Introduction: Prehospital and emergency medical services (EMS) providers are usually the first to respond to an individual's urgent health needs, sometimes in emotionally charged circumstances. Because violence toward EMS providers in the Czech Republic is often overlooked and under-reported, we do not have a complete understanding of the extent of such violence, nor do we have recommendations from EMS professional organizations on how to resolve this problem in prehospital emergency medicine. Methods:We conducted this study to explore the process of violence against EMS providers, using the Strauss/Corbin systematic approach of grounded theory to create a paradigm model. The participants in this research included personnel who had at least two years experience in the EMS systems of the city of Prague and the Central Bohemian Region, and who had been victims of violence. Our sample included 10 registered paramedics and 10 emergency medical technicians ages 23-33 (mean ± standard deviation: 27.7). The impact of communication during EMS delivery, in the context of violence from patients or their relatives, emerged as the core category and the main focus of our study. The five main groups of the paradigm model of violence against EMS personnel included causal, contextual and intervening conditions, strategies, and consequences.Results: Of the 20 study participants, 18 reported experiencing an attack during the night shift. Ten participants experienced violence on the street, and 10 inside an ambulance. The perpetrators in all 18 cases were men. The behavior of EMS personnel plays a crucial role in how violent confrontations play out: nonprofessional behavior with drunken or addict patients increases the possibility of violence in 70% of cases. Conclusion:We found that paramedics and EMTs were exposed to verbal abuse and physical violence. However, in 10 of the violent encounters reported by our 20 participants, the attack was perpetrated by otherwise-ordinary people (ie, individuals with strong family support and good jobs) who found themselves in a very stressful situation. Thanks to grounded theory we learned that for all 20 participants there was a potential opportunity to prevent the conflict.
Background The so called ABCDE approach (Airway-Breathing-Circulation-Disability-Exposure) is a golden standard of patient assessment. The efficacy of using cognitive aids (CA) in resuscitation and peri-arrest situations remains an important knowledge gap. This work aims to develop an ABCDE CA tool (CAT) and study its potential benefits in patient condition assessment. Methods The development of the ABCDE CAT was done by 3 rounds of modified Delphi method performed by the members of the Advanced Life Support Science and Education Committee of the European Resuscitation Council. A pilot multicentre study on 48 paramedic students performing patient assessment in pre-post cohorts (without and with the ABCDA CAT) was made in order to validate and evaluate the impact of the tool in simulated clinical scenarios. The cumulative number and proper order of steps in clinical assessment in simulated scenarios were recorded and the time of the assessment was measured. Results The Delphi method resulted in the ABCDE CAT. The use of ABCDE CAT was associated with more performed assessment steps (804: 868; OR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.35, p = 0.023) which were significantly more frequently performed in proper order (220: 338; OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.40 to 2.02, p < 0.0001). The use of ABCDE CAT did not prolong the time of patient assessment. Conclusion The cognitive aid for ABCDE assessment was developed. The use of this cognitive aid for ABCDE helps paramedics to perform more procedures, more frequently in the right order and did not prolong the patient assessment in advanced life support and peri-arrest care.
Background Non-technical skills (NTS) are important for the proper functioning of emergency medical ambulance crews but have hardly been researched in the conditions of clinical pre-hospital care. The primary objective of this study, therefore, is to describe the use of NTS in practice. The secondary objective is to compare if the performance of NTS varies according to the type of case. Methods In this multicentric observational study the modified Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) score was used to assess the performed NTS of two or more crews on site. The evaluation consisted of leadership, teamwork and task management, rated by a field supervisor. The study observations took place in real clinical pre-hospital emergency medical cases when two or more crews were dispatched between October 2019 and August 2020. The sample size was determined by researchers prior to the study to at least 100 evaluated events per each of the three participating emergency medical services. The results are presented as median and interquartile range. The internal reliability, consistency and validity of test items and results were evaluated. The Kruskal–Wallis test and the post hoc Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction were used for multiple comparisons of three groups. Results A total of 359 events were evaluated. Surprisingly, the median value for all eight items was as high as 3.0 with a similar interquartile range of 1.0. There were no differences observed by case type (CPR vs. TRAUMA vs. MEDICAL) except from item 1. A post hoc analysis revealed that this difference is in favour of a higher rated performance of non-technical skills in CPR. Conclusions The overall result of the performance of non-technical skills can be regarded as very good and can serve for further evaluations. The crews achieved better parameters of NTS in leadership in resuscitation situations in comparison with general medical events. Trial Registration The study is registered at Clinical Trials under the ID: NCT04503369.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.