A statewide study of EMS oversight: medical director characteristics and involvement compared with national guidelines.

INTRODUCTION

From their inception, advanced life support (ALS) programs have had oversight by emergency medical services (EMS) medical directors. Position statements about medical direction have been published in the medical literature, initially by the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP). Most recently, the National Association of EMS Physicians (NAEMSP) published a position paper to serve as a guideline for the medical directors' tasks, describing qualifications and areas of involvement.

OBJECTIVE

To study the baseline status of EMS oversight in Maryland as the position paper was disseminated, to view how local directors meet the published guidelines.

METHODS

Twenty-two of the 23 (96%) jurisdictional EMS medical directors (JMDs) in Maryland were interviewed in face-to-face meetings. Information was collected about their qualifications and their regular involvement in activities within various EMS subsystems.

RESULTS

Sixteen (73%) JMDs are members of ACEP and four (18%) are members of NAEMSP. Six (27%) received EMS medical director training. Three (14%) went through a formal application process for their positions. Activities of relatively high involvement were investigations of variance from protocols (100% of JMDs involved), runsheet review (15 [68%]), liaison duties (20 [91%]), and disaster drills (15 [68%]). Most other subsystems, including dispatch, public health, administration, system evaluation, and quality programs, showed relatively low regular involvement (0-59%).

CONCLUSION

In Maryland, significant increases in active physician involvement in EMS are necessary to meet the national job description. These data provide supportive evidence of the need for further commitment by state and local agencies, as well as trained EMS physicians in national societies, to enable all JMDs to reach the goals set forth for their important roles in EMS systems.