PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Marincowitz, Carl AU - Stone, Tony AU - Hasan, Madina AU - Campbell, Richard AU - Bath, Peter A. AU - Turner, Janette AU - Pilbery, Richard AU - Thomas, Benjamin AU - Sutton, Laura AU - Bell, Fiona AU - Biggs, Katie AU - Hopfgartner, Frank AU - Mazumdar, Suvodeep AU - Petrie, Jennifer AU - Goodacre, Steve TI - Accuracy of emergency medical service telephone triage of need for an ambulance response in suspected COVID-19: An observational cohort study AID - 10.1101/2021.10.12.21264136 DP - 2021 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2021.10.12.21264136 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/10/19/2021.10.12.21264136.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/10/19/2021.10.12.21264136.full AB - Background Emergency Medical Services (EMS) have experienced surges in demand as the COVID-19 pandemic has progressed with ambulances services in the UK declaring major incidents due to the risk of care being compromised. COVID-19 specific EMS telephone triage tools have been introduced to help manage demand. There has been no previous evaluation of the accuracy of EMS telephone triage in identifying patients with suspected COVID-19 at risk of serious adverse outcome.We aimed to assess accuracy of EMS telephone triage in identifying patients who need an EMS response and identify factors which affect triage accuracy.Method Patients who made an emergency call to Yorkshire Ambulance Service between 2nd April and 29th June 2020 and were assessed using an AMPDS pandemic pathway for suspected COVID-19 were linked to Office for National Statistics death registration data, hospital and general practice electronic health care data collected by NHS Digital.Accuracy of decision to dispatch an ambulance was assessed in terms of death or need for organ support at 30 days from the first 999 call. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with false negative and false positive triage.Results Of 12, 653 callers included in the study population, 11.1% experienced the primary composite adverse outcome. Using the triage pathway, 16% of callers did not receive an emergency response and they had a lower risk (3.5%) of the primary outcome. Ambulances were dispatched to 4, 230 callers (33.4%) who were not subsequently conveyed to hospital and did not experience the primary outcome (false positive triage). Multivariable modelling found older age and presence of pre-existing respiratory disease were significant predictors of false positive triage.Conclusion EMS telephone triage avoided 16% of calls receiving an emergency ambulance, of whom 3.5% died or needed organ support by 30 days. Telephone triage can therefore reduce the burden of EMS responses but with the cost of a small proportion of patients who do not receive an initial emergency response deteriorating. Research is needed to identify the appropriate balance between over- and under-triageCompeting Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Trialhttps://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN28342533Funding StatementThe PRIEST study was funded by the United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme (project reference 11/46/07). The funder played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The North West - Haydock Research Ethics Committee gave a favourable opinion on the PAINTED study on 25 June 2012 (reference 12/NW/0303) and on the updated PRIEST study on 23rd March 2020. The Confidentiality Advisory Group of the Health Research Authority granted approval to collect data without patient consent in line with Section 251 of the National Health Service Act 2006.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data used for this study are subject to data sharing agreements with NHS Digital and Yorkshire Ambulance Service which prohibits further sharing of individual level data. The data sets used are obtainable from these organisations subject to necessary authorisations and approvals.