Impact of two-level filtering on emergency medical communication center triage during the COVID-19 pandemic: an uncontrolled before-after study.

BACKGROUND: Rapid access to emergency medical communication centers (EMCCs) is pivotal to address potentially life-threatening conditions. Maintaining public access to EMCCs without delay is crucial in case of disease outbreak despite the significant increased activity and the difficulties to mobilize extra staff resources. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of two-level filtering on EMCC performance during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: A before-after monocentric prospective study was conducted at the EMCC at the Nantes University Hospital. Using telephone activity data, we compared EMCC performance during 2 periods. In period one (February 27th to March 11th 2020), call takers managed calls as usual, gathering basic information from the caller and giving first aid instructions to a bystander on scene if needed. During period two (March 12th to March 25th 2020), calls were answered by a first-line call taker to identify potentially serious conditions that required immediate dispatch. When a serious condition was excluded, the call was immediately transferred to a second-line call taker who managed the call as usual so the first-line call taker could be rapidly available for other incoming calls. The primary outcome was the quality of service at 20 s (QS20), corresponding to the rate of calls answered within 20 s. We described activity and outcome measures by hourly range. We compared EMCC performance during periods one and two using an interrupted time series analysis. RESULTS: We analyzed 45,451 incoming calls during the two study periods: 21,435 during period 1 and 24,016 during period 2. Between the two study periods, we observed a significant increase in the number of incoming calls per hour, the number of connected call takers and average call duration. A linear regression model, adjusted for these confounding variables, showed a significant increase in the QS20 slope (from - 0.4 to 1.4%, p = 0.01), highlighting the significant impact of two-level filtering on the quality of service. CONCLUSIONS: We found that rapid access to our EMCC was maintained during the COVID-19 pandemic via two-level filtering. This system helped reduce the time gap between call placement and first-line call-taker evaluation of a potentially life-threatening situation. We suggest implementing this system when an EMCC faces significantly increased activity with limited staff resources.

Prognostic performance of early absence of pupillary light reaction after recovery of out of hospital cardiac arrest.

INTRODUCTION: Loss of pupillary light reactivity (PLR) three days after a cardiorespiratory arrest is a prognostic factor. Its predictive value upon hospital admission remains unclear. Our objective was to determine the prognostic value of the absence of PLR upon hospital admission in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS: We prospectively included all out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occurring between July 2011 and July 2017 treated by a mobile medical team (MMT) based on data from a French cardiac arrest registry database. PLR was evaluated upon hospital admission and the outcome on day 30. The prognosis was classified as good for Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1 or 2, and poor for CPC 3-5 or in case of death. RESULTS: Data from 10151 patients was analysed. The sensitivity and specificity of the absence of PLR for a poor outcome were 72.2% (71.2-73.2) and 68.8% (66.7-70.1), respectively. We identified several variables modifying the sensitivity values and the false positive fraction of a factor, ranging from 0.49 (0.35-0.69) for the Glasgow Coma Scale to 2.17 (1.09-2.48) for pupillary asymmetry. Among those living with CPC 1 or 2 on day 30 (n = 1990; 19.6%), 621 (31.2% (29.2-33.3)) had no PLR upon hospital admission. In the multivariate analysis, loss of PLR was associated with a poor outcome (OR = 3.1 (2.7-3.5)). CONCLUSIONS: Loss of pupillary light reactivity upon hospital admission is predictive of a poor outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. However, it does not have sufficient accuracy to determine prognosis and decision making.