Neely K W, Norton R L, Young G P
Oregon Health Sciences University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Portland 97201, USA.
Prehosp Disaster Med. 1994 Jul-Sep;9(3):172-6; discussion 177. doi: 10.1017/s1049023x00041297.
This was a five-month, prospective, observational study in an urban area with a population of 600,000 comparing all 9-1-1 ambulance diversions against a randomly selected sample of 5% of all other 9-1-1 originated patients. All patient diversions that originated from the 9-1-1 center are included in the study.
Hospitals identify their diversion status on a community-wide computer system monitored at the 9-1-1 center and base station. Accepted categories include: 1) diversion of all patients through the 9-1-1 center from the emergency department (ED); 2) trauma system patients (T); 3) psychiatric secure beds (PSB); 4) general acute ward beds (AW); 5) critical care (CC); 6) computed tomography scan (CT); 7) labor and delivery (LD); and 8) pediatric beds (PEDS). Data were abstracted from 481 patients' records. A total of 111 were diverted from their intended destination. Transport times were longer and diverted patients traveled further (p < .002). Hospitals showing ED and LD diversion categories were more likely to have patients diverted away (r2 = .895, multilinear regression, p < .001). Of the 111 patients, 21 (19%) were diverted because of CC unavailability. Six of these (28%) were inappropriate because they did not fit the CC definition.
In this system, hospital diversions increase transport times and distances traveled. Diversion of patients correlated strongly to unavailability of specific categories. Paramedics make errors in determining appropriate CC diversions. Systems reviewing their diversion problems need to assess the impact of longer out-of-hospital times and of certain diversion categories, and to clarify definitions.
1)被分流患者的转运或现场时间没有增加,行程距离也没有增加;2)医院资源短缺与被分流患者的数量无关;3)护理人员能够将患者与特定医院可用的资源正确匹配。
这是一项在一个拥有60万人口的城市地区进行的为期五个月的前瞻性观察性研究,比较了所有通过911系统调度的救护车分流情况与从所有其他通过911系统呼叫的患者中随机抽取的5%样本。所有源自911中心的患者分流情况都纳入了研究。
医院在911中心和基站监控的社区范围内的计算机系统上确定其分流状态。接受的类别包括:1)所有患者通过911中心从急诊科(ED)分流;2)创伤系统患者(T);3)精神科安全床位(PSB);4)普通急性病房床位(AW);5)重症监护(CC);6)计算机断层扫描(CT);7)分娩(LD);8)儿科床位(PEDS)。数据从481名患者的记录中提取。共有111名患者被从原定目的地分流。转运时间更长,被分流患者的行程更远(p < .002)。显示有ED和LD分流类别的医院更有可能有患者被分流走(r2 = .895,多元线性回归,p < .001)。在111名患者中,21名(19%)因CC不可用而被分流。其中6名(28%)不合适,因为他们不符合CC的定义。
在这个系统中,医院分流增加了转运时间和行程距离。患者分流与特定类别的不可用密切相关。护理人员在确定适当的CC分流方面存在错误。审查其分流问题的系统需要评估更长的院外时间和某些分流类别的影响,并明确定义。