The Effect of Ambulance Staffing Models in a Metropolitan, Fire-Based EMS System.

Introduction The staffing of ambulances with different levels of Emergency Medical Service (EMS) providers is a difficult decision with evidence being mixed on the benefit of each model. Hypothesis/Problem The objective of this study was to describe a pilot program evaluating alternative staffing on two ambulances utilizing the paramedic-basic (PB) model (staffed with one paramedic and one emergency medical technician[EMT]). METHODS: This was a retrospective study conducted from September 17, 2013 through December 31, 2013. The PB ambulances were compared to geographically matched ambulances staffed with paramedic-paramedic (PP ambulances). One PP and one PB ambulance were based at Station A; one PP and one PB ambulance were based at Station B. The primary outcome was total on-scene time. Secondary outcomes included time-to-electrocardiogram (EKG), time-to-intravenous (IV) line insertion, IV-line success rate, and percentage of protocol violations. Inclusion criteria were all patients requesting prehospital services that were attended to by these teams. Patients were excluded if they were not attended to by the study ambulance vehicles. Descriptive statistics were reported as medians and interquartile ranges (IQR). Proportions were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The Mann-Whitley U test was used for significance testing (P<.05). RESULTS: Median on-scene times at Station A for the PP ambulance were shorter than the PB ambulance team (PP: 10.1 minutes, IQR 6.0-15; PB: 13.0 minutes, IQR 8.1-18; P=.01). This finding also was noted at Station B (PP: 13.5 minutes, IQR 8.5-19; PB: 14.3 minutes, IQR 9.9-20; P=.01). There were no differences between PP and PB ambulance teams at Station A or Station B in time-to-EKG, time-to-IV insertion, IV success rate, and protocol violation rates. CONCLUSION: In the setting of a well-developed EMS system utilizing an all-Advanced Life Support (ALS) response, this study suggests that PB ambulance teams may function well when compared to PP ambulances. Though longer scene times were observed, differences in time to ALS interventions and protocol violation rates were not different. Hybrid ambulance teams may be an effective staffing alternative, but decisions to use this model must address clinical and operational concerns. Cortez EJ , Panchal AR , Davis JE , Keseg DP . The effect of ambulance staffing models in a metropolitan, fire-based EMS system. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2017;32(2):175-179.

The ultrasound challenge 2.0: introducing interinstitutional competition in medical student ultrasound education.

The Ultrasound Challenge was developed at The Ohio State University College of Medicine to introduce focused ultrasound to medical students. The goal was to develop experience in ultrasound through practice and competition. Initially this competition was held between Ohio State University College of Medicine students from years 1 through 4. The Ultrasound Challenge 2.0 was held in 2013. The event expanded on the previous structure by including students from the Wayne State University College of Medicine. The goal of this article is to describe our experiences with expansion of our interinstitutional ultrasound event. The challenge consisted of 6 stations: focused assessment with sonography for trauma, aortic ultrasound, cardiac ultrasound, pelvic ultrasound, musculoskeletal ultrasound, and vascular access. The participants were given a handbook outlining the expectations for each station ahead of time. Vascular access was graded in real time using the Brightness Mode Quality Ultrasound Imaging Examination Technique (B-QUIET) method. The remainder were timed, saved, and graded after the event by 3 independent faculty members using the B-QUIET method. The highest score with the fastest time was the winner. The Ultrasound Challenge 2.0 included 40 participants: 31 from The Ohio State University College of Medicine and 9 from the Wayne State University College of Medicine. The makeup of the winners in all categories consisted of 1 first-year medical student, 7 second-year medical students, 3 third-year medical students, and 10 fourth-year medical students. The Ultrasound Challenge 2.0 was a success for those who participated. It provided the first known interinstitutional medical student ultrasound competition. Students from both institutions were able to practice their image acquisition skills, demonstrate abilities in a competitive environment, and develop collegiality and teamwork.