van de Breevaart Otto J, Van Loey Nancy E E, Leenen Luke P H, Schoonhoven Lisette, Ham Wietske H W
University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Maasstad Hospital, Emergency Department, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Research Group Integrated Complex Care, Faculty of Health, Center of Expertise Urban Vitality, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Utrecht University, Department of Clinical Psychology, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Int Emerg Nurs. 2025 Feb;78:101533. doi: 10.1016/j.ienj.2024.101533. Epub 2024 Nov 22.
In 2016, a selective preventive spinal immobilization protocol for emergency medical service (EMS) nurses was introduced in the Netherlands. This protocol leaves more room for autonomous decision-making in the pre-hospital phase regarding preventive spinal immobilization (PSI), compared to the previous strict protocol. In this study, we explored the experiences and perspectives of EMS nurses on decisionmaking about PSI after the change from a strict to a selective PSI protocol.
We used a qualitative design with semi-structured face-to-face interviews. Thematic analysis was applied. The capability-opportunity-motivation-behavior-model was used to interpret the experiences and perspectives.
Thirteen EMS nurses from three emergency medical services were interviewed. Respondents appreciated autonomous decision-making as there was more room for patient-centered informed decision-making. However, autonomous decision-making required optimized knowledge and skills and elicited the need to receive feedback on their decision not to apply PSI. When nurses anticipated resistance to selective PSI from receiving hospitals, they were doubtful to apply it.
Nurses appreciate the increased autonomy in decision-making, encouraging them to focus on patient-centered care. Increased autonomy also places higher demands on knowledge and skills, calling for training and feedback. Anticipated resistance to receiving hospitals based on mutual protocol discrepancies could lead to PSI application by EMS nurses while not deemed necessary.
To enhance PSI procedures, optimizing the knowledge and skills of EMS nurses that facilitate on-scene decision-making may be indicated. A learning loop for feedback between the EMS nurses and the involved hospitals may add to their professional performance. More efforts are needed to create support for the changed Emergency Medical Services strategy in PSI to prevent unnecessary PSI and practice variation.
2016年,荷兰引入了一项针对紧急医疗服务(EMS)护士的选择性预防性脊柱固定方案。与之前严格的方案相比,该方案在院前阶段为预防性脊柱固定(PSI)的自主决策留出了更多空间。在本研究中,我们探讨了EMS护士在从严格的PSI方案转变为选择性PSI方案后,对PSI决策的经验和看法。
我们采用定性设计,进行半结构化面对面访谈。应用主题分析法。使用能力-机会-动机-行为模型来解释经验和看法。
对来自三个紧急医疗服务机构的13名EMS护士进行了访谈。受访者赞赏自主决策,因为有更多空间以患者为中心进行知情决策。然而,自主决策需要优化知识和技能,并引发了对其不应用PSI的决策获得反馈的需求。当护士预计接收医院会抵制选择性PSI时,他们对应用该方案表示怀疑。
护士赞赏决策自主权的增加,这鼓励他们专注于以患者为中心的护理。自主权的增加也对知识和技能提出了更高要求,需要进行培训并提供反馈。基于相互协议差异而预计接收医院会抵制,这可能导致EMS护士在不必要时应用PSI。
为了改进PSI程序,可能需要优化EMS护士的知识和技能,以促进现场决策。EMS护士与相关医院之间的反馈学习循环可能会提高他们的专业表现。需要做出更多努力,以支持PSI中紧急医疗服务战略的改变,以防止不必要的PSI和实践差异。