen to engage young patients and to encourage them to give feedback about the service they had received. The standard Trust satisfaction survey was modified for use with young patients, and this had the effect of increasing the response rate from this patient group by 8%, and increasing the percentage of young patients aged 5–10 years completing the survey themselves by 29%. The vast majority of parents/guardians were happy for the Trust to survey their child, but the age of the child affected to whom they would like the survey sent. The Trust subsequently altered patient survey practice to write to parents/guardians of patients aged <12 years and directly to all patients aged ≥12 years.