EMS non-conveyance: A safe practice to decrease ED crowding or a threat to patient safety?

dc.contributor.authorPaulin Jani
dc.contributor.authorKurola Jouni
dc.contributor.authorKoivisto Mari
dc.contributor.authorIirola Timo
dc.contributor.organizationfi=anestesiologia ja tehohoito|en=Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care|
dc.contributor.organizationfi=biostatistiikka|en=Biostatistics|
dc.contributor.organizationfi=tyks, vsshp|en=tyks, varha|
dc.contributor.organization-code1.2.246.10.2458963.20.82197219338
dc.contributor.organization-code1.2.246.10.2458963.20.89365200099
dc.converis.publication-id67419761
dc.converis.urlhttps://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/Publication/67419761
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-28T13:31:57Z
dc.date.available2022-10-28T13:31:57Z
dc.description.abstract<p><strong>Background: </strong>The safety of the Emergency Medical Service's (EMS's) non-conveyance decision was evaluated by EMS re-contacts, primary health care or emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalization within 48 h. The secondary outcome was 28-day mortality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cohort study used prospectively collected data on non-conveyed EMS patients from three different regions in Finland between June 1 and November 30, 2018. The Adjusted International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC2) as the reason for care was compared to hospital discharge diagnoses (ICD10). Multivariable logistic regressions were used to determine factors that were independently associated with adverse outcomes. Results are presented with adjusted odds ratios (aORs) together with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Data regarding deceased patients were reviewed by the study group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the non-conveyed EMS patients (n = 11,861), 6.3% re-contacted the EMS, 8.3% attended a primary health care facility, 4.2% went to the ED, 1.6% were hospitalized, and 0.1% died 0-24 h after the EMS mission. The 0-24 h adverse event rate was higher than 24-48 h. After non-conveyance, 32 (0.3%) patients were admitted to an intensive care unit within 24 h. Primary non-urgent EMS mission (aOR 1.49; 95% CI 1.25 to 1.77), EMS arrival at night (aOR 1.82; 95% CI 1.58 to 2.09), ALS unit type vs BLS (aOR 1.43; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.77), rural area (aOR 1.74; 95% CI 1.51 to 1.99), and older patient age (aOR 1.41; 95% CI 1.20 to 1.66) were associated with subsequent primary health care visits (0-24 h).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Four in five non-conveyed patients did not have any re-contact in follow-up period. EMS non-conveyance seems to be a relatively safe method of focusing ED resources and avoiding ED crowding.</p>
dc.identifier.eissn1471-227X
dc.identifier.jour-issn1471-227X
dc.identifier.olddbid182729
dc.identifier.oldhandle10024/165823
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/11111/40062
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi-fe2021102752639
dc.language.isoen
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorPaulin, Jani
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorKoivisto, Mari
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorDataimport, tyks, vsshp
dc.okm.discipline3141 Health care scienceen_GB
dc.okm.discipline3141 Terveystiedefi_FI
dc.okm.internationalcopublicationnot an international co-publication
dc.okm.internationalityInternational publication
dc.okm.typeA1 ScientificArticle
dc.publisher.countryUnited Kingdomen_GB
dc.publisher.countryBritanniafi_FI
dc.publisher.country-codeGB
dc.relation.doi10.1186/s12873-021-00508-1
dc.relation.ispartofjournalBMC Emergency Medicine
dc.relation.issue1
dc.relation.volume21
dc.source.identifierhttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/10024/165823
dc.titleEMS non-conveyance: A safe practice to decrease ED crowding or a threat to patient safety?
dc.year.issued2021

Tiedostot

Näytetään 1 - 1 / 1
Ladataan...
Name:
s12873-021-00508-1.pdf
Size:
1.2 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Publisher's version