Codesigned standardised referral form: simplifying the complexity.

BACKGROUND: Referring providers are often critiqued for writing poor-quality referrals. This study characterised clinical referral guidelines and forms to understand which data consultant providers require. These data were then used to codesign an evidence-based, high-quality referral form. METHODS: This study used both observational and quality improvement approaches. Canadian referral guidelines were reviewed and summarised. Referral data fields from 150 randomly selected Ontario referral forms were categorised and counted. The referral guideline summary and referral data were then used by referring providers, consultant providers and administrators to codesign a referral form. RESULTS: Referral guidelines recommended 42 types of referral data be included in referrals. Referral data were categorised as patient demographics, provider demographics, reason for referral, clinical information and administrative information. The percentage of referral guidelines recommending inclusion of each type of referral data varied from 8% to 77%. Ontario referral forms requested 264 different types of referral data. Digital referral forms requested more referral data types than paper-based referral forms (55.0±10.6 vs 30.5±8.1; 95% CI p<0.01). A codesigned referral form was created across two sessions with 29 and 21 participants in each. DISCUSSION: Referral guidelines lack consistency and specificity, which makes writing high-quality referrals challenging. Digital referral forms tend to request more referral data than paper-based referrals, which creates administrative burdens for referring and consultant providers. We created the first codesigned referral form with referring providers, consultant providers and administrators. We recommend clinical adoption of this form to improve referral quality and minimise administrative burdens.

Exploring the need for and application of human factors and ergonomics in ambulance design: Overcoming the barriers with technical standards.

Ergonomic risk factors, such as excessive physical effort, awkward postures or repetitive movements, were the leading causes of injuries amongst EMS workers in the United States, of which 90% were attributed to lifting, carrying, or transferring a patient and/or equipment. Although the essential tasks of patient handling, transport, and care cannot be eliminated, the design of ambulances and associated equipment is modifiable. Our aims were to identify the extent of Human Factors and Ergonomic (HFE) considerations in existing ambulance design standards/regulations, and describe how HFE and the standards/regulations were applied in the EMS system. Through an extensive environmental scan of jurisdictionally relevant standards/regulations and key informant interviews, our findings demonstrated that existing standards/regulations had limited considerations for HFE. As a result, HFE principles continue to be considered reactively through retrofit rather than proactively in upstream design. We recommend that performance-based HFE requirements be integrated directly into ambulance design standards.

Existing Science on Human Factors and Ergonomics in the Design of Ambulances and EMS Equipment.

Background: Emergency medical services (EMS) personnel face a disproportionally high risk for fatality and injury due to the nature of their work; and current ambulance and EMS equipment design standards do not adequately safeguard EMS personnel from sacrificing personal safety for patient care, a known human factors and ergonomic (HFE) design challenge. Despite the desire to include HFE interventions or considerations into a standard, the effectiveness of existing HFE interventions for EMS is unclear. Objective: Therefore, this study aimed to synthesize the peer-reviewed literature on the design features of patient compartments and EMS equipment that affect EMS personnel's performance or well-being. Methods: A scoping review methodology was applied to systematically search and screen for relevant articles, and extract data. Three databases (EmBase, Scopus, and PubMed) were searched, and search results were screened for articles that pertained to the performance or well-being of EMS personnel when interacting with the patient compartment or its associated equipment. Results and Discussion: Of the 4,125 search results, 48 relevant articles were retained, and then sorted into one of 3 categories: general design, patient handling, and patient transport. It was concluded that, although research has progressed over the past 15 years, more research, development, and resources are needed. Newer generations of ambulances have not been shown to be safer during collisions and there is a knowledge gap in how occupants and contents of a patient compartment behave during a collision. Crash-tests have been performed with restrained occupants and supplies; however, that scenario is unrealistic in the field. While the existing literature provided initial ideas and innovations for improving the HFE of patient handling and patient transport, it is important for future research to convey findings in a manner that can be used to inform design standards.