ABSTRACT
Outcomes research offers out-of-hospital medicine a valuable methodology for studying the effectiveness of services provided in the out-of hospital setting. A clear understanding of the history and constructs of outcomes research is necessary for its integration into emergency medical services research. This report describes the conceptual framework of outcomes research and key methodological considerations for the successful implementation of out-of-hospital outcomes research. Illustrations of the specific applications of outcomes research and implications to existing methodologies are given, as well as suggestions for improved interdisciplinary research.
Subject(s)
Emergency Medical Services/organization & administration , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Research Design , Databases as Topic/organization & administration , Humans , Quality Assurance, Health Care/methods , Risk Adjustment/methodsABSTRACT
The purpose of the Emergency Medical Services Outcomes Project (EMSOP) is to develop a foundation and framework for out-of-hospital outcomes research. In prior work, this group delineated the priority conditions, described conceptual models, suggested core and risk adjustment measures potentially useful to emergency medical services research, and summarized out-of-hospital pain measurement. In this fifth article in the EMSOP series, the authors recommend specific risk-adjustment measures and outcome measures for use in out-of-hospital research on patients presenting with respiratory distress. The methodology included systematic literature searches and a structured review by an expert panel. The EMSOP group recommends use of pulse oximetry, peak expiratory flow rate, and the visual analog dyspnea scale as potential risk-adjustment measures and outcome measures for out-of-hospital research in patients with respiratory distress. Furthermore, using mortality as an outcome measure is also recommended. Future research is needed to alleviate the paucity of validated tools for out-of-hospital outcomes research.
Subject(s)
Emergency Medical Services/organization & administration , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Risk Adjustment/methods , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Dyspnea/diagnosis , Dyspnea/etiology , Humans , Oximetry , Pain Measurement , Patient Satisfaction , Peak Expiratory Flow Rate , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/complications , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , United StatesABSTRACT
The purpose of the Emergency Medical Services Outcomes Project (EMSOP) is to develop a foundation and framework for out-of-hospital outcomes research. In prior work (EMSOP I), discomfort had the highest weighted score among outcome categories for the top 3 adult conditions (ie, minor trauma, respiratory distress, chest pain) and the first and third highest rankings for children's conditions (ie, minor trauma, respiratory distress). In this fourth article in the EMSOP series, we discuss issues relevant to the measurement of pain in the out-of-hospital setting, recommended pain measures that require evaluation, and implications for outcomes research focusing on pain. For adults, adolescents, and older children, 2 verbal pain-rating scales are recommended for out-of-hospital evaluation: (1) the Adjective Response Scale, which includes the responses "none," "slight," "moderate," "severe," and "agonizing," and (2) the Numeric Response Scale, which includes responses from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst pain imaginable). The Oucher Scale, combining a visual analog scale with pictures, seems most promising for out-of-hospital use among younger children. Future research in out-of-hospital care should be conducted to determine the utility and feasibility of these measures, as well as the effectiveness of interventions for pain relief.
Subject(s)
Emergency Medical Services/methods , Pain Measurement/methods , Pain/diagnosis , Adult , Child , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pain/etiology , Wounds and Injuries/complicationsABSTRACT
The purpose of the Emergency Medical Services Outcomes Project (EMSOP) is to develop a foundation and framework for out-of-hospital outcomes research. Fundamental to that purpose is the identification of priority conditions, risk-adjustment measures (RAMs), and outcome measures. In this third EMSOP article, we examine the topic of risk adjustment, discuss the relevance of risk adjustment for out-of-hospital outcomes research, and recommend RAMs that should be evaluated for potential use in emergency medical services (EMS) research. Risk adjustment allows better judgment about the effectiveness and quality of alternative therapies; it fosters a better comparison of potentially dissimilar groups of patients. By measuring RAMs, researchers account for an important source of variation in their studies. Core RAMs are those measures that might be necessary for out-of-hospital outcomes research involving any EMS condition. Potential core RAMs that should be evaluated for their feasibility, validity, and utility in out-of-hospital research include patient age and sex, race and ethnicity, vital signs, level of responsiveness, Glasgow Coma Scale, standardized time intervals, and EMS provider impression of the presenting condition. Potential core RAMs that could be obtained through linkage to other data sources and that should be evaluated for their feasibility, validity, and utility include principal diagnosis and patient comorbidity. We recommend that these potential core RAMs be systematically evaluated for use in risk adjustment of out-of-hospital patient groups that might be used for outcomes research
Subject(s)
Emergency Medical Services/methods , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/methods , Risk Adjustment/methods , Adult , Child , Data Collection/methods , Documentation/methods , Female , Glasgow Coma Scale , Humans , Male , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Reproducibility of Results , United StatesABSTRACT
During the past 30 years, emergency medical services (EMS) in the United States have experienced explosive growth. The American health care system is now transforming, providing an opportune time to examine what we have learned over the past three decades in order to create a vision for the future of EMS. Over the course of several months, a multidisciplinary steering committee collaborated with hundreds of EMS-interested individuals, organizations, and agencies to develop the "EMS Agenda for the Future." Fourteen EMS attributes were identified as requiring continued development in order to realize the vision established within the Agenda. They are Integration of Health Services, EMS Research, Legislation and Regulation, System Finance, Human Resources, Medical Direction, Education Systems, Public Education, Prevention, Public Access, Communication Systems, Clinical Care, Information Systems, and Evaluation. Discussion of these attributes provides important guidance for achieving a vision for the future of EMS that emphasizes its critical role in American health care. [Delbridge TR, Bailey B, Chew JL Jr, Conn AKT, Krakeel JJ, Manz D, Miller DR, O'Malley PJ, Ryan SD, Spaite DW, Stewart RD, Suter RE, Wilson EM: EMS agenda for the future: Where we are where we want to be. Ann Emerg Med February 1998;31:251-263.].
