Developing EMS quality assessment indicators

Measuring quality in emergency medical services: a review of clinical performance indicators

Measuring quality in Emergency Medical Services (EMSs) systems is challenging. This paper reviews the current approaches to measuring quality in health care and EMS with a focus on currently used clinical performance indicators in EMS systems (US and international systems). The different types of performance indicators, the advantages and limitations of each type, and the evidence-based prehospital clinical bundles are discussed. This paper aims at introducing emergency physicians and health care providers to quality initiatives in EMS and serves as a reference for tools that EMS medical directors can use to launch new or modify existing quality control programs in their systems.

Emergency medical dispatch

EMD will always remain somewhat of an imprecise science by nature. 911 is, after all, the access point for lifesaving assistance, and citizens must have absolute freedom to this service. The consequence of having the freedom to request help from any location at any time is that some individuals will use it for the wrong reasons. Present-day dispatchers must serve ever-broadening communities with multiple languages, cultural diversity, and unique health needs. Along with other essential personnel that make up the fabric of the public safety net, emergency medical dispatchers have now become essential to the provision of time-critical skills and compassion for perceived medical emergency.

Performance measurements in emergency medical services

With the strong encouragement of leading health care agencies, business principles are being implemented throughout health care, including emergency medical services (EMS). The reason is simple--quality of care can be enhanced by incorporating the management concepts of continuous quality improvement (CQI). The CQI process couples carefully identified, measurable performance indicators with information systems to monitor, analyze, and trend data. Benchmarking outcomes with other EMS systems allows the identification of "best practices" and the evolution of standards. Emergency medical services professionals must actively participate with the broader health care community in creating performance measurements to ensure that high-quality care is delivered consistently.

Quality indicators for out-of-hospital emergency medical services: the paramedics' perspective

OBJECTIVE

Out-of-hospital emergency medical services (EMS) need relevant and measurable indicators of quality. Those front-line workers who provide service directly to the customer are integral to the process of defining quality. The authors' objective was to obtain from paramedics, the front-line workers in the EMS system, their perspective on quality of care.

METHODS

During regularly scheduled education sessions, 102 of the 140 field paramedics from a large municipal EMS system attended a presentation on total quality management. The paramedics were then assigned to focus groups and asked to identify quality indicators and provide recommendations for how they should be measured.

RESULTS

Eighteen different quality indicators were identified. In addition, the paramedics suggested 17 ways to measure these proposed quality indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

From the perspective of the study participants, indicators of the quality of out-of-hospital care differ from many used in traditional EMS quality assurance programs. Future studies should investigate the applicability of these indicators to the total quality management of EMS systems.

Model curriculum in emergency medical services for emergency medicine residency programs. SAEM Emergency Medical Services Committee

An emergency medical services (EMS) curriculum, as developed by the SAEM Emergency Medical Services Committee, is provided for the training of emergency medicine residents in EMS.

The potential of an anaesthesiologist-manned ambulance service in a rural/urban district

The use of anaesthesiologists in prehospital emergency care is controversial. We wanted to assess the impact of an anaesthesiologist and a short time interval from acceptance of a mission to take-off at survival rates in a rural/urban emergency medical service. Prospectively registered data for 991 consecutive patients through a 12-month period were retrospectively evaluated by an independent foreign expert. Of all primary missions, 3.3% were considered probably lifesaving from site of injury to receiving hospital. Of these, the lifesaving result in 50% were dependent on both the qualifications of the anaesthesiologist and a short response time. Survival from hospital admission to discharge was 44%. All patients were discharged to their own homes, able to live a fully functional life. The consistent use of anaesthesiologists compared to less qualified personnel and the maintaining of response times below presently required minima doubles the potential for lives saved in services comparable to the one studied.

The effect of a quality improvement feedback loop on paramedic skills, charting, and behavior

OBJECTIVE

A mechanism was initiated for conveying quality improvement (QI) results to paramedics as a means of improving chart documentation in difficult-to-correct areas. This study examines the impact of this QI feedback loop on charting, resuscitation rates from cardiac arrest, endotracheal intubation (ETI) success rates, and trauma scene times.

DESIGN

Paramedic trip sheets were reviewed before and after the institution of the QI feedback loop in this interrupted time series design.

SETTING

The New Castle County, Delaware, Paramedic Program.

PARTICIPANTS

All New Castle County paramedics participated in the study.

INTERVENTIONS

In January 1990, the medical director began to circulate a QI summary among the paramedics in an effort to improve performance and chart documentation. The summary focused on the management of respiratory distress or arrest, cardiac arrest, and major trauma. The success rate for ETI was compared with the rate of field resuscitation from cardiac arrest, the percentage of unjustified prolonged trauma scene times (longer than 10 minutes), and the percent compliance with minimum endotracheal intubation documentation (ETID) requirements from a six-month period before institution of the QI feedback mechanism with data obtained from a six-month period after the program had been operational for one year.

RESULTS

Comparing results from before with after the initiation of the QI program, the ETI success rate was 273 of 295 (92.5%) before and 300 of 340 (88.2%) after (chi 2 = 3.04, p < .1, ns); field resuscitations totaled 26 of 187 (13.9%) before and 44 of 237 (18.6) after (chi 2 = 1.40, p < .25, ns); ETID rate was 249 of 295 (84.4%) before and 336 of 340 (98.8%) after (chi 2 = 44.24, p < .001), and unjustified prolonged trauma scene times were 69 of 278 (24.8%) before and seven of 501 (1.4%) after (chi 2 = 320.5, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

The use of QI feedback had little effect on psychomotor skills as the ETI success rate or resuscitation rate, but had a dramatic effect on chart documentation, as evidenced by ETID rate, and behavior, as evidenced by the reduction in prolonged trauma scene times. The use of QI feedback is recommended as a means of correcting charting deficiencies or modifying behavior.