British paramedic journal最新文献

Introduction: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a time-sensitive medical emergency. There is international evidence to suggest that rural regions experience worse OHCA outcomes, such as reduced survival rates. The aim of this study was to quantitatively review and compare the OHCA response, treatment and pre-hospital outcomes in a single-centre ambulance service over a 1-year period in urban and rural areas.

Methods: This study used retrospective OHCA audit data from the North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, from April 2018 to April 2019, comparing OHCA response, treatment and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) data in relation to urban or rural classification status, using the UK government urban-rural classification tool.

Results: A total of 1295 urban cases and 319 rural cases were compared. Bystander public-access defibrillator (PAD) use was higher in rural areas in comparison to urban areas (20/319 (6.3%) vs 47/1295 (3.6%); p = 0.03). The mean ambulance response time was slower in rural areas (10:43 minutes (n = 319) (SD ± 8.2) vs 07:35 minutes (n = 1295) (SD ± 7.1); p = < 0.01). Despite this, overall ROSC rates at hospital were similar between the groups, with no statistically significant difference (rural: 87/319 (27.3%) vs urban: 409/1295 (31.6%); p = 0.14).A further sub-group analysis of initially shockable OHCA cases showed slower ambulance response times in rural areas (10:45 minutes (n = 68) (SD ± 12.3) vs 07:55 minutes (n = 245) (SD ± 5.5); p = < 0.01) and that rural cases experienced lower ROSC at hospital rates (31/68 (45.6%) vs 151/245 (61.6%); p = 0.02).

Conclusion: This report showed differences in OHCA response and outcomes between rural and urban settings. In the shockable OHCA sub-group analysis, rural areas had slower ambulance response times and lower ROSC rates. The longer ambulance response times in the rural shockable OHCA group could be a factor in the reduced ROSC rates. Linking hospital survival data should be used in future research to explore this area further.

Aim: The aim of this professional practice paper is to provide a critical commentary on displaced risk among perinatal and neonatal patients attended to by the ambulance service.

Background: NHS services across the United Kingdom are currently facing unprecedented demand and increased scrutiny in their ability to provide safe and personalised care to patients. While current focus in the system centres around addressing social care demand, hospital bed capacity, planned care waiting times, staffing and ambulance handover delays, a less explored cohort of patients impacted by the current healthcare crisis is perinatal and neonatal populations attended to by the ambulance service. Little focus has been paid within national agendas to the care provided to women and babies outside of planned maternity and obstetric care. A case is presented to highlight the importance of considering urgent and emergency maternity care provision provided by the ambulance service, and the impact of 'displaced risk' due to the current pressures within healthcare systems.

Conclusion: Placed in a national context, drawing upon current independent reviews into maternity services, national transformation agendas and the most recent MBRRACE-UK confidential enquiry into maternal deaths and morbidity, a case is made to commissioners and Integrated Care Systems to focus on and invest in the unplanned pre-hospital care of maternity and neonatal patients. Recognition of the ambulance service as a key provider of care to this cohort of patients is paramount, calling on services and systems to work together on realising and addressing displaced risk for perinatal populations across the United Kingdom. A system approach that acknowledges the need for high-quality care at every point of contact and equitability in access to services for pregnant, postpartum and neonatal patients is vital.

Background: Health inequalities and poorer outcomes have been identified for patients with dark skin tones. The reasons are multi-factorial, but may include delayed treatment due to a lack of recognition of early clinical signs of physiological deterioration. Within the medical literature there is a light skin tone bias, leading to healthcare professionals having insufficient knowledge regarding the assessment of patients with different skin tones, which may result in reduced confidence and create patient safety issues. The aim of this scoping review was to explore the confidence levels of healthcare professionals when assessing patients of different skin tones.

Methods: The methodology followed scoping review frameworks set out by Arksey and O'Malley (2005), the Joanna Briggs Institute (Peters et al., 2020) and the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) (Tricco et al., 2018). Searches for literature were performed between February and June 2022 using electronic databases EBSCO (Academic Search Complete, the Allied Complementary Medicine Database, e-journals, MEDLINE, CINAHL), British Nursing Index (ProQuest), Scopus, Web of Science, Zetoc, UpToDate, Google Scholar, NICE Evidence, ResearchGate, Opengrey and the British Association of Dermatologists. No date range was specified, expanders were left on and the findings were screened using inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included papers were synthesised using narrative synthesis.

Results: Thirteen papers were identified, and the extracted data charted by the paper's origin, sample size, profession and confidence levels. Our synthesis revealed reduced confidence in assessing, managing and diagnosing skin conditions in dark skin tones. A lack of training was cited by different health professionals, but undertaking tailored training and experiential learning increased confidence.

Conclusions: There is a safety issue for patients with dark skin tones, as healthcare professionals lack clinical confidence in managing and treating all ethnicities equally. Tangible diversity within healthcare training is required, supported by inclusive skin tone imagery and appropriate terminology within medical literature.

Introduction: Mixed methods research, a methodology entailing the integration of qualitative and quantitative data within a single study, offers researchers the ability to investigate complex processes and systems in health and healthcare. The collective strength gained through the data combination can provide an enhanced understanding of research problems, providing an ideal solution to understanding complex clinical issues in a range of settings. In pre-hospital practice, where often uncontrollable variables and environmental considerations increase healthcare complexity, mixed methods has emerged as a valuable approach to research.

Aims: Given the exponential growth of pre-hospital mixed methods research since the publication of our first systematic review in 2014, we aim to provide an update. Our review will explore how mixed methods is utilised in pre-hospital research and identify what standards of reporting are achieved.

