Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
This journal utilises an Online Peer Review Service (OPRS) for submissions. By clicking "Continue" you will be taken to our partner site
https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pdm.
Please be aware that your Cambridge account is not valid for this OPRS and registration is required. We strongly advise you to read all "Author instructions" in the "Journal information" area prior to submitting.
To save this undefined to your undefined account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your undefined account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This study attempted to determine the extent of training and emergency care knowledge of public school teachers in midwestern states. A secondary purpose was to assess the frequency of injury and illness in the school setting requiring the teacher to first respond.
Method:
A questionnaire and 14-item, scenario-based, emergency medical care test was developed and pretested. A discrimination index was used for validation of the instrument and a reliability coefficient of .82 was computed using the Kuder-Richardson Formula 20. A randomly recruited group of public school nurses from Arkansas, Kansas, and Missouri administered the instrument to 334 teachers who had no prior knowledge of the test. A random telephone survey of local school patrons also was completed to determine parental assumptions and expectations for emergency care and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training in teachers.
Results:
One-third (112 teachers) had no specific training in first-aid and 40% never had been trained in CPR. However, most (87%) of the respondents strongly agreed that emergency care training should be required in teacher preparation programs. Eighteen percent of the teachers responded to more than 20 injured or ill students annually, and 17% reported that they had encountered at least one life-threatening emergency in a student during their career. The average score for all respondents on the emergency care test was 58% (X2 = 8.12±2.42). Those with prior first-aid training averaged 60.5% (X2 = 8.47±2.32). Significant deficiencies were noted for recognition and appropriate treatment of student emergencies involving basic life support (BLS) and airway interventions, diabetic emergencies, and treatment of profuse bleeding. Forty of the 50 (80%) parents surveyed assumed that all teachers were adequately trained in first-aid and CPR.
Conclusion:
Public school teachers represent a potentially effective first-response component during disasters and isolated emergencies in the school environment. Overall, most of public school teachers in this study were deficient in both training and knowledge of emergency care and BLS modalities. Lack of effective, formal emergency care training in teacher preparation programs coupled with no continuing education requirement is a possible explanation of these results. Emergency medical services providers should seek opportunities to help with first-responder training and continuing education in their schools.
Although emergency medical services (EMS) liability litigation is a concern of many prehospital health care providers, there have been no studies of these legal cases nationwide and no local case studies since 1987.
Methods:
A retrospective case series was obtained from a computerized database of trial court cases filed against EMS agencies nation-wide. All legal cases that met the inclusion criteria were included in the study sample. These cases must have involved either ambulance collisions (AC) or patient care (PC) incidents, and they must have been closed between 1987 and 1992.
Results:
There were 76 cases that met the inclusion criteria. Half of these cases involved an AC, and the other cases alleged negligence of a PC encounter. Thirty (78.9%) of the plaintiffs in the AC cases were other motorists, and 35 (92.1%) of the plaintiffs in the PC cases were EMS patients. Almost half of the cases named an individual (usually an emergency medical technician or paramedic) as a codefendant. Thirty-one (40.8%) of the cases were closed without any payment to the plaintiff. There were five cases with plaintiffs' awards or settlements greater than [US] $1 million. Most (71.0%) ofthe ACs occurred in an intersection or when one vehicle rear-ended another vehicle. The most common negligence allegations in the PC cases were arrival delay, inadequate assessment, inadequate treatment, patient transport delay, and no patient transport.
Conclusion:
Risk management for EMS requires specific knowledge of the common sources of EMS liability litigation. This sample of recent legal cases provides the common allegations of negligence. Recommendations to decrease the legal risk of EMS agencies and prehospital providers are suggested.
Emergency medical services vehicle collisions (EMVCs) associated with the use of warning “lights and siren” (L&S) are responsible for injuries and death to emergency medical services (EMS) personnel and patients. This study examines patient outcome when medical protocol directs L&S transport.
Design:
During four months, all EMS calls initiated as an emergency request for service and culminating in transport to an emergency department (ED) were included. Medical criteria determined emergent (L&S) versus non-emergent transport. Patients with worsened conditions, as reported by EMS providers, were reviewed.
Setting:
Countywide suburban/rural EMS system.
Results:
Ninety-two percent (1,495 of 1,625) of patients were transported non-emergently. Thirteen (1%) of these were reported to have worsened during transport, and none of them suffered any worsened outcome related to the non-L&S transport.
Conclusion:
This medical protocol directing the use of warning L&S during patient transport results in infrequent L&S transport. In this study, no adverse outcomes were found related to non-L&S transports.
