Item — HN Reader

So showing up 1-2 minutes earlier does indeed increase survival rates. For instances in which someone is actually shot, I estimate that -2 minutes = 1% increase in survival, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12061-020-09362-3. So in that case, ShotSpotter will save a life around every 100 shooting victims it covers.

Part of the rub is that people being hit are not all that common. (It may be false positives, or just no recovered shells on scene, but many of the ShotSpotter calls result in a nothingburger.) So what has happened in some cities is that ShotSpotter has increased workload in going to calls, so may have had negative spillover in that regards.

2 comments

As a paramedic, drive time isn't necessarily the biggest factor, I feel, it's response times for EMS, particularly for wounds that are not easy to tourniquet.

After that, it's also generally not distance or speed of drive time - usually the factor that determines speed to the hospital is "opticom", aka traffic light pre-emption. I can move a lot more smoothly if my opticom is making the entire "lane" of intersections green for me, even if traffic is garbage.

There's also a self-selection in that study. Reality is most GSWs do not NEED to go to a L1 Trauma Center (the difference between L1 and L2 in most cases is as simple as "teaching facilities", the difference between these and L3 is who is required to have certain people physically at the hospital 24/7 versus "on-call").

That's something I didn't consider, you're right. I guess they have to weigh lives saved versus cost. A decision I am glad I don't have to make. Thanks for finding that data.