Emergency Medical Service Providers' Attitudes andExperiences Regarding Enrolling Patients in Clinical Research Trials

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate Emergency Medical Services (EMS) providers' attitudes andexperiences about enrolling patients in clinical research trials utilizing the federal rules for exception from informed consent. We hypothesized that Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) would have varied attitudes about research using an exception from informed consent which could have an impact on the research. Methods andsetting: Since January 2007, the EMS system has been participating in a randomized, multi-center interventional trial in which out-of-hospital providers enroll critically injured trauma patients using exception from informed consent.A voluntary, anonymous, written survey was administered to EMS providers during an in-service. The survey included demographics andLikert-type questions about their experiences with andattitudes towards research in general, andresearch using an exception from informed consent for an out-of-hospital clinical trial. Results: The response rate was 79.3% (844/1067). Most respondents, 93.3%, agreed that “research in EMS care is important.” However, 38.5% also agreed that individual EMTs/paramedics should maintain the personal right of refusal to enroll patients in EMS trials. Fifty-four percent of respondents agreed with the statement that “the right of research subjects to make their own choices is more important than the interests of the general community.” In response to statements about the current study, 11.3% agreed that “the study is unethical because the patient cannot consent” and69.2% responded that they would personally be willing to be enrolled in the study before they were able to give consent if they were seriously injured. Those who had not enrolled a patient into the study (681 respondents) were asked their reasons: 76.8% had not encountered an eligible patient or did not work for an agency that carried the fluid; 4.3% did not have time; 4.1% forgot and1.1% stated that they were opposed to enrolling patients in studies without their consent. Conclusion: The majority of EMS personnel in one community support EMS research andthis specific out-of-hospital clinical trial being conducted under an exception from informed consent. Potential barriers to enrollment were identified. Further study in other systems is warranted to better understand EMS provider perspectives about exception from informed consent research.     

Emergency Medical Services Provider Experiences of Hospice Care

Background: Growing numbers of emergency medical services (EMS) providers respond to patients who receive hospice care. The objective of this investigation was to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and experiences of EMS providers in the care of patients enrolled in hospice care. Methods: We conducted a survey study of EMS providers regarding hospice care. We collected quantitative and qualitative data on EMS provider's knowledge, attitudes, and experiences in responding to the care needs of patients in hospice care. We used Chi-squared tests to compare EMS provider's responses by credential (Emergency Medical Technician [EMT] vs. Paramedic) and years of experience (0–5 vs. 5+). We conducted a thematic analysis to examine open-ended responses to qualitative questions. Results: Of the 182 EMS providers who completed the survey (100% response rate), 84.1% had cared for a hospice patient one or more times. Respondents included 86 (47.3%) EMTs with Intermediate and Advanced training and 96 (52.7%) Paramedics. Respondent's years of experience ranged from 0–10+ years, with 99 (54.3%) providers having 0–5 years of experience and 83 (45.7%) providers having 5+ years of experience. There were no significant differences between EMTs and Paramedics in their knowledge of the care of these patients, nor were there significant differences (p < 0.05) between those with 0–5 and 5+ years of experience. Furthermore, 53 (29.1%) EMS providers reported receiving formal education on the care of hospice patients. A total of 36% respondents felt that patients in hospice care required a DNR order. In EMS providers' open-ended responses on challenges in responding to the care needs of hospice patients, common themes were family-related challenges, and the need for more education. Conclusion: While the majority of EMS providers have responded to patients enrolled in hospice care, few providers received formal training on how to care for this population. EMS providers have expressed a need for a formal curriculum on the care of the patient receiving hospice.     

EMS P ROVIDER R ELUCTANCE TO P ERFORM M OUTH - TO - MOUTH R ESUSCITATION

Objectives. To assess the willingness of EMS providers to perform mouth-to-mouth resuscitation (MMR) both with and without a barrier device (e.g., face shield), while not on duty; and to determine the providers' perceived risk from performing MMR and the frequency with which they carry a barrier device. Methods. A survey was mailed to 543 EMS providers presenting four scenarios describing a patient in respiratory arrest. The respondents were asked whether they would perform MMR in each scenario both with and without a barrier device. Results. Of those surveyed, 342 (64%) responded. Strikingly few (≤5%) of the respondents would perform MMR without a barrier on each of the cases, except for the case of a pediatric drowning (52%). The respondents were least likely to perform MMR on a patient with AIDS (< 1%). The respondents were much more likely to perform MMR in each case if a barrier device was available. The respondents were very concerned about the risk of contagion from MMR, yet 44% of the respondents rarely or never carried a barrier device with them. Conclusion. Emergency medical services providers are quite reluctant to perform MMR, and this is likely related to their perception of a high risk of contagion. The availability of barrier devices greatly decreases this reluctance, but EMS personnel carry such devices infrequently.     