Methods: This systematic review update will search MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, Embase and Scopus bibliographic databases from 1 January 2012 to 15 March 2023, using an updated pre-hospital search strategy. Study screening will be performed in duplicate. Articles reported in English, explicitly stating the use of 'mixed methods' in the pre-hospital ambulance setting, including helicopter emergency medical services and community first-responder services, will be included. Data related to underpinning philosophy or theoretical framework, rationale for utilising mixed methods, background of the corresponding author, mode of data integration, model of publication and adherence to reporting standards, utilising the good reporting of a mixed methods study (GRAMMS) guidelines, will be extracted and analysed. All extracted data from study articles will be summarised in a table, allowing analysis of included studies against specified criteria.

The COVID-19 pandemic placed the UK healthcare system under unprecedented pressure, and recovery will require whole-system investment in innovative, flexible and pragmatic solutions. Positioned at the heart of the healthcare system, ambulance services have been tasked with addressing avoidable hospital conveyance and reducing unnecessary emergency department and hospital attendances through the delivery of care closer to home. Having begun to implement models of care intended to increase 'see and treat' opportunities through greater numbers of senior clinical decision makers, emphasis has now been placed upon the use of remote clinical diagnostic tools and near-patient or point-of-care testing (POCT) to aid clinical decision making. In terms of POCT of blood samples obtained from patients in the pre-hospital setting, there is a paucity of evidence beyond its utility for measuring lactate and troponin in acute presentations such as sepsis, trauma and myocardial infarction, although potential exists for the analysis of a much wider panel of analytes beyond these isolated biomarkers. In addition, there is a relative dearth of evidence in respect of the practicalities of using POCT analysers in the pre-hospital setting. This single-site feasibility study aims to understand whether it is practical to use POCT for the analysis of patients' blood samples in the urgent and emergency care pre-hospital setting, through descriptive data of POCT application and through qualitative focus group interviews of advanced practitioners (specialist paramedics) to inform the feasibility and design of a larger study. The primary outcome measure is focus group data measuring the experiences and perceived self-reported impact by specialist paramedics. Secondary outcome measures are number and type of cartridges used, number of successful and unsuccessful attempts in using the POCT analyser, length of time on scene, specialist paramedic recruitment and retention, number of patients who receive POCT, descriptive data of safe conveyance, patient demographics and presentations where POCT is applied and data quality. The study results will inform the design of a main trial if indicated.

Background: Pre-hospital care providers are the first line of contact when emergencies occur. They are at high risk of mental health disorders associated with trauma and stress. The magnitude of their stress could increase during difficult times such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives: This study reports on the state of mental well-being and the degree of psychological distress among pre-hospital care workers (paramedics, emergency medical technicians, doctors, paramedic interns and other healthcare practitioners) during the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia.

Methods: The study was a cross-sectional survey study in Saudi Arabia. A questionnaire was distributed among pre-hospital care workers in Saudi Arabia during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The questionnaire was based on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) and the World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5).

Results: In total, 427 pre-hospital care providers completed the questionnaire; 60% of the respondents had scores of more than 30 in the K10 and were likely to have a severe disorder. The WHO-5 showed a similar percentage of respondents with a score of more than 50 and coded as having poor well-being.

Conclusions: The findings of this study provide evidence around mental health and well-being for pre-hospital care workers. They also highlight the need to better understand the quality of mental health and well-being for this population and to provide appropriate interventions to improve their quality of life.

Background: Information governance and resource challenges can impede pre-hospital clinicians from accessing and reflecting upon clinical information from the hospital phase of care, to ascertain how appropriate their diagnoses and management were. The authors performed a 12-month service evaluation of a hospital-to-pre-hospital feedback system, in which clinical information was requested by pre-hospital clinicians, and returned by a small team of hospital-based clinicians, while meeting information governance standards.

Method: Pre-hospital clinicians in one ambulance station and one air ambulance service accessed patient information from a hospital, via a mediating senior pre-hospital colleague (a facilitator). Case-based learning conversations between the facilitator and clinician followed, using a report from the hospital. Evidence of benefit to the pre-hospital clinicians was prospectively collected using Likert-type scales, regarding general satisfaction, likelihood to change practice and effects on well-being. Reports aimed to be generated by the hospital within 14 days.

Results: All 59 appropriate requests had reports returned. Of the reports, 59.5% were returned in 14 days or less. The median duration was 11 days (interquartile range 7-25). Learning conversations were completed in 86.4% (n = 51) of these cases, and of those, clinician questionnaires were completed in 66.7% (n = 34). Of the 34 questionnaire respondents, 82.4% (n = 28) were very satisfied with the returned information. A total of 61.1% (n = 21) were either likely or very likely to change their practice following the hospital's information, and 64.7% (n = 22) reported similar or very similar impressions to the hospital's eventual diagnosis. Regarding mental health, 76.5% (n = 26) reported positively or very positively affected mental health, while 2.9% (n = 1) reported adversely affected mental health. All of the respondents, 100% (n = 34) were either satisfied or very satisfied with the learning conversation.

Conclusion: While hospital-based clinical information was successfully and securely provided to pre-hospital clinicians, these pilot data suggest it is not possible to meet the self-imposed, empirical 14-day target with four to five voluntary doctors. Sustained performance may improve with allocated or paid time to report the requests. The validity of these data is limited by a poor response rate, a non-validated questionnaire and potential for selection bias. Validation using multiple hospitals and greater numbers is the appropriate next step. Responses suggest that this system identifies areas for improvement, reinforces good practice and improves the mental well-being of the participating clinicians.