Can video streaming improve first aid for injured patients? A prospective observational study from Norway.

BACKGROUND: Video streaming in emergency medical communication centers (EMCC) from caller to medical dispatcher has recently been introduced in some countries. Death by trauma is a leading cause of death and injuries are a frequent reason to contact EMCC. We aimed to investigate if video streaming is associated with recognition of a need for first aid during calls regarding injured patients and improve quality of bystander first aid. METHODS: A prospective observational study including patients from three health regions in Norway, from November 2021 to February 2023 (registered in clinical trials 10/25/2021, NCT05121649). Cases where video streaming had been used as a supplement during the medical emergency call were compared to cases where video streaming was not used during the call. Patients were included by ambulance personnel on the scene of accident if they met the following criteria: 1. Ambulance personnel arrived at a patient who had an injury, 2. One or more bystanders had been present before their arrival, 3. One or more of the following first aid measures had been performed by bystander or should have been performed: airway management, control of external bleeding, recovery position, and hypothermia prevention. Ambulance personnel assessed quality of first aid performed by bystander, and information concerning use of video streaming and patient need for first aid measures recognized by dispatcher was collected through EMCC audio logs and patient charts. We present descriptive data and results from a logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Data was collected on 113 cases, and dispatchers used video streaming in addition to standard telephone communication in 12/113 (10%) of the cases. The odds for the dispatcher to recognize a need for first aid during a medical emergency call were more than five times higher when video streaming was used compared to no use of video streaming (OR 5.30, 95% CI 1.11-25.44). Overall quality of bystander first aid was rated as "high". The odds ratio for the patient receiving first aid of higher quality were 1.82 (p-value 0.46) when video streaming was used by dispatcher during the call. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that video streaming is not frequently used by dispatchers in calls regarding patients with injuries, but that video streaming is associated with improved recognition of patients' first aid needs. We found no statistically significant difference in first aid quality comparing the calls where video streaming as a supplement were used with the calls with audio only.

Data quality of Glasgow Coma Scale and Systolic Blood Pressure in scientific studies involving physician-staffed emergency medical services: Systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Emergency physicians on-scene provide highly specialized care to severely sick or injured patients. High-quality research relies on the quality of data, but no commonly accepted definition of EMS data quality exits. Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) and Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) are core physiological variables, but little is known about the quality of these data when reported in p-EMS research. This systematic review aims to describe the quality of pre-hospital reporting of GCS and SBP data in studies where emergency physicians are present on-scene. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Medline, Norart, Scopus, SweMed + and Web of Science, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Reported data on accuracy of reporting, completeness and capture were extracted to describe the quality of documentation of GCS and SBP. External and internal validity assessment was performed by extracting a set of predefined variables. RESULTS: We included 137 articles describing data collection for GCS, SBP or both. Most studies (81%) were conducted in Europe and 59% of studies reported trauma cases. Reporting of GCS and SBP data were not uniform and may be improved to enable comparisons. Of the predefined external and internal validity data items, 26%-45% of data were possible to extract from the included papers. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of GCS and SBP is variable in scientific papers. We recommend standardized reporting to enable comparisons of p-EMS.

Assignment of pre-event ASA physical status classification by pre-hospital physicians: a prospective inter-rater reliability study.

