Westcott Sally, Walrath Benjamin, Miller Jeremy, Trumbull Melissa, Manifold Craig
Emergency Department, Naval Medical Center, 34800 Bob Wilson Drive, San Diego, CA 92134.
Trident University, 5757 Plaza Dr #100, Cypress, CA 90630.
Mil Med. 2020 Sep 18;185(9-10):e1803-e1809. doi: 10.1093/milmed/usaa099.
Currently, there is a disconnection between veteran military medics and the civilian Emergency Medical Services (EMS) workforce. This project aimed to characterize the rate of civilian certification among military medics, both active duty and retired, and identify perceived barriers to continuing a career in EMS after military separation.
The National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) administered a 21-question online survey to participants. Individuals were recruited through the National Association of EMTs membership communications, Military Relations Committee members, and social media. All responses were anonymous and no identifiable information was collected. Survey questions were compiled and reported as a percentage of respondents. Free-text responses were categorized based on broad themes identified by the authors and are reported as a percentage of respondents.
Results included 456 veteran and active duty respondents, of whom 304 (70.7%) had prehospital experience while in the military and 250 (58.1%) had emergency department experience. Over 60% of respondents participated in combat-related duty with 37% having at least 18 months of overseas deployment. Civilian EMT certification was held by 164 (36.7%) survey participants and 170 held paramedic certification (38.1%), while 65 (14.6%) held no EMS certification. There were 119 (28.1%) respondents who stated that they did not plan to work in civilian EMS. Top selected reasons for not pursuing civilian EMS careers included: pursuing a medical career that was not prehospital (28.5%), pay disparity (18.1%), and no interest in civilian prehospital medicine (16.4%). Write in responses indicated general frustration with maintaining certification and a desire for advanced certification (AEMT, paramedic) to be supplied by the military prior to transitioning to a civilian workforce as many respondents felt their military-endowed skills and experiences were better aligned with these advanced EMS licenses.
The majority of survey respondents held an EMS certification of some kind and suggests that recent efforts to supply military medics with civilian certifications have been largely successful. However, there is still a large portion that remains noncertified or expresses disinterest with entering the civilian workforce. Generally, many of those certified feel their military scope of practice exceeded civilian EMT certification and requested AEMT or paramedic licensure opportunities while still active duty military.
目前,退伍军人医护人员与民用紧急医疗服务(EMS)工作人员之间存在脱节现象。该项目旨在描述现役和退役军事医护人员获得民用认证的比例,并确定他们在退役后继续从事EMS职业所感知到的障碍。
美国国家紧急医疗技术人员协会(EMT)对参与者进行了一项包含21个问题的在线调查。通过美国国家紧急医疗技术人员协会会员通讯、军事关系委员会成员和社交媒体招募个体。所有回复均为匿名,未收集可识别信息。调查问题进行汇总并以受访者的百分比形式报告。自由文本回复根据作者确定的宽泛主题进行分类,并以受访者的百分比形式报告。
结果包括456名退伍军人和现役受访者,其中304人(70.7%)在军队中有院前急救经验,250人(58.1%)有急诊科经验。超过60%的受访者参与过与战斗相关的任务,37%的人有至少18个月的海外部署经历。164名(36.7%)调查参与者持有民用EMT认证,170人持有护理人员认证(38.1%),而65人(14.6%)没有EMS认证。有119名(28.1%)受访者表示他们不打算从事民用EMS工作。不追求民用EMS职业的首要原因包括:追求非院前急救的医疗职业(28.5%)、薪酬差距(18.1%)以及对民用院前急救医学不感兴趣(16.4%)。书面回复表明,许多人对维持认证普遍感到沮丧,并希望在过渡到民用劳动力之前由军队提供高级认证(AEMT、护理人员),因为许多受访者认为他们通过军队获得的技能和经验与这些高级EMS执照更匹配。
大多数调查受访者持有某种EMS认证,这表明最近为军事医护人员提供民用认证的努力在很大程度上是成功的。然而,仍有很大一部分人未获得认证或表示对进入民用劳动力队伍不感兴趣。总体而言,许多获得认证的人认为他们在军队中的执业范围超过了民用EMT认证,并要求在仍为现役军人时获得AEMT或护理人员执照的机会。