Comfort level of emergency medical service providers in responding to weapons of mass destruction events: impact of training and equipment

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have suggested that emergency medical services (EMS) providers are ill-prepared in the areas of training and equipment for response to events due to weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and other public health emergencies (epidemics, etc.). METHODS: A nationally representative sample of basic and paramedic EMS providers in the United States was surveyed to assess whether they had received training in WMD and/or public health emergencies as part of their initial provider training and as continuing medical education within the past 24 months. Providers also were surveyed as to whether their primary EMS agency had the necessary specialty equipment to respond to these specific events. RESULTS: More than half of EMS providers had some training in WMD response. Hands-on training was associated with EMS provider comfort in responding to chemical, biological, and/or radiological events and public health emergencies (odds ratio (OR) = 3.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.1, 3.3). Only 18.1% of providers surveyed indicated that their agencies had the necessary equipment to respond to a WMD event. Emergency medical service providers who only received WMD training reported higher comfort levels than those who had equipment, but no training. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of training and education as well as the lack of necessary equipment to respond to WMD events is associated with decreased comfort among emergency medical services providers in responding to chemical, biological, and/or radiological incidents. Better training and access to appropriate equipment may increase provider comfort in responding to these types of incidents.     

Into the fray: integration of emergency medical services and special weapons and tactics (SWAT) teams

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine current experience and training of emergency medical support personnel for special weapons and tactics (SWAT) teams in North America. METHODS: This cross-sectional, epidemiologic survey was sent to SWAT unit commanders from the 200 largest metropolitan areas. Questions included basic demographics, specialized training of emergency medical services (EMS) personnel, and where such personnel are deployed during tactical operations. Unit commanders also were asked to estimate the number and type of injuries sustained during tactical operations and to list any recommendations to improve the EMS response. RESULTS: A total of 150 surveys was completed, for a response rate of 75%. The most common medical support (69%) was a civilian ambulance on standby at a predesignated location. Ninety-four percent of these prehospital care providers had no specialized training, and could not enter an area that was not secured tactically. Police officers with first aid or EMT training comprised the next largest group of medical support. Overall, 31% of SWAT commanders depended on remote EMS dispatch by radio to the scene when injuries occurred. Thirty-eight percent of respondents reported a significant injury had occurred during their tactical operations within the past 24 months. Common injuries included gunshot wounds, chemical exposure, and fractures. However, 78% (117/150) of respondents did not have a medical director, and 23% (35/150) of teams did not have an EMS preplan or protocol. CONCLUSION: The results suggest a need for established EMS protocols, medical direction, and specialized tactical medical training, especially in large metropolitan areas.     

Potential Utility of a Miniature Electrocardiographic Device in the Medical Support of Law Enforcement Tactical Teams

Abstract

Objectives. To determine which mode of completing a survey yields the highest response rate among emergency medical services (EMS) providers, examine rural and urban differences, and determine the completeness of questions by mode of response. Methods. A random sample of EMS providers was mailed one of the following: 1) a paper survey, with instructions to return it via the enclosed self-addressed, stamped envelope; 2) a letter, with instructions to complete the survey at the provided URL (Web address); or 3) a paper survey with a self-addressed, stamped envelope and a URL, with the option of choosing the mode of response. We compared response rates based on the three different modes. We conducted analysis of the number of skipped multiple-choice and open-ended questions by mode and content analysis of the open-ended questions. Results. The paper-only option resulted in the highest response rate (40.4%, p = 0.003) compared with the response rates from Web-only and choice of mode. Overall, rural EMS providers responded at a higher rate than urban EMS providers (40.3% vs. 31.6%, respectively [p = 0.0002]). Web respondents were more likely to complete all the open-ended questions (p = 0.003). Almost a fourth (22.8%) of the paper respondents skipped multiple-choice questions. There was a pattern of more complete responses for open-ended questions among the Web-based participants, but this was not significant (p = 0.17). Conclusion. EMS providers seem to prefer a more traditional mode (paper) when responding to a survey. Rural providers are more likely to respond. Mode of response influences the number of skipped questions but does not impact the quality of open-ended answers.     

Children's Safety Initiative: A National Assessment of Pediatric Educational Needs among Emergency Medical Services Providers

Abstract

Objective. Emergency medical services (EMS) providers may have critical knowledge gaps in pediatric care due to lack of exposure and training. There is currently little evidence to guide educators to the knowledge gaps that most need to be addressed to improve patient safety. The objective of this study was to identify educational needs of EMS providers related to pediatric care in various domains in order to inform development of curricula. Methods. The Children's Safety Initiative-EMS performed a three-phase Delphi survey on patient safety in pediatric emergencies among providers and content experts in pediatric emergency care, including physicians, nurses, and prehospital providers of all levels. Each round included questions related to educational needs of providers or the effect of training on patient safety events. We identified knowledge gaps in the following domains: case exposure, competency and knowledge, assessment and decision making, and critical thinking and proficiency. Individual knowledge gaps were ranked by portion of respondents who ranked them “highly likely” (Likert-type score 7–10 out of 10) to contribute to safety events. Results. There were 737 respondents who were included in analysis of the first phase of the survey. Paramedics were 50.8% of respondents, EMT-basics/first responders were 22%, and physicians 11.4%. The top educational priorities identified in the final round of the survey include pediatric airway management, responder anxiety when working with children, and general pediatric skills among providers. The top three needs in decision-making include knowing when to alter plans mid-course, knowing when to perform an advanced airway, and assessing pain in children. The top 3 technical or procedural skills needs were pediatric advanced airway, neonatal resuscitation, and intravenous/intraosseous access. For neonates, specific educational needs identified included knowing appropriate vital signs and preventing hypothermia. Conclusions. This is the first large-scale Delphi survey related to pediatric prehospital education. Our results provide foundational information related to the educational needs of prehospital providers. Medical directors and educators can use the results to shape future curricular development.     