BACKGROUND: Individualized treatment is a common principle in hospitals. Treatment decisions are made based on the patient's condition, including comorbidities. This principle is equally relevant out-of-hospital. Furthermore, comorbidity is an important risk-adjustment factor when evaluating pre-hospital interventions and may aid therapeutic decisions and triage. The American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) classification system is included in templates for reporting data in physician-staffed pre-hospital emergency medical services (p-EMS) but whether an adequate full pre-event ASA-PS can be assessed by pre-hospital physicians remains unknown. We aimed to explore whether pre-hospital physicians can score an adequate pre-event ASA-PS with the information available on-scene. METHODS: The study was an inter-rater reliability study consisting of two steps. Pre-event ASA-PS scores made by pre- and in-hospital physicians were compared. Pre-hospital physicians did not have access to patient records and scores were based on information obtainable on-scene. In-hospital physicians used the complete patient record (Step 1). To assess inter-rater reliability between pre- and in-hospital physicians when given equal amounts of information, pre-hospital physicians also assigned pre-event ASA-PS for 20 of the included patients by using the complete patient records (Step 2). Inter-rater reliability was analyzed using quadratic weighted Cohen's kappa (κw). RESULTS: For most scores (82%) inter-rater reliability between pre-and in-hospital physicians were moderate to substantial (κw 0,47-0,89). Inter-rater reliability was higher among the in-hospital physicians (κw 0,77 to 0.85). When all physicians had access to the same information, κw increased (κw 0,65 to 0,93). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-hospital physicians can score an adequate pre-event ASA-PS on-scene for most patients. To further increase inter-rater reliability, we recommend access to the full patient journal on-scene. We recommend application of the full ASA-PS classification system for reporting of comorbidity in p-EMS.

Collecting core data in physician-staffed pre-hospital helicopter emergency medical services using a consensus-based template: international multicentre feasibility study in Finland and Norway.

BACKGROUND: Comparison of services and identification of factors important for favourable patient outcomes in emergency medical services (EMS) is challenging due to different organization and quality of data. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility of physician-staffed EMS (p-EMS) to collect patient and system level data by using a consensus-based template. METHODS: The study was an international multicentre observational study. Data were collected according to a template for uniform reporting of data from p-EMS using two different data collection methods; a standard and a focused data collection method. For the standard data collection, data were extracted retrospectively for one year from all FinnHEMS bases and for the focused data collection, data were collected prospectively for six weeks from four selected Norwegian p-EMS bases. Completeness rates for the two data collection methods were then compared and factors affecting completeness rates and template feasibility were evaluated. Standard Chi-Square, Fisher's Exact Test and Mann-Whitney U Test were used for group comparison of categorical and continuous data, respectively, and Kolomogorov-Smirnov test for comparison of distributional properties. RESULTS: All missions with patient encounters were included, leaving 4437 Finnish and 128 Norwegian missions eligible for analysis. Variable completeness rates indicated that physiological variables were least documented. Information on pain and respiratory rate were the most frequently missing variables with a standard data collection method and systolic blood pressure was the most missing variable with a focused data collection method. Completeness rates were similar or higher when patients were considered severely ill or injured but were lower for missions with short patient encounter. When a focused data collection method was used, completeness rates were higher compared to a standard data collection method. CONCLUSIONS: We found that a focused data collection method increased data capture compared to a standard data collection method. The concept of using a template for documentation of p-EMS data is feasible in physician-staffed services in Finland and Norway. The greatest deficiencies in completeness rates were evident for physiological parameters. Short missions were associated with lower completeness rates whereas severe illness or injury did not result in reduced data capture.

Template for documenting and reporting data in physician-staffed pre-hospital services: a consensus-based update.

BACKGROUND: Physician-staffed emergency medical services (p-EMS) are resource demanding, and research is needed to evaluate any potential effects of p-EMS. Templates, designed through expert agreement, are valuable and feasible, but they need to be updated on a regular basis due to developments in available equipment and treatment options. In 2011, a consensus-based template documenting and reporting data in p-EMS was published. We aimed to revise and update the template for documenting and reporting in p-EMS. METHODS: A Delphi method was applied to achieve a consensus from a panel of selected European experts. The experts were blinded to each other until a consensus was reached, and all responses were anonymized. The experts were asked to propose variables within five predefined sections. There was also an optional sixth section for variables that did not fit into the pre-defined sections. Experts were asked to review and rate all variables from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree) based on relevance, and consensus was defined as variables rated ≥4 by more than 70% of the experts. RESULTS: Eleven experts participated. The experts generated 194 unique variables in the first round. After five rounds, a consensus was reached. The updated dataset was an expanded version of the original dataset and the template was expanded from 45 to 73 main variables. The experts approved the final version of the template. CONCLUSIONS: Using a Delphi method, we have updated the template for documenting and reporting in p-EMS. We recommend implementing the dataset for standard reporting in p-EMS.