[Structure, organization and capacity problems in emergency medical services, emergency admission and intensive care units].

Emergency medicine is subjected worldwide to financial stringencies and organizational evaluations of cost-effectiveness. The various links in the chain of survival are affected differently. Bystander assistance or bystander CPR is available in only 30% of the emergencies, response intervals--if at all required by legislation--are observed to only a limited degree or are too extended for survival in cardiac arrest. A single emergency telephone number is lacking. Too many different phone numbers for emergency reporting result in confusion and delays. Organizational realities are not fully overcome and impair efficiency. The position of the emergency physician in the EMS System is inadequately defined, the qualification of too many emergency physicians are unsatisfactory. In spite of this, emergency physicians are frequently forced to answer out-of-hospital emergency calls. Conflicts between emergency physicians and EMTs may be overcome by providing both groups with comparable qualifications as well as by providing an explicit definition of emergency competence. A further source of conflict occurs at the juncture of prehospital and inhospital emergency care in the emergency department. Deficiencies on either side play a decisive role. At least in principle there are solutions to the deficiencies in the EMSS and in intensive care medicine. They are among others: Adequate financial compensation of emergency personnel, availability of sufficient numbers of highly qualified personnel, availability of a central receiving area with an adjacent emergency ward, constant information flow to the dispatch center on the number of available emergency beds, maintaining 5% of all beds as emergency beds, establishing intermediate care facilities. Efficiency of emergency physician activities can be demonstrated in polytraumatized patients or in patients with ventricular fibrillation or acute myocardial infarction, in patients with acute myocardial insufficiency and other emergency clinical pictures. Cost effectiveness is clearly in favor of emergency medicine. Future developments will be characterized by the consequences of new health care legislation and by effects of financial stringencies on the emergency medical services.