Frequent contacts to Emergency Medical Services (EMS): more than frequent callers.

BACKGROUND: A frequent caller is defined by The Frequent Caller National Network (FreCaNN) as an adult who makes five or more emergency calls in a month or twelve or more in three months, related to individual episodes of care. However, we believe that when limiting the definition to those who call themselves, one underestimates the impact frequent contacts have on the Emergency Medical Communication Center (EMCC) and the Emergency Medical Services (EMS). METHOD: We conducted a descriptive retrospective cross-sectional database review of frequent contacts; defined as persons who have ≥ 5 contacts in a month or ≥ 12 contacts in three months. Data were provided from Oslo EMCC, between 1. January 2017 and 31. December 2022. Contrary to the FreCaNN definition, we included all types of contacts and callers, both emergent and non-emergent, regarding patients of all ages. RESULTS: During the study period, 2.149.400 contacts were registered. Of these 129.700 were contacts from frequent callers, where the patients called themselves. When including contacts frequently made on behalf of a patient, we found that 268.723 fit the definition of frequent emergency contacts. When also taking non-emergent contacts into account, a total of 437.361 contacts fit the definition of frequent contacts. CONCLUSION: When limiting the criteria to only frequent callers, one underestimates the impact persons who have frequent contacts, have on the EMCC and the EMS. We were able to distinguish between three categories-contacts from frequent callers, frequent emergency contacts, and frequent contacts. We believe broadening the definition can benefit both research and audits, when accessing the use of emergency resources to patients with frequent requests for help to the EMCCs.

Description of the prehospital emergency healthcare system in Norway.

Background: Norway has a long coastline, steep mountains, and wide fjords, which presents some challenges to the prehospital emergency healthcare system. In recent years, the prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) have undergone significant changes, structurally, in terms of professionalisation of the services and in the education level of the personnel. In this article, we aim to describe the current structure for handling prehospital medical emergencies. Methods: For healthcare, Norway is divided into four Regional Health Authorities, consisting of 19 Health Trusts, where 18 have an EMS. There is a dedicated medical emergency number, 113, that terminates in 16 emergency medical communication centres. The use of air and boat ambulances, in addition to traditional ambulances, seeks to meet the challenges in the EMS system. Strengths and limitations: The Norwegian EMS is an advanced system with highly educated staff; however, this level of care comes with an equally high cost. Conclusion: The Norwegian EMS can handle emergencies nationwide, providing advanced care at the scene and during transport. The geography and demography challenge the idea of equal care, but the open publishing of data from national quality registries seeks to identify and address potential differences.

The MeSH heading "Call Center" is due for an update: why we recommend the more precise heading "Emergency Medical Communication Center".

Call centers can be found in various industries. However as a Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) the term "Call centers" does not reflect the critical purpose of handling emergency calls. We recommend "emergency medical communication center(s)", as this provides clarity and precision regarding the primary function and purpose of the center.

Resuscitation of older adults in Norway; a comparison of survival and outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in healthcare institutions and at home.

BACKGROUND: Perceptions about expected outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) influence treatment decisions, and there is a need for updated evidence about outcomes for the elderly. METHOD: We conducted a cross-sectional study of cases reported to the Norwegian Cardiac Arrest Registry from 2015 through 2021 of patients 60 years and older, suffering cardiac arrest in healthcare institutions or at home. We examined reasons for emergency medical service (EMS) withholding or withdrawing resuscitation. We compared survival and neurological outcome for EMS-treated patients and explored factors associated with survival using multivariate logistic regression. RESULT: We included 12,191 cases and the EMS started resuscitation in 10,340 (85%). The incidence per capita of OHCA the EMS were alerted to was 267/100,000 in healthcare institutions and 134/100,000 at home. Resuscitation was most frequently withdrawn due to medical history (n = 1251). In healthcare institutions, 72 of 1503 (4.8%) patients survived to 30 days compared to 752 of 8837 (8.5%) at home (P <.001). We found survivors in all age cohorts both in healthcare institutions and at home, and most of the 824 survivors had a good neurological outcome with a Cerebral Performance Category ≤2 (88%). CONCLUSION: Medical history was the most frequent reason for EMS not to start or continue resuscitation, indicating a need for a discussion about, and documentation of, advance directives in this age group. When EMS attempted resuscitation, most survivors had a good neurological outcome, both in healthcare institutions and at home.