Nationwide data were collected concerning serious, disabling injuries requiring hospitalization (SDIH) or deaths among urban emergency medical services (EMS) providers.
Design and Setting:
A mail survey of EMS systems was conducted among the 200 most populated U.S. cities.
Participants:
Participants were training and operations officers of urban EMS systems.
Measurements and Main Results:
Ninety forms (45%) were returned with 88 evaluable (44%). There were 81 SDIHs for a rate of one in 31,616 dispatches. No deaths were reported. Body parts most frequently injured were the hand (22%), head (19%), foot (16%), and eye (14%). Although 90% of fire-based EMS systems (fire-EMS) provided helmets, eye protection, safety shoes, and gloves, less than half (45%) of nonfire-EMS did so. Three (4%) SDIHs resulted from acts of violence.
Conclusion:
Occupational injuries of EMS personnel are at a serious level. Fire-based EMS systems experienced a higher rate of hand SDIHs despite the provision of protective equipment. Few nonfire-EMS staff are provided with safety equipment, which may have resulted in a relatively high number of head and hand SDIHs. Fire-EMS medical directors need to take an active role in verifying that protective equipment is adequate and appropriate to allow the performance of field EMS duties without being too cumbersome. Medical directors of nonfire-EMS must be advocates for the provision of basic protective equipment aimed at mitigating SDIHs of EMS staff.
Recent studies have documented decreased time to emergency department (ED) thrombolytic therapy with the use of prehospital electrocardiography.
Purpose:
Is the time to ED diagnosis and treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients with thrombolytic agents decreased by emergency medical services (EMS) transport when compared with those transported by other means (non-EMS)?
Design:
Retrospective, case-control study
Population:
The AMI patients treated with thrombolytic agents at a 34,000-visit, community hospital ED during 1992.
Methods:
Review of records of patients who received thrombolytic therapy for AMI. Statistical analysis was performed using “Student's” t-test and Yates corrected Chi-square (X2).
Results:
Eighty-seven patients received thrombolytic agents for AMI during 1992; 33 arrived by ambulance, 54 arrived by other methods. There were no differences in age, gender, or time of ED arrival among these groups. Ambulance patients received standard advanced life support (ALS) care, but not a 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) or thrombolytic agents. Ambulance patients experienced a significantly shorter time to first ECG (12.9 ±9.1 min. versus 20.8 ±25.3 win.; p = .028) and received thrombolytic therapy sooner than did controls (56.0 ±31.5 min. versus 78.0 ±63.4 min.; p = .018). There was no difference in time from diagnosis to treatment between these groups.
Conclusion:
Emergency medical services transport of AMI patients in this study decreased time to diagnosis and treatment and may be a confounder in studies that assess the value of field EMS interventions. Non-EMS AMI patients did not receive as rapid diagnosis and treatment, and emergency physicians should evaluate and address this issue in their departments.
To evaluate the effectiveness of interactive videodisc (IVD) instruction of paramedics through the use of computer analysis of trip sheets.
Design/Setting:
Prospective, controlled, in an urban 9-1-1, paramedic, emergency medical services (EMS) system with total call volume of 62,000/year; 15,000 advanced life support (ALS).
Interventions:
All 150 paramedics in the system received eight hours of IVD instruction covering five subject areas: 1) airway; 2) head/cervical trauma; 3) chest; 4) shock; and 5) cardiac arrest. Trip sheets from 9,943 runs in the pre-IVD period were subjected to computer analysis, and a compliance score was generated using previously developed algorithms that assigned a weight to each omission and commission. After a nine-month IVD training period, 4,303 cases were collected and analyzed in the post-IVD period. Statistical analyses were made using “Student's“ t-test and Chi-square with alpha set at 0.05.
Exclusions:
Only those records of adult patients who fit one of the five protocols were eligible for computer analysis. Of the 9,943 cases in the pre-IVD group, 480 (4.8%) were excluded, all due to inadequate data recording by the paramedics. A statistically similar portion, 233 (5.4%) of the 4,303 post-IVD instruction cases were excluded (p = .15).
Results:
Overall the mean compliance score of the pre-IVD group was 0.65 ±0.19 (±SD). The post-IVD group score was 0.65 ±0.19 (p = 0.99). Analysis of scores for each algorithm also showed no significant differences. This study had an observed power of .94 to detect a difference in compliance as small as 0.030.
Conclusion:
Eight hours of IVD instruction did not result in improved paramedic performance as judged by computer analysis of trip sheets.