• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

监测急救医疗服务(EMS)协议偏差:一种有用的质量保证工具。

Monitoring EMS protocol deviations: a useful quality assurance tool.

作者信息

Salerno S M, Wrenn K D, Slovis C M

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Strong Memorial Hospital, Rochester, New York.

出版信息

Ann Emerg Med. 1991 Dec;20(12):1319-24. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(05)81074-1.

DOI:10.1016/s0196-0644(05)81074-1
PMID:1746735
Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence, type, and outcome of protocol deviations in an emergency medical services (EMS) system.

DESIGN

Retrospective consecutive case series.

SETTING

Seven advanced life support ambulance services servicing five area hospital emergency departments.

PATIENTS

1,246 patients requiring advanced life support care.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Advanced life support ambulance runs during a two-month period were examined for protocol deviations. Of 1,246 runs examined, 16% had deviations. Approximately 55% of these deviations were minor, 38% were serious, and 7% were very serious in nature. The effects of the errors were evaluated using hospital records. Results showed that 89.5% of patients were unaffected, 5.0% improved, and 5.5% suffered complications from deviations. Emergency medical technicians committed 69% of the deviations without the consent of medical control, medical control committed an additional 18%, and both were responsible in 13% of cases. Incomplete histories were found in 8% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Protocol deviations committed in prehospital care do not usually cause direct harm to patients. On review of these deviations, however, several disturbing trends were uncovered, including misconceptions in the use of IV therapy, a number of serious deviations in advanced cardiac life support protocols, and lack of communication with medical control. This type of quality assurance study has the ability to identify areas of strength and weakness in an EMS system, allowing planning of ongoing educational efforts in the system.

摘要

研究目的

确定紧急医疗服务(EMS)系统中方案偏离的发生率、类型及结果。

设计

回顾性连续病例系列研究。

地点

为五家地区医院急诊科提供服务的七家高级生命支持救护车服务机构。

患者

1246例需要高级生命支持护理的患者。

干预措施

无。

测量指标及主要结果

对为期两个月的高级生命支持救护车出诊情况进行检查,以查找方案偏离情况。在检查的1246次出诊中,16%存在偏离。其中约55%的偏离为轻微偏离,38%为严重偏离,7%为非常严重的偏离。利用医院记录评估这些差错的影响。结果显示,89.5%的患者未受影响,5.0%的患者病情改善,5.5%的患者因偏离出现并发症。紧急医疗技术人员在未经医疗控制人员同意的情况下造成了69%的偏离,医疗控制人员造成了另外18%的偏离,在13%的病例中两者均有责任。8%的病例存在病史记录不完整的情况。

结论

院前护理中出现的方案偏离通常不会对患者造成直接伤害。然而,在对这些偏离进行审查时,发现了一些令人不安的趋势,包括静脉治疗使用方面的误解、高级心脏生命支持方案中的一些严重偏离以及与医疗控制人员缺乏沟通。这种质量保证研究能够识别EMS系统中的优势和薄弱环节,有助于规划该系统中持续的教育工作。

相似文献

1
Monitoring EMS protocol deviations: a useful quality assurance tool.监测急救医疗服务(EMS)协议偏差:一种有用的质量保证工具。
Ann Emerg Med. 1991 Dec;20(12):1319-24. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(05)81074-1.
2
A statewide evaluation of pediatric prehospital and hospital emergency services.一项针对全州儿科院前和医院急诊服务的评估。
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1994 Jan;148(1):76-81. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.1994.02170010078019.
3
Physician medical direction and advanced life support in the United States.美国的医师医疗指导与高级生命支持。
Acad Emerg Med. 1995 Apr;2(4):274-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1995.tb03221.x.
4
Emergency medical service system development: results of the statewide emergency medical service Technical Assessment Program.紧急医疗服务系统发展:全州紧急医疗服务技术评估项目的结果
Ann Emerg Med. 1995 Jun;25(6):768-75. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(95)70205-9.
5
Pediatric pre-hospital advanced life support care in an urban setting.城市环境中的儿科院前高级生命支持护理
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2001 Feb;17(1):5-9. doi: 10.1097/00006565-200102000-00002.
6
Implementation of standing field treatment protocols in an urban EMS system.在城市急救医疗服务系统中实施站立场治疗方案。
Am J Emerg Med. 2001 Jul;19(4):280-3. doi: 10.1053/ajem.2001.22666.
7
Errors of omission in the treatment of prehospital chest pain patients.院前胸痛患者治疗中的漏诊失误。
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2005 Jan-Mar;9(1):2-7. doi: 10.1080/10903120590891688.
8
Prehospital emergency medical services in Malaysia.马来西亚的院前紧急医疗服务。
J Emerg Med. 2007 May;32(4):415-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2006.08.021. Epub 2007 Apr 16.
9
Comparison of ambulance dispatch protocols for nontraumatic abdominal pain.非创伤性腹痛救护车调度协议的比较
Ann Emerg Med. 1995 Nov;26(5):579-89. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(95)70008-0.
10
Outcome of trauma patients immobilized by emergency department staff, but not by emergency medical services providers: a quality assurance initiative.由急诊科工作人员而非紧急医疗服务提供者固定创伤患者的结果:一项质量保证举措。
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2014 Oct-Dec;18(4):544-9. doi: 10.3109/10903127.2014.912702. Epub 2014 May 30.

引用本文的文献

1
Measurement and monitoring patient safety in prehospital care: a systematic review.院前护理中患者安全的测量与监测:一项系统综述。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2021 Feb 5;33(1). doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzab013.
2
Text Classification for Clinical Trial Operations: Evaluation and Comparison of Natural Language Processing Techniques.临床试验操作的文本分类:自然语言处理技术的评估与比较。
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2021 Mar;55(2):447-453. doi: 10.1007/s43441-020-00236-x. Epub 2020 Oct 30.
3
Assessment and classification of protocol deviations.方案偏差的评估与分类
Perspect Clin Res. 2016 Jul-Sep;7(3):132-6. doi: 10.4103/2229-3485.184817.
4
Adherence to guidelines and protocols in the prehospital and emergency care setting: a systematic review.院前和紧急医疗照护环境中对指南和方案的遵循:系统回顾。
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013 Feb 19;21:9. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-21-9.