Analyzing emergency call volume, call durations, and unanswered calls during the first two waves of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to 2019: An observational study of routine data from seven bavarian dispatch centres.

Background: The spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and the corresponding implementation of measures such as stay-at-home orders and curfews had a major impact on health systems, including emergency medical services. This study examined the effect of the pandemic on call volumes, duration of calls and unanswered calls to the emergency number 112. Method: For this retrospective, descriptive study, 986,650 calls to seven emergency dispatch centres in Bavaria between January 01, 2019 and May 31, 2021 were analysed. The absolute number of calls and calls per 100,000 inhabitants as well as the number of unanswered calls are reported. The Mann‒Whitney U test was used to compare mean call durations between 2019 and 2020/2021 during several periods. Results: Call volume declined during the pandemic, especially during periods with strict lockdown restrictions. The largest decline (-12.9 %) occurred during the first lockdown. The largest reduction in the number of emergency calls overall (-25.3 %) occurred on weekends during the second lockdown. Emergency call duration increased, with the largest increase (+13 s) occurring during the "light" lockdown. The number of unanswered calls remained at a similar level as before the pandemic. Conclusion: This study showed that the studied Bavarian dispatch centres experienced lower call volumes and longer call durations during the first two waves of the COVID-19 pandemic (up to May 2021). Longer call durations could be the result of additional questions to identify potentially infectious patients. The fact that the number of unanswered calls hardly changed may indicate that the dispatch centres were not overwhelmed during the study period.

Ambulance deployment without transport: a retrospective difference analysis for the description of emergency interventions without patient transport in Bavaria.

BACKGROUND: Not all patients who call the ambulance service are subsequently transported to hospital. In 2018, a quarter of deployments of an emergency ambulance in Bavaria were not followed by patient transport. This study describes factors that influence patient transport rates. METHOD: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study based on data from all Integrated Dispatch Centres of the Free State of Bavaria in 2018. Included were ambulance deployments without emergency physician involvement, which were subdivided into ambulance deployments without transport and ambulance deployments with transport. The proportion of transported patients were determined for the primary reasons for deployment and for the different community types. On-scene time was compared for calls with and without patient transport. Differences were tested for statistical significance using Chi2 tests and the odds ratio was calculated to determine differences between groups. RESULTS: Of 510,145 deployments, 147,621 (28.9%) could be classified as ambulance deployments without transport and 362,524 (71.1%) as ambulance deployments with transport.The lowest proportion of patients transported was found for activations where the fire brigade was involved ("fire alarm system" 0.6%, "fire with emergency medical services" 5.4%) and "personal emergency response system active alarm" (18.6%). The highest transport rates were observed for emergencies involving "childbirth/delivery" (96.9%) and "trauma" (83.2%). A lower proportion of patients is transported in large cities as compared to smaller cities or rural communities; in large cities, the odds ratio for emergencies without transport is 2.02 [95% confidence interval 1.98-2.06] referenced to rural communites. The median on-scene time for emergencies without transport was 20.8 min (n = 141,052) as compared to 16.5 min for emergencies with transport (n = 362,524). The shortest on-scene times for emergencies without transport were identified for activations related to "fire alarm system" (9.0 min) and "personal emergency response system active alarm" (10.6 min). CONCLUSION: This study indicates that the proportion of patients transported depends on the reason for deployment and whether the emergency location is urban or rural. Particularly low transport rates are found if an ambulance was dispatched in connection with a fire department operation or a personal emergency medical alert button was activated. The on-scene-time of the rescue vehicle is increased for deployments without transport. The study could not provide a rationale for this and further research is needed. Trial registration This paper is part of the study "Rettungswageneinsatz ohne Transport" ["Ambulance deployment without transport"] (RoT), which was registered in the German Register of Clinical Studies under the number DRKS00017758.

[Differences between emergency medical services operations with and without patient transport : A retrospective analysis of dispatch center data in a territorial state]. / Unterschiede zwischen Rettungsdiensteinsätzen mit und ohne Patiententransport : Eine retrospektive Analyse der Leitstellendaten in einem Flächenstaat.

BACKGROUND: The use of the emergency medical services (EMS) in Bavaria has been increasing for years. We hypothesized that emergency response without patient transport (RoT) is often an expression of inadequate alert planning. The aim of the study was to describe the differences between the integrated dispatch centers (ILSs) for such operations with regard to the characteristics of transport quotas and ranges according to the reason for deployment as well as times and days of the week. METHOD: Retrospective cross-sectional study of data from all 26 ILSs in the Free State of Bavaria in 2018. Transport quotas for emergency operations for essential reasons without emergency physician involvement were analyzed comparatively in relation to dispatch center area, time of day, and day of the week. Deployments were categorized as RoT or ambulance deployment with transport (TP). RESULTS: Of 510,145 call-outs, 147,621 (28.9%) were RoT and 362,524 (71.1%) were TP. There were significant regional differences in the transport quotas for all deployment reasons investigated. The highest range among the ILSs was found for the deployment reasons "fire alarm system" (16.8 percentage points), "personal emergency response system" (16.1%), and "heart/circulation" (14.6%). In the morning hours, the number of calls decreases with increasing TP. The fewest RoT took place between 8 and 10 am. The days of the week analysis revealed small differences in the frequency of RoT on Mondays as well as on weekends without planning relevance. CONCLUSION: We found significant differences in the ranges. This could indicate locally different alert planning specifications or dispatching decisions by the ILS. The control centers probably have considerable potential for controlling and improving resource allocation.