The development of emergency medical services benefit score: a European Delphi study

dc.contributor.authorHeino Anssi
dc.contributor.authorRaatiniemi Lasse
dc.contributor.authorIirola Timo
dc.contributor.authorMeriläinen Merja
dc.contributor.authorLiisanantti Janne
dc.contributor.authorTommila Miretta
dc.contributor.author& Collaboration Group
dc.contributor.organizationfi=anestesiologia ja tehohoito|en=Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care|
dc.contributor.organizationfi=tyks, vsshp|en=tyks, varha|
dc.contributor.organization-code1.2.246.10.2458963.20.82197219338
dc.converis.publication-id67998251
dc.converis.urlhttps://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/Publication/67998251
dc.date.accessioned2025-08-28T00:32:05Z
dc.date.available2025-08-28T00:32:05Z
dc.description.abstract<p>Background<br>The helicopter emergency services (HEMS) Benefit Score (HBS) is a nine-level scoring system developed to evaluate the benefits of HEMS missions. The HBS has been in clinical use for two decades in its original form. Advances in prehospital care, however, have produced demand for a revision of the HBS. Therefore, we developed the emergency medical services (EMS) Benefit Score (EBS) based on the former HBS. As reflected by its name, the aim of the EBS is to measure the benefits produced by the whole EMS systems to patients.</p><p>Methods<br>This is a four-round, web-based, international Delphi consensus study with a consensus definition made by experts from seven countries. Participants reviewed items of the revised HBS on a 5-point Likert scale. A content validity index (CVI) was calculated, and agreement was defined as a 70% CVI. Study included experts from seven European countries. Of these, 18 were prehospital expert panellists and 11 were in-hospital commentary board members.</p><p>Results<br>The first Delphi round resulted in 1248 intervention examples divided into ten diagnostic categories. After removing overlapping examples, 413 interventions were included in the second Delphi round, which resulted in 38 examples divided into HBS categories 3–8. In the third Delphi round, these resulted in 37 prehospital interventions, examples of which were given revised version of the score. In the fourth and final Delphi round, the expert panel was given an opportunity to accept or comment on the revised scoring system.</p><p>Conclusions<br>The former HBS was revised by a Delphi methodology and EBS developed to represent its structural purpose better. The EBS includes 37 exemplar prehospital interventions to guide its clinical use.</p><p>Trial registration The study permission was requested and granted by Turku University Hospital (decision number TP2/010/18).</p>
dc.identifier.jour-issn1757-7241
dc.identifier.olddbid205888
dc.identifier.oldhandle10024/188915
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/11111/36010
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi-fe2022012710606
dc.language.isoen
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorHeino, Anssi
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorTommila, Miretta
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorDataimport, tyks, vsshp
dc.okm.discipline3126 Surgery, anesthesiology, intensive care, radiologyen_GB
dc.okm.discipline3126 Kirurgia, anestesiologia, tehohoito, radiologiafi_FI
dc.okm.internationalcopublicationnot an international co-publication
dc.okm.internationalityInternational publication
dc.okm.typeA1 ScientificArticle
dc.publisherBMC
dc.relation.articlenumberARTN 151
dc.relation.doi10.1186/s13049-021-00966-3
dc.relation.ispartofjournalScandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
dc.relation.volume29
dc.source.identifierhttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/10024/188915
dc.titleThe development of emergency medical services benefit score: a European Delphi study
dc.year.issued2021

Tiedostot

Näytetään 1 - 1 / 1
Ladataan...
Name:
s13049-021-00966-3.pdf
Size:
1.29 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Publisher's version