Strategies Used by Prehospital Providers to Overcome Language Barriers

Objective: Language barriers are commonly encountered in the prehospital setting but there is a paucity of research on how prehospital providers address language discordance. We sought to identify the communication strategies, and the limitations of those strategies, used by emergency medical services (EMS) providers when confronted with language barriers in a variety of linguistic and cultural contexts. Methods: EMS providers were queried regarding communication strategies to overcome language barriers as part of an international, multi-site, sequential explanatory, qualitative-predominant, mixed methods study of prehospital language barriers. A survey of EMS telecommunicators was administered at dispatch centers in New Mexico (United States) and Western Cape (South Africa). Semi-structured qualitative interviews of EMS field providers were conducted at agencies who respond to calls from participating dispatch centers. Survey data included quantitative data on demographics and communication strategies used to overcome language barriers as well as qualitative free-text responses on the limitations of strategies. Interviews elicited narratives of encounters with language-discordant patients and the strategies used to communicate. Data from the surveys and interviews were integrated at the point of analysis. Results: 125 telecommunicators (overall response rate of 84.5%) and a purposive sample of 27 field providers participated in the study. The characteristics of participants varied between countries and between agencies, consistent with variations in participating agencies’ hiring and training practices. Telecommunicators identified 3rd-party telephonic interpreter services as the single most effective strategy when available, but also described time delays and frustration with interpreter communications that leads them to preferentially try other strategies. In the field, all providers reported using similar strategies, relying heavily on bystanders, multilingual coworkers, and non-verbal communication. Prehospital providers described significant limitations to these strategies, including time delays, breaches of patient confidentiality, and inaccurate interpretation. Participants suggested various resources to improve communication with language-discordant patients. Conclusions: Prehospital providers rely upon similar, informal strategies for overcoming language barriers across a variety of locations, provider types, and linguistic and cultural contexts.     

Resident perspectives of ems as a subspecialty

Objective. Emergency medical services (EMS) is frequently considered to be a subspecialty of emergency medicine (EM) despite the unavailability of subspecialty certification. An assessment of future interest in EMS subspecialization and the perceived educational needs of potential EMS physicians was performed in order to provide data to leaders responsible for development of this subspecialty area. Methods. A survey concerning EMS subspecialization issues was distributed to 2,464 members of the Emergency Medicine Residents Association (EMRA). Questions addressed demographic information, interest in EMS, educational issues, and desired credentials. The response rate was 30% (n = 737). All surveys were analyzed by the Pearson chi-square probability and Mantel-Haenszel tests for linear association. Results. A moderate to very high interest in EMS medical direction was expressed by 84% of the respondents, with 14% interested in full-time EMS positions. This interest increased with years of training (p < 0.0001). Almost 89% believed that EMS physicians should have special preparations prior to practice beyond EM residency training. Fewer than half (44%) thought that an EM residency provided sufficient preparation for a significant role in EMS, and this perception increased in intensity with years of training (p < 0.0052). Interest in EMS fellowships (24%) would increase to 36% if subspecialty certification were available (p < 0.0001). Thirty-nine percent believed subcertification should be required of all EMS medical directors if available. Conclusions. Many EM residents have an interest in active participation in EMS on either a part-time or a full-time basis. Most respondents think EMS is a unique area requiring focused education beyond an EM residency. Interest in EMS fellowships would greatly increase if subspecialty certification were available.     

EMS Provider Compliance with Infection Control Recommendations Is Suboptimal

Abstract

Introduction. Standard precautions are disease transmission prevention strategies recommended by both the World Health Organization (WHO) and by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Emergency medical services (EMS) personnel are expected to utilize standard precautions. Methods. This was a prospective observational study of the use of standard precautions by EMS providers arriving at a large urban emergency department (ED). Research assistants (RAs) observed EMS crews throughout their arrival and delivery of patients and recorded data related to the use of gloves, hand hygiene, and equipment disinfection. Results. A total of 423 EMS deliveries were observed, allowing for observation of 899 EMS providers. Only 512 (56.9%) EMS providers arrived wearing gloves. Hand washing was observed in 250 (27.8%) of providers. Reusable equipment disinfection was noted in only 31.6% of opportunities. The most commonly disinfected item was the stretcher (55%). Conclusion. EMS provider compliance with standard precautions and equipment disinfection recommendations is suboptimal. Strategies must be developed to improve EMS provider compliance with internationally recognized infection control guidelines.