Harmsen Annelieke Maria Karien, Giannakopoulos Georgios, Franschman Gaby, Christiaans Herman, Bloemers Frank
Department of Surgery, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, Slotervaart Hospital Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Emerg Med. 2017 Apr;52(4):504-512. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2016.11.010. Epub 2016 Dec 18.
Prehospital communication with Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is carried out in hectic situations. Proper communication among all medical personal is required to enhance collaboration, to provide the best care and enable shared situational awareness.
The objective of this article was to give insight into current Dutch prehospital emergency care communication among all EMS and evaluate the usage of a new physician staffed helicopter EMS (P-HEMS) cancellation model.
Trauma-related P-HEMS dispatches between November 1, 2014 and May 31, 2015 for the Lifeliner 1 were included; a random sample of 100 dispatches was generated. Tape recordings on all verbal prehospital communication between the dispatch center, EMS, and P-HEMS were transcribed and analyzed. Qualitative content analysis was performed, using open coding to code key messages.
Ninety-two tape recordings were analyzed. The most frequent reason for P-HEMS dispatch was suspicion of brain injury (24%). The cancellation model was followed in 66%, overruled in 9%, and not applicable in 25%. The main reason for not adhering to the model was hemodynamic stability. In 5% of P-HEMS dispatches, a complete ABCD (airway, breathing, circulation, disability) methodology was used for handover, in 9% a complete Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation technique, in 2% a complete Mechanism-Injuries-Signs-Treatment method was used. The other handovers were incomplete.
Prehospital handover between EMS on-scene and P-HEMS often entails insufficient information. The cancellation model for P-HEMS is frequently used and promotes adequate information transfer. To increase joined decision-making, more patient and situational information needs to be handed over. Standardization of prehospital trauma handovers will facilitate this and improve trauma patient's outcome.
与紧急医疗服务(EMS)的院前沟通是在忙碌的情况下进行的。所有医疗人员之间需要进行恰当的沟通,以加强协作、提供最佳护理并实现共同的态势感知。
本文的目的是深入了解荷兰目前所有EMS之间的院前急救沟通情况,并评估一种新的由医生配备的直升机紧急医疗服务(P-HEMS)取消模式的使用情况。
纳入2014年11月1日至2015年5月31日期间Lifeliner 1的创伤相关P-HEMS调度;生成100次调度的随机样本。对调度中心、EMS和P-HEMS之间所有院前口头沟通的录音进行转录和分析。采用定性内容分析,使用开放编码对关键信息进行编码。
分析了92份录音。P-HEMS调度最常见的原因是怀疑脑损伤(24%)。66%的情况遵循了取消模式,9%被否决,25%不适用。不遵循该模式的主要原因是血流动力学稳定。在5%的P-HEMS调度中,采用了完整的ABCD(气道、呼吸、循环、残疾)方法进行交接,9%采用了完整的情况-背景-评估-建议技术,2%采用了完整的机制-损伤-体征-治疗方法。其他交接不完整。
EMS现场与P-HEMS之间的院前交接往往信息不足。P-HEMS的取消模式经常被使用,并促进了充分的信息传递。为了增加联合决策,需要交接更多的患者和情况信息。院前创伤交接的标准化将有助于实现这一点,并改善创伤患者的预后。