Debatten om akuttmedisin i Norge

Buskop, Christian; Berve, Per Olav; Sabel, Mads Alexander

doi:10.4045/tidsskr.15.1223

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A similar debate later took place in the Norwegian doctors union publication, with an anesthesiologist claiming that emergency physicians are not needed in Norway because patients are initially evaluated by their PCP or legevakt, 24 and NORSEM leadership pointing out the importance of having a regular group of emergency physicians in the receiving area who have a broad knowledge base that is based on EuSEM's curriculum 25…”

Section: Barriers To An Emergency Medicine Specialtymentioning

confidence: 96%

“…NORSEM supported a new specialty that would be in line with IFEM's definition that "emergency medicine is a field of practice based on knowledge and skills required for the prevention, diagnosis and management of acute and urgent aspects of illness and injury affecting patients of all age groups with a full spectrum of episodic undifferentiated physical and behavioral disorders. "23 A similar debate later took place in the Norwegian doctors union publication, with an anesthesiologist claiming that emergency physicians are not needed in Norway because patients are initially evaluated by their PCP or legevakt,24 and NORSEM leadership pointing out the importance of having a regular group of emergency physicians in the receiving area who have a broad knowledge base that is based on EuSEM's curriculum 25. Also in 2015, while the debate was raging in the media, a working group of 9 physicians, with backgrounds from internal medicine, emergency medicine, anesthesia, surgery, and radiology, was established todevelop the framework of the new specialty.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Emergency medicine in Norway: The road to specialty recognition

Galletta

Løvstakken

2020

JACEP Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emergency medicine (EM) in most of Europe is a much newer specialty than in the United States. Until recently, emergency departments (EDs) in Norway were staffed with unsupervised interns, leading to a government report in 2008 that called for change. From the establishment of the Norwegian Society for Emergency Medicine in 2010 to the creation of the specialty in 2017 and the approval of the first emergency physician in Norway in 2019, our review article describes how a small group of physicians were able to work with politicians and the media to get an emergency medicine specialty approved despite resistance from a much larger group of existing specialists. Norway faced many of the same obstacles as the United States did with implementing the specialty 60 years ago. This article serves as a review of the conflict that may ensue when enacting a change in public policy and a resource to those countries that have yet to implement an emergency medicine specialty.

show abstract

Section: Barriers To An Emergency Medicine Specialtymentioning

confidence: 96%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergency medicine in Norway: The road to specialty recognition

Galletta

Løvstakken

2020

JACEP Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Relevant vs non-relevant subspecialist for patients hospitalised in internal medicine at a local hospital: which is better? A retrospective cohort study

Berg

Hurtig

Steinsbekk

2022

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Studies of the treatment of patients in-hospital with a specific diagnosis show that physicians with a subspecialisation relevant to this diagnosis can provide a better quality of care. However, studies including patients with a range of diagnoses show a more negligible effect of being attended by a relevant subspecialist. This project aimed to study a more extensive set of patients and diagnoses in an environment where the subspecialist present could be controlled. Thus, this study investigated whether being attended by a physician with a subspeciality relevant to the patient’s primary diagnosis was prospectively associated with readmission, in-hospital mortality, or length of stay compared to a physician with a subspeciality not relevant to the patient’s primary diagnosis. Methods We have conducted a retrospective register-based study of 11,059 hospital admissions across 9 years at a local hospital in south-eastern Norway, where it was possible to identify the physician attending the patients at the beginning of the stay. The outcomes studied were emergency readmissions to the same ward within 30 days, any in-hospital mortality and the total length of stay. The patients admitted were matched with the consultant(s) responsible for their treatment. Then, the admissions were divided into two groups according to their primary diagnosis. Was their diagnosis within the subspeciality of the attending consultant (relevant subspecialist) or not (non-relevant subspecialist). The two groups were then compared using bivariable and multivariable models adjusted for patient characteristics, comorbidities, diagnostic group and physician sex. Results A relevant subspecialist was present during the first 3 days in 8058 (73%) of the 11,059 patient cases. Patients attended to by a relevant subspecialist had an odds ratio (OR) of 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.76 to 1.09) for being readmitted and 0.71 (0.48 to 1.04) for dying in the hospital and had a length of stay that was 0.18 (− 0.07 to 0.42) days longer than for those attended to by a non-relevant subspecialist. Conclusions This study found that patients attended by a relevant subspecialist did not have a significantly different outcome to those attended by a non-relevant subspecialist.

show abstract

12. Samarbeid i akutte hendelser utenfor sykehus

Kolnes,

Halvorsen

2024

Samarbeid

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Debatten om akuttmedisin i Norge

Cited by 3 publications

References 4 publications

Emergency medicine in Norway: The road to specialty recognition

Emergency medicine in Norway: The road to specialty recognition

Relevant vs non-relevant subspecialist for patients hospitalised in internal medicine at a local hospital: which is better? A retrospective cohort study

12. Samarbeid i akutte hendelser utenfor sykehus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About