Objective: To describe patient satisfaction with pre-hospital emergency knowledge and determine if patients and professionals share a common vision on the satisfaction predictors. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted in two phases. First, a systematic review following the PRISMA protocol was carried out searching publications between January 2000 and July 2016 in Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane. Second, three focus groups involving professionals (advisers and healthcare providers) and a total of 79 semi-structured interviews involving patients were conducted to obtain information about what dimensions of care were a priority for patients. Results: Thirty-three relevant studies were identified, with a majority conducted in Europe using questionnaires. They pointed out a very high level of satisfaction of callers and patients. Delay with the assistance and the ability for resolution of the case are the elements that overlap in fostering satisfaction. The published studies reviewed with satisfaction neither the overall care process nor related the measurement of the real time in responding to an emergency. The patients and professionals concurred in their assessments about the most relevant elements for patient satisfaction, although safety was not a predictive factor for patients. Response capacity and perceived capacity for resolving the situation were crucial factors for satisfaction. Conclusions: Published studies have assessed similar dimensions of satisfaction and have shown high patient satisfaction. Expanded services resolving a wide number of issues that can concern citizens are also positively assessed. Delays and resolution capacity are crucial for satisfaction. Furthermore, despite the fact that few explanations may be given due to a lack of face-to-face attention, finding the patient’s location, taking into account the caller’s emotional needs, and maintaining phone contact until the emergency services arrive are high predictors of satisfaction.

Objective. To describe patient satisfaction with pre-hospital emergency knowledge and determine if patients and professionals share a common vision on the satisfaction predictors.Methods. A qualitative study conducted in two phases. First, a systematic review following the PRISMA protocol was carried out searching publications between January 2000 and July 2016 in Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane. Second, three focus groups involving professionals (advisers and healthcare providers) and a total of 79 semi-structured interviews involving patients were conducted to obtain information about what dimensions of care were a priority for patients.Results. Thirty-three relevant studies were identified. A majority conducted in Europe using questionnaires. They pointed out a very high level of satisfaction of callers and patients. Delay with the assistance and the ability for resolution of the case are the elements that overlap in fostering satisfaction. The published studies neither reviewed the overall care process nor related the measurement of the real time in responding to an emergency with the satisfaction. The patients and professionals concurred in their assessments about the most relevant elements for patient satisfaction, although safety was not a predictive factor for patients. Response capacity and perceived capacity for resolving the situation were crucial factors for satisfaction. This qualitative approach yielded assistance targets to be improved.Conclusions. Published studies have assessed similar dimensions of satisfaction. Furthermore, despite the fact that few explanations may be given due to the no face to face attention, taking into account the patient's emotional needs or maintaining contact with the patient until the emergency services arrive are high predictors of the satisfaction.