Document Type : Original Article
Authors
- . Meysam Safi‑Keykaleh
- . Davoud Khorasani‑Zavareh 1
- . Zohreh Ghomian 2
- . Saeideh Nateghinia 3
- . Hamid Safarpour 4
- . Reza Mohammadi 5
1 Professor in Workplace Health Promotion Research Center (WHPRC), Department of Health in Emergencies and Disasters, School of Public Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Health in Disasters and Emergencies, School of Public Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3 Skull Base Research Center, Loghman Hakim Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4 Department of Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran
5 Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society (NVS), H1, Division of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Huddinge, Sweden
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To avoid making decisions based on the unproven opinions of emergency medical
technicians (EMTs), many emergency medical service (EMS) systems rely on emergency medical
protocols. As protocol‑based on‑scene decision‑making is influenced by many challenges, identifying
these challenges can result in providing appropriate conditions for EMTs’ decision‑making. Therefore,
this study aimed to identify the barriers and requirements in the off‑line emergency medical protocols
implementation m in the prehospital emergency medical system.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: To conduct this study, qualitative content analysis using 10 field
observations, 22 interviews, and 2 rounds of focus group discussions was applied. The duration of
interviews lasted from October 2019 to January 2020. The Graneheim and Lundman approach was
used to analyze the data.
RESULTS: Seven categories (15 subcategories) including education and awareness (professional
training and education and community‑based education); attitudes (professional attitude and
community attitude); interactions and coordination (interpersonal interactions, organizational
interferences, and community’s interactions); rules and instructions (instructions and supportive
rules); control system (monitoring and evaluation and motivational system); accessibility (recourses
and communication); and organization (structure and process) were obtained as the obstacles and
challenges in the offline emergency medical protocol implementation in the prehospital system.
CONCLUSIONS: There are many challenges in implementing offline emergency medical protocols in
the prehospital emergency system. To achieve the effectiveness and efficiency of offline prehospital
emergency protocols, it is necessary to facilitate these challenges and improve the EMTs’ knowledge,
attitude, and performance through cooperative and skill‑based education. The findings of this study
can be useful for EMS systems from national to local levels.
Keywords
Out-of-hospital emergency care providers’ work and challenges
in a changing care environment. Scand J Caring Sci 2018;32:253‑60.
2. Zorab O, Robinson M, Endacott R. Are pre‑hospital treatment or
conveyance decisions affected by an ambulance crew’s ability to
access a patient’s health information? BMC Emerg Med 2015;15:26.
3. Janka A, Duschek S. Self‑reported stress and psychophysiological
reactivity in paramedics. Anxiety Stress Coping 2018;31:402‑17.
4. Bång A, Grip L, Herlitz J, Kihlgren S, Karlsson T, Caidahl K,
et al. Lower mortality after pre‑hospital recognition and
treatment followed by fast tracking to coronary care compared
with admittance via emergency department in patients with
ST‑elevation myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiol 2008;129:325‑32.
5. Perona M, Rahman MA, O’Meara P. Paramedic judgement,
decision‑making and cognitive processing: a review of the
literature. Australas J Paramed 2019;16:1‑12.
6. Shakeri K, Jafari M, Khankeh H, Seyedin H. History and structure
of the fourth leading emergency medical service in the world; a
review article. Arch Acad Emerg Med 2019;7:e17.
7. BahadoriM, NasiripurA, Tofighi S, GohariM. Emergency medical
services in Iran: An overview. Australas Med J 2010;3:335.
8. Nilsson C, Bremer A, Blomberg K, Svantesson M. Responsibility
and compassion in pre‑hospital support to survivors of suicide
victim–Professionals’ experiences. Int Emerg Nurs 2017;35:37‑42.
9. Townsend R, Willis S, Mehmet N. Legal and Ethical Aspects
of Paramedic Practice. Fundamentals of Paramedic Practice:
A Systems Approach. Editor/Sam Willis; Roger Dalrymple. 1st.
ed. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons 2015: 59‑69.
10. Lindquist B, Strehlow MC, Rao GR, Newberry JA. Barriers
to real‑time medical direction via cellular communication for
pre‑hospital emergency care providers in Gujarat, India. Cureus
2016;8:e676.
11. Tang N, Fabbri W. Medical direction and integration with existing
EMS infrastructure. Adv Emerg Nurs J 2003;25:326‑32.
12. MuradMH. Clinical practice guidelines: APrimer on development
and dissemination. Mayo Clin Proc 2017;92:423‑33.
13. Dainton C, Chu CH, Lin H, Cherniak W, Loh LC. A protocol to
develop practice guidelines for primary care medical service trips.
Ann Glob Health 2016;82:678‑85.
14. Rycroft‑Malone J, Fontenla M, Bick D, Seers K. A realistic
evaluation: The case of protocol‑based care. Implement Sci
2010;5:38.
