Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Emergency Medicine and BioMed Central.

Open Access Highly Accessed Research article

Evaluation of an algorithm for estimating a patient's life threat risk from an ambulance call

Kenji Ohshige1*, Chihiro Kawakami1, Shunsaku Mizushima1, Yoshihiro Moriwaki2 and Noriyuki Suzuki2

Author affiliations

1 Department of Public Health, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, Japan

2 Critical Care and Emergency Center, Yokohama City University Medical Center, 4-57 Urafune-cho, Minami-ku, Yokohama, Japan

For all author emails, please log on.

Citation and License

BMC Emergency Medicine 2009, 9:21  doi:10.1186/1471-227X-9-21

Published: 21 October 2009

Abstract

Background

Utilizing a computer algorithm, information from calls to an ambulance service was used to calculate the risk of patients being in a life-threatening condition (life threat risk), at the time of the call. If the estimated life threat risk was higher than 10%, the probability that a patient faced a risk of dying was recognized as very high and categorized as category A+. The present study aimed to review the accuracy of the algorithm.

Methods

Data collected for six months from the Yokohama new emergency system was used. In the system, emergency call workers interviewed ambulance callers to obtain information necessary to assess triage, which included consciousness level, breathing status, walking ability, position, and complexion. An emergency patient's life threat risk was then estimated by a computer algorithm applying logistic models. This study compared the estimated life threat risk occurring at the time of the emergency call to the patients' state or severity of condition, i.e. death confirmed at the scene by ambulance crews, resulted in death at emergency departments, life-threatening condition with occurrence of cardiac and/or pulmonary arrest (CPA), life-threatening condition without CPA, serious but not life-threatening condition, moderate condition, and mild condition. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios of the algorithm for categorizing A+ were calculated.

Results

The number of emergency dispatches over the six months was 73,992. Triage assessment was conducted for 68,692 of these calls. The study targets account for 88.8% of patients who were involved in triage calls. There were 2,349 cases where the patient had died or had suffered CPA. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio of the algorithm at predicting cases that would result in a death or CPA were 80.2% (95% confidence interval: 78.6% - 81.8%), 96.0% (95.8% - 96.1%), 42.6% (41.1% - 44.0%), 99.2% (99.2% - 99.3%), 19.9 (18.8 - 21.1), and 0.21 (0.19 - 0.22), respectively.

Conclusion

A patient's life threat risk was quantitatively assessed at the moment of the emergency call with a moderate level of accuracy.