Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 9 Hansard (23 August) . . Page.. 3320 ..


Patient transport service

(Question No 401)

Mr Hargreaves asked the Minister for Urban Services, upon notice:

Question 1: What is the total number of (a) Priority 1 (b) Priority 2 and (c)

Priority 3 cases responded to in (i) 1996 (ii) 2000.

Question 2. What was the percentage of total work this accounted for in each of these years.

Mr Smyth: The answer to the member's question is as follows:

Answer to Question 1 and 2:

The total number of cases by category and the percentages of total work for each of the years are as follows:

1996 2000

No. of Case Percentage No. of Case Percentage

Priority 1 7,479 49.46 9,537 46.20

Priority 2 4,324 28.59 6,645 32.19

Priority 3 2,614 17.29 2,674 12.95

*CT/PTS 705 4.66 1,787 8.66

Totals 15,122 100 20,643 100

* Note: Clinic Transport Service (CT) was a predecessor to the current Patient Transport Service which provides a broader range of patient transport options.

Question 3: What is the breakdown of these cases in suburbs, by (i) number and (ii) percentage, presented in tabular and graph form.

Answer: Data to answer this question is not available in the time frame requested.

Question 4: What was the breakdown of suburb of response times by (a) mean and (b) median for (i) P1, (ii) P2, (iii) P3 cases in (1) 1996 and (2) 2000.

Answer: Data to answer this question is not available in the time frame requested.

Question 5: What was the breakdown by suburb of the nature of the job (ie. cardiac, trauma, overdose, stroke etc) in (a) 1996 and (b) 2000.

Answer: Due to the unsophisticated nature of our data base (prior to full implementation of Computer Aided Despatch and related Information Management System) this information is not available.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .