Suppr超能文献

单一的初级护理护理人员配置能否安全地通过空中救护车运送低 acuity 患者? (注:这里“acuity”可能是“急症程度”之类的医学术语,原英文表述不太准确完整,正常应该有更明确关于“低急症程度”的具体所指描述。)

Can a single primary care paramedic configuration safely transport low-acuity patients in air ambulances?

作者信息

Tien Homer, Sawadsky Bruce, Lewell Michael, Moore Sean, Peddle Michael, Ackery Alun, Nolan Brodie, MacDonald Russell D

机构信息

*Ornge,Mississauga,ON.

出版信息

CJEM. 2018 Mar;20(2):247-255. doi: 10.1017/cem.2017.392. Epub 2017 Sep 22.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine if utilizing a single paramedic crew configuration is safe for transporting low acuity patients requiring only a primary care paramedic (PCP) level of care in Air Ambulances.

METHODS

We studied single-PCP transports of low acuity patients done by contract air ambulance carriers, organized by Ornge (Ontario's Air Ambulance Service) for one year. We only included interfacility transports. We excluded all scene calls, and all Code 4 (emergent) calls. Our primary outcome was clinical deterioration during transport. We then asked a panel to analyze each case of deterioration to determine if a dual-PCP configuration might have reasonably prevented the deterioration or have better treated the deterioration, compared to a single-PCP configuration.

RESULTS

In one year, contract carriers moved 3264 patients, who met inclusion criteria. 85% were from Northern Ontario. There were 21 cases of medical deterioration (0.6%±0.26%). Paper charts were found for 20 of these cases. Most were self-limited cases of pain or nausea. A small number of cases (n=5) were cardiorespiratory decompensation. There was 100% consensus amongst the panel that all cases of clinical deterioration were not related to team size. There was also 100% consensus that a dual-PCP team would not have been better able to deal with the deterioration, compared to a single-PCP crew.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that using a single-PCP configuration for transporting low acuity patients is safe. This finding is particularly important for rural areas where air ambulance is the only means for accessibility to care and where staffing issues are magnified.

摘要

目的

确定在空中救护中,使用单一护理人员配置运送仅需初级护理护理人员(PCP)水平护理的低 acuity 患者是否安全。

方法

我们研究了由安大略省空中救护服务机构 Ornge 组织的合同空中救护运营商对低 acuity 患者进行的单 PCP 转运,为期一年。我们仅纳入机构间转运。我们排除了所有现场呼叫和所有 4 级(紧急)呼叫。我们的主要结局是转运过程中的临床恶化。然后,我们请一个专家小组分析每例恶化情况,以确定与单 PCP 配置相比,双 PCP 配置是否可能合理地预防了恶化或更好地治疗了恶化情况。

结果

在一年中,合同运营商运送了 3264 名符合纳入标准的患者。85%来自安大略省北部。有 21 例医疗恶化(0.6%±0.26%)。其中 20 例找到了纸质病历。大多数是疼痛或恶心的自限性病例。少数病例(n = 5)是心肺失代偿。专家小组一致认为,所有临床恶化病例均与团队规模无关。专家小组还一致认为,与单 PCP 机组相比,双 PCP 团队并不能更好地应对恶化情况。

结论

我们发现,使用单 PCP 配置运送低 acuity 患者是安全的。这一发现对于农村地区尤为重要,在这些地区,空中救护是获得医疗服务的唯一途径,人员配备问题也更为突出。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验