Table 4 Progression criteria findings
Progression criteria | RAG rating | ||
|---|---|---|---|
1: Proportion of callers with smartphones agreeing to and able to activate video livestreaming | n/N (%) | 62/72 (86) | Green |
| Â | 95% CI | (76 to 93) | Â |
2. Number (proportion) of requests to activate that result in GoodSAM footage being viewed by HEMS and/or CCP | n/N (%) | 53/62 (85) | Green |
NB: The number of requests to activate is taken as the number of GoodSAM texts received (n = 62) | (95% CI) | (74 to 93) |  |
3. Air Ambulance standdown rate/change in dispatch decision as result of livestreaming | n/N (%) | 2/20 (10) ITT* | Indeterminate due to insufficient data |
| Â | Â | 2/6 (33) PP | |
4a. Rates of psychological harm not significantly greater in 999 callers using livestreaming vs. not | Only 4/244 (1.6%) callers completed surveys | Â | |
| Â | No evidence of harm from interviews or observations | Â | |
4b. No significant difference in change over time in psychological harm in staff within the trial site compared to the comparison site | Â | Â | |
Trial site: Pre-intervention IES-R (n = 41) | 3.6 (6.2) |  | |
Post-intervention IES-R (n = 25) | 2.8 (4.4) |  | |
Change (mean, SD), difference between time points (95% CI) |  − 1 (8.5),  − 1.0( − 4.5,2.5) |  | |
Pre-intervention GHQ-12 (n = 40) | 9.6 (3.4) |  | |
Post-intervention GHQ-12 (n = 25) | 9.0 (2.8) |  | |
Comparison site: Pre-intervention IES-R (n = 9) | 5 (5.8) |  | |
Post-intervention IES-R (n = 4) | 13.1 (20.6) |  | |
Change: Mean (SD)** | 6.3 (15.8) | Â | |
Pre-intervention GHQ-12 (n = 9) | 9.9 (3.4) |  | |
Post-intervention GHQ-12 (n = 4) | 14.5 (4.4) |  | |
Change, difference between sites (95% CI) | Â | Â | |
IES-R |  − 7.3 ( − 31.8, 17.3), p = 0.43 |  | |
GHQ-12 |  − 7.5 ( − 14.4,  − 0,7), p = 0.04 |  | |