15. Berg M. Problems and promises of the protocol. Soc Sci Med
1997;44:1081‑8.
16. Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J. Clinical
guidelines: Potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical
guidelines. BMJ 1999;318:527‑30.
17. Schmidt T, Atcheson R, Federiuk C, Mann NC, Pinney T, Fuller D,
et al. Evaluation of protocols allowing emergency medical
technicians to determine need for treatment and transport. Acad
Emerg Med 2000;7:663‑9.
18. Santiago‑Delefosse M, Gavin A, Bruchez C, Roux P, Stephen SL.
Quality of qualitative research in the health sciences: Analysis
of the common criteria present in 58 assessment guidelines by
expert users. Soc Sci Med 2016;148:142‑51.
19. American Psychological Association. Professional practice
guidelines: Guidance for developers and users. Am Psychol
2015;70:823‑31.
20. Ek B, Svedlund M. Registered nurses’ experiences of their
decision-making at an Emergency Medical Dispatch Centre. J Clin
Nurs 2015;24:1122‑31.
21. Hosseini SMR, Maleki M, Gorji HA, Khorasani‑Zavareh D,
Roudbari M. Factors affecting emergency medical dispatchers’
decision‑making: a qualitative study. J Multidiscip Healthc
2018;11:391‑98.
22. Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in
nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve
trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 2004;24:105‑12.
23. NeergaardMA, Olesen F, AndersenRS, SondergaardJ. Qualitative
description–the poor cousin of health research? BMC Med Res
Methodol 2009;9:52.
24. Brown CE, Wickline MA, Ecoff L, Glaser D. Nursing practice,
knowledge, attitudes and perceived barriers to evidencebased practice at an academic medical center. J Adva Nurs
2009;65:371‑81.
25. Safi Keykaleh M, Sohrabizadeh S. The emergency medical
system (EMS) response to iraqi pilgrims’ bus crash in iran: A case
report. BMC Emerg Med 2019;19:38.
26. Glow SD, Colucci VJ, Allington DR, Noonan CW, Hall EC.
Managing multiple‑casualty incidents: A rural medical
preparedness training assessment. Prehosp Disaster Med
2013;28:334‑41.
27. Bashiri A, Savareh BA, Ghazisaeedi M. Promotion of pre‑hospital
emergency care through clinical decision support systems:
opportunities and challenges. Clin Exp Emerg Med 2019;6:288‑96.
28. Rosenfeld RM, Shiffman RN, Robertson P. Clinical practiceguideline development manual: a quality‑driven approach for
translating evidence into action. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
2013;148:S1‑55.
29. Norberg Boysen G, Nyström M, Christensson L, Herlitz J,
Wireklint Sundström B. Trust in the early chain of healthcare:
Lifeworld hermeneutics from the patient’s perspective. Int J Qual
Stud Health Well‑being 2017;12:1356674.
30. Pype P, Mertens F, Helewaut F, Krystallidou D. Healthcare teams
as complex adaptive systems: understanding team behaviour
through team members’ perception of interpersonal interaction.
BMC Health Serv Res 2018;18:570.
31. Dols JD, Muñoz LR, Martinez SS, Mathers N, Miller PS,
Pomerleau TA, et al. Developing policies and protocols in the age
of evidence‑based practice. J Contin Educ Nurs 2017;48:87‑92.
32. Shaw D, Siriwardena AN. Identifying barriers and facilitators to
ambulance service assessment and treatment of acute asthma:
A focus group study. BMC Emerg Med 2014;14:18.
33. Vardon F, Bounes V, Ducassé J, Minville V, Lapostolle F, editors.
Out‑of‑Hospital Equipment of Emergency Medical Services
for Hemorrhagic Shock Management: Can do Better!. Annales
Francaises D’anesthesie et de Reanimation 2014;33:621‑25.
34. American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Emergency
Physicians, American College of Surgeons Committee on
Trauma, Emergency Medical Services for Children, Emergency
Nurses Association, National Association of EMS Physicians.
et al. Equipment for ground ambulances. Prehosp Emerg Care
2014;18:92‑7.
35. O’Hara R, Johnson M, Siriwardena AN, Weyman A, Turner J,
Shaw D, et al. A qualitative study of systemic influences on
paramedic decision making: Care transitions and patient safety.
J Health Serv Res Policy 2015;20:45‑53.
36. O’Cathain A, Knowles E, Bishop‑Edwards L, Coster J, Crum A,
Jacques R, et al. Understanding variation in ambulance service
non‑conveyance rates: A mixed methods study. Health Serv Deliv
Res 2018;6:224p.
37. Ebben RH, Vloet LC, Speijers RF, Tönjes NW, Loef J, Pelgrim T,
et al. A patient-safety and professional perspective on nonconveyance in ambulance care: a systematic review. Scandinavian
Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
2017;25:71.
)