ObjectiveThe implementation of cardiopulmonary resuscitation guidelines, updated every five years, appears to improve patient survival rates after Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA). The aim of this study is: 1) to measure the level of improvement in the prognosis of OHCA patient survival rates for the years 2009 and 2010 and the following two years 2011 and 2012; and 2) correlate the improvement in prognosis with the updated 2010 Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support (ACLS) Guidelines.MethodWe performed a retrospective observational study based on Geneva’s OHCA register that includes data from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2012. We compared the evolution of prognostic factors that influenced survival at hospital discharge between the periods before and after the implementation of the 2010 guidelines. We then compared the survival rates between each period. Finally, we adjusted the effects on survival in the second period to prognostic factors not linked with the care provided by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) teams, using a multivariable logistic regression model. Changes in advanced resuscitation treatment provided by EMS personnel were also examined.Results795 OHCA were resuscitated between 1st January, 2009 and 31st December, 2012. The prognosis of patient survival at the time of hospital discharge rose from 10.33% in 2009–2010 to 17.01% in 2011–2012 (p = 0.007). After making adjustments for the effect of improved survival rates on the second period with factors not related to care provided by EMS teams, the odds ratio (OR) remains comparable (OR = 1.87, 95% CI [1.08–3.22]). Measured changes in treatment provided by EMS personnel were minor.ConclusionsSurvival rate for OHCA patients improved significantly in 2011–2012. This study suggests that it was probably the improvement in the quality of care provided during CPR and post-cardiac arrest care that have contributed to the increase in survival rates at the time of hospital discharge.

Background Some emergency medical systems (EMS) use a dispatch centre where nurses or paramedics assess emergency calls and dispatch ambulances. Paramedics may also provide the first tier of care “in the field”, with the second tier being an Emergency Physician (EP). In these systems, the appropriateness of the decision to dispatch an EP to the first line at the same time as the ambulance has not often been measured. The main objective of this study was to compare dispatching an EP as part of the first line emergency service with the severity of the patient’s condition. The secondary objective was to highlight the need for a recognized reference standard to compare performance analyses across EMS. Methods This prospective observational study included all emergency calls received in Geneva’s dispatch centre between January 1st, 2016 and June 30th, 2019. Emergency medical dispatchers (EMD) assigned a level of risk to patients at the time of the initial call. Only the highest level of risk led to the dispatch of an EP. The severity of the patient’s condition observed in the field was measured using the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) scale. Two reference standards were proposed by dichotomizing the NACA scale. The first compared NACA≥4 with other conditions and the second compared NACA≥5 with other conditions. The level of risk identified during the initial call was then compared to the dichotomized NACA scales. Results 97′861 assessments were included. Overall prevalence of sending an EP as first line was 13.11, 95% CI [12.90–13.32], and second line was 2.94, 95% CI [2.84–3.05]. Including NACA≥4, prevalence was 21.41, 95% CI [21.15–21.67], sensitivity was 36.2, 95% CI [35.5–36.9] and specificity 93.2 95% CI [93–93.4]. The Area Under the Receiver-Operating Characteristics curve (AUROC) of 0.7507, 95% CI [0.74734–0.75397] was acceptable. Looking NACA≥5, prevalence was 3.09, 95% CI [2.98–3.20], sensitivity was 64.4, 95% CI [62.7–66.1] and specificity 88.5, 95% CI [88.3–88.7]. We found an excellent AUROC of 0.8229, 95% CI [0.81623–0.82950]. Conclusion The assessment by Geneva’s EMD has good specificity but low sensitivity for sending EPs. The dichotomy between immediate life-threatening and other emergencies could be a valid reference standard for future studies to measure the EP’s dispatching performance.

Background: Measuring the performance of emergency medical dispatch tools used in paramedic-staffed emergency medical communication centres (EMCCs) is rarely performed. The objectives of our study were, therefore, to measure the performance and accuracy of Geneva’s dispatch system based on symptom assessment, in particular, the performance of ambulance dispatching with lights and sirens (L&S) and to measure the effect of adding specific protocols for each symptom. Methods: We performed a prospective observational study including all emergency calls received at Geneva’s EMCC (Switzerland) from 1 January 2014 to 1 July 2019. The risk levels selected during the emergency calls were compared to a reference standard, based on the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) scale, dichotomized to severe patient condition (NACA ≥ 4) or stable patient condition (NACA < 4) in the field. The symptom-based dispatch performance was assessed using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Contingency tables and a Fagan nomogram were used to measure the performance of the dispatch with or without L&S. Measurements were carried out by symptom, and a group of symptoms with specific protocols was compared to a group without specific protocols. Results: We found an acceptable area under the ROC curve of 0.7474, 95%CI (0.7448–0.7503) for the 148,979 assessments included in the study. Where the severity prevalence was 21%, 95%CI (20.8–21.2). The sensitivity of the L&S dispatch was 87.5%, 95%CI (87.1–87.8); and the specificity was 47.3%, 95%CI (47.0–47.6). When symptom-specific assessment protocols were used, the accuracy of the assessments was slightly improved. Conclusions: Performance measurement of Geneva’s symptom-based dispatch system using standard diagnostic test performance measurement tools was possible. The performance was found to be comparable to other emergency medical dispatch systems using the same reference standard. However, the implementation of specific assessment protocols for each symptom may improve the accuracy of symptom-based dispatch systems.