Fleischman Ross J, Yarris Lalena M, Curry Merlin T, Yuen Stephanie C, Breon Alia R, Meckler Garth D
Center for Policy and Research in Emergency Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Portland, OR 97239, USA.
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2011 Dec;27(12):1130-5. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e31823a3e73.
The objective of the study was to identify past experiences, present needs, barriers, and desired methods of training for urban and rural emergency medical technicians.
This 62-question pilot-tested written survey was administered at the 2008 Oregon EMS and 2009 EMS for Children conferences. Respondents were compared with registration lists and the state emergency medical services (EMS) database to assess for nonresponder bias. Agencies more than 10 miles from a population of 40,000 were defined as rural.
Two hundred nineteen (70%) of 313 EMS personnel returned the surveys. Respondents were 3% first responders, 27% emergency medical technician basics, 20% intermediates, and 47% paramedics. Sixty-eight percent were rural, and 32% were urban. Sixty-eight percent reported fewer than 10% pediatric transports. Overall, respondents rated their comfort caring for pediatric patients as 3.1 on a 5-point Likert scale (95% confidence interval, 3.1-3.2). Seventy-two percent reported a mean rating of less than "comfortable" (4 on the scale) across 17 topics in pediatric care, which did not differ by certification level. Seven percent reported no pediatric training in the last 2 years, and 76% desired more. The "quality of available trainings" was ranked as the most important barrier to training; 26% of rural versus 7% of urban EMS personnel ranked distance as the most significant barrier (P < 0.01). Fifty-one percent identified highly realistic simulations as the method that helped them learn best. In the past 2 years, 19% had trained on a highly realistic pediatric simulator. One to 3 hours was the preferred duration for trainings.
Except for distance as a barrier, there were no significant differences between urban and rural responses. Both urban and rural providers desire resources, in particular, highly realistic simulation, to address the infrequency of pediatric transports and limited training.
本研究的目的是确定城乡急救医疗技术人员过去的经历、当前的需求、障碍以及期望的培训方法。
这份经过62个问题预测试的书面调查问卷在2008年俄勒冈州紧急医疗服务会议和2009年儿童紧急医疗服务会议上进行了发放。将受访者与注册名单和州紧急医疗服务(EMS)数据库进行比较,以评估无应答偏差。距离4万人口超过10英里的机构被定义为农村机构。
313名急救医疗服务人员中有219人(70%)返回了调查问卷。受访者中,3%是第一反应者,27%是初级急救医疗技术员,20%是中级急救医疗技术员,47%是护理人员。68%为农村人员,32%为城市人员。68%的人报告称儿科转运病例少于10%。总体而言,受访者在5分李克特量表上对照顾儿科患者的舒适度评分为3.1(95%置信区间,3.1 - 3.2)。72%的人报告称在儿科护理的17个主题中,平均评分低于“舒适”(量表上的4分),且不同认证水平之间无差异。7%的人报告在过去两年中没有接受过儿科培训,76%的人希望增加培训。“现有培训的质量”被列为培训的最重要障碍;26%的农村急救医疗服务人员与7%的城市急救医疗服务人员将距离列为最显著的障碍(P < 0.01)。51%的人认为高度逼真的模拟是帮助他们学习效果最佳的方法。在过去两年中,19%的人使用高度逼真的儿科模拟器进行过培训。1至3小时是培训的首选时长。
除距离作为障碍外,城乡应答之间无显著差异。城乡急救医疗服务人员都需要资源,尤其是高度逼真的模拟,以应对儿科转运病例较少和培训有限的情况。