Understanding the drivers on medical workloads: an analysis of spectators at the Australian Football League
Kathryn Zeitz A B E , Pari Delir Haghighi C , Frada Burstein C and Jeffrey Williams A DA St John Ambulance, PO Box 3895, Manuka, ACT 2603, Australia.
B School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health Sciences, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia.
C Centre for Organisational and Social Informatics, Monash University, PO Box 197, Caulfield East, Vic. 3145, Australia. Email: pari.delir.haghighi@monash.edu; frada.burstein@monash.edu
D St John of God Hospital Subiaco, 12 Salvado Road, Subiaco, WA 6008, Australia.
E Corresponding author. Email: kmzeitz@onaustralia.com.au
Australian Health Review 37(3) 402-406 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH13032
Submitted: 24 July 2012 Accepted: 10 March 2013 Published: 4 June 2013
Journal Compilation © AHHA 2013
Abstract
Objective. The present study was designed to further understand the psychosocial drivers of crowds impacting on the demand for healthcare. This involved analysing different spectator crowds for medical usage at mass gatherings; more specifically, did different football team spectators (of the Australian Football League) generate different medical usage rates.
Methods. In total, 317 games were analysed from 10 venues over 2 years. Data were analysed by the ANOVA and Pearson correlation tests.
Results. Spectators who supported different football teams generated statistically significant differences in patient presentation rates (PPR) (F15, 618 = 1.998, P = 0.014). The present study confirmed previous findings that there is a positive correlation between the crowd size and PPR at mass gatherings but found a negative correlation between density and PPR (r = –0.206, n = 317, P < 0.0005).
Conclusions. The present study has attempted to scientifically explore psychosocial elements of crowd behaviour as a driver of demand for emergency medical care. In measuring demand for emergency medical services there is a need to develop a more sophisticated understanding of a variety of drivers in addition to traditional metrics such as temperature, crowd size and other physical elements. In this study we saw that spectators who supported different football teams generated statistically significant differences in PPR.
What is known about this topic? Understanding the drivers of emergency medical care is most important in the mass gathering setting. There has been minimal analysis of psychological ‘crowd’ variables.
What does this paper add? This study explores the psychosocial impact of supporting a different team on the PPR of spectators at Australian Football League matches. The value of collecting and analysing these types of data sets is to support more balanced planning, better decision support and knowledge management, and more effective emergency medical demand management.
What are the implications for practitioners? This information further expands the body of evidence being created to understand the drivers of emergency medical demand and usage. In addition, it supports the planning and management of emergency medical and health-related requirements by increasing our understanding of the effect of elements of ‘crowd’ that impact on medical usage and emergency healthcare.
Additional keywords: crowd safety, crowd size, emergency medical workload, mass gathering, patient presentation rate.
References
[1] Morgans A, Burgess S. What is a health emergency? The difference in definition and understanding between patients and health professionals. Aust Health Rev 2011; 35 284–9.| What is a health emergency? The difference in definition and understanding between patients and health professionals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21871188PubMed |
[2] Gindi R, Cohen R, Kirzinger W. Emergency room use among adults aged 18–64: early release of estimates from the national health interview survey, January–June 2011. Hyattsville: Division of Health Interview Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2011.
[3] Harris M, Zwar N. Care of patients with chronic disease: the challenge for general practice. Med J Aust 2007; 187 104–7.
| 17635094PubMed |
[4] Arbon P, Bridgewater F, Smith C. Mass gathering medicine: a predictive model for patient presentation rates. Prehosp Disaster Med 2001; 6 109–16.
[5] Tsouros A, Efstathiou P. Mass gatherings and public health, the experience of the Athens 2004 Olympic Games; 2007.
[6] Boyle J, Jessup M, Crilly J, Green D, Lind J, Wallis M, Miller P, Fitzgerald G. Predicting emergency department admissions. Emerg Med J 2012; 29 358–65.
| Predicting emergency department admissions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21705374PubMed |
[7] Milsten A, Maguire B, Bissell R, Seaman K. Mass-gathering medical care: a review of the literature. Prehosp Disaster Med 2002; 17 151–62.
| 12627919PubMed |
[8] Arbon P. The development of conceptual models for mass-gathering health. Prehosp Disaster Med 2004; 19 208–12.
| 15571196PubMed |
[9] Hutton A, Zeitz K, Brown S, Arbon P. Assessing the psychosocial elements of crowds at mass gatherings. Prehosp Disaster Med 2011; 26 414–21.
| Assessing the psychosocial elements of crowds at mass gatherings.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22559306PubMed | 22559306PubMed |
[10] Zeitz K, Tan H, Zeitz C. Crowd behavior at mass gatherings – a literature review. Prehosp Disaster Med 2009; 24 32–8.
| 19557955PubMed |
| 19557955PubMed |
[11] Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). 4174.0 − Sports attendance, Australia, 2002. Canberra: ABS; 2007. Available at http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4174.0Main+Features12002?OpenDocument [Verified 15 April 2013]
[12] Milsten AM, Seaman KG, Liu P, Bissell R, Maguire B. Variables influencing medical usage rates, injury patterns, and levels of care for mass gatherings. Prehosp Disaster Med 2003; 18 334–46.
| 15310046PubMed |
| 15310046PubMed |
[13] Berlognghi AE. Understanding and planning for different spectator crowds. Engineering for crowd safety. Safety Science 1995; 18 239–47.
[14] Acton C, Miller R. SPSS Statistics for Social Scientists. 2nd edn. Bassingstoke: Plagrave Macmillan; 2009.
[15] Arbon P. The development of a web-based algorithm for the predication of patient presentation rates at mass gatherings. Aust J Emerg 2002; 17 60–4.
[16] De Lorenzo RA, Grey BC, Bennet PC. Effect of crowd size on patient volume at a large, multipurpose, indoor stadium. J Emerg Med 1989; 7 379–84.
| Effect of crowd size on patient volume at a large, multipurpose, indoor stadium.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK3c%2FpsFSguw%3D%3D&md5=5fa9014f4d44d712b40bec03e79b2b65CAS | 2600396PubMed | 2600396PubMed |
[17] Michael JA, Barbera JA. Mass gathering medical care: a twenty-five year review. Prehosp Disaster Med 1997; 12 305–12.
| 1:STN:280:DyaK1c3mt1SjsQ%3D%3D&md5=3a804ca1be3af3cb7f1fd02cb3db879cCAS | 10179212PubMed | 10179212PubMed |
[18] Hnatow D, Gordon DJ. Medical planning of mass gatherings: a retrospective review of the San Antonio Papal Mass. Prehosp Disaster Med 1991; 6 443–50.
[19] Morimura N, Katsumi A, Koido Y, Sugimoto K, Fuse A, Asai Y, et al Analysis of patient load data related from the 2002 FIFA World Cup Korea/Japan. Prehosp Disaster Med 2002; 19 278–84.
