[Comparison of the emergency medical services systems of Birmingham and Bonn: process efficacy and cost effectiveness]. / Effektivitäts- und Effizienzvergleich der Rettungsdienstsysteme in Birmingham (UK) und Bonn (D).

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Due to rising health care costs there is a need to verify that the treatment by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) systems is efficient and cost effective. The integration of emergency physicians is inherent part of out-of-hospital emergency care and regulated by law in Germany but not in England and the United States of America. Aim of this study therefore was to conduct a cost performance analysis by evaluating the underlying structure, the costs incurred and the achieved performance in two EMS systems with paramedics or emergency physicians on scene. METHODS: The study was carried out in West-Birmingham, a part of the West-Midlands-Ambulance-Service (WMAS), and the EMS of Bonn. Pre defined questionnaires, EMS protocols, calculations of purchasing power parity and recent publications concerning out-of-hospital resuscitation (CPR) were used to evaluate the operating costs, to describe the structure and to measure the quality of performance. Significance was assumed at p < 0.01 for CHI(2)- or t-test, respectively. RESULTS: Birmingham used state of the art technology for dispatch and logistics whereas Bonn trusted in high qualified personnel. In the 1st quarter 1997 the Mainz-Emergency-Evaluation Score could be achieved before (MEES A) and after preclinical treatment (MEES B) in 3502 and 3422 patients in Birmingham and Bonn, respectively. In Birmingham 7.5 % and in Bonn 17 % of all patients could be improved by the EMS treatment, respectively (p < 0.01). Looking at severely ill patients (MEES A < 22) the EMS in West-Birmingham achieved an improvement in 27.9 % of these patients with an averaged change in MEES of 0.9 +/- 1.7 points in all of them. In contrast the Bonn EMS improved the status in 47.8 % of these patients and MEES A could be improved considerably by 2.3 +/- 3.4 points (p < 0.01). Pharmacological treatment was less frequently used in Birmingham than in Bonn (12.9 % vs. 32.4 %, respectively; p < 0.01). At equal incidences of CPR attempts discharge rate after CPR was only 4 % in WMAS compared to 14.7 % in Bonn-North (p < 0.01). Per inhabitant and year total costs amounted to 10.43 euro for the EMS system in Birmingham, which is 42 % less than in Bonn. Unit hour utilisation reached 0.6 in Birmingham and only 0.33 in Bonn. In severely ill patients the improvement of MEES A by 0.1 points cost per inhabitant and year 1.16 euro in Birmingham and only 0.65 euro in Bonn. The survival of one patient after CPR was calculated to 0.7 euro in Birmingham and 0.17 euro in Bonn. CONCLUSIONS: The provider of the EMS in West-Birmingham--WMAS--organised a reliable system with high efficiency concerning unit hour utilisation and response time reliability. In the EMS of Bonn, in contrast, the complex therapy by the emergency physicians improved MEES considerably and increased probability of survival after CPR at a higher level of efficiency. Further investigations however are necessary to evaluate the presented parameter of efficiency.