The Effect of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on Adverse Events in Health Care: A Retrospective Study in Ground and Helicopter Emergency Medical Services

OBJECTIVE

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has proven to be a significant hardship for the entire world. Health care systems and their workers have been stretched to their limits. Research regarding whether this increased strain has affected patient safety has not been sufficient, especially in emergency medical services. The aim of this study was to determine if there has been an increased rate of adverse events in ground and helicopter emergency medical services since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A 2-year retrospective review was performed at a Midwest regional critical care transport service. The rate of adverse events for 1-year periods before and after March 13, 2020, was the primary outcome. All adverse events that generated a quality improvement incident report form (QIRF) were included, except those generated for non-clinical-related incidents. Additionally, a smaller time frame between May 1st and August 31st of both years was included containing all flagged adverse events from peer reviewers; not all of these generated a QIRF.

RESULTS

In the time period between March 13, 2019, and March 12, 2020, 5 of 3,154 (0.16%) calls generated a QIRF versus 21 of 3,185 (0.66%) calls between March 13, 2020, and March 12, 2021. There was a significant relationship showing an adverse event was more likely to happen after the onset of COVID-19 compared with before (χ21 [N = 6,339] = 8.643, P ≤ .001). Additionally, from May 1st to August 31st, the total adverse event rates were 16.86% (143/848 calls) and 24.46% (387/1,582 calls) for 2019 and 2020, respectively. Similarly, statistical significance existed for adverse events occurring after onset of the pandemic versus before (χ21 [N = 2,430] = 18.253, P ≤ .001).

CONCLUSION

A higher rate of adverse events for the year after the onset of COVID-19 existed. Additional studies looking at the causes of adverse events and patient outcomes should be undertaken to further understand this increase.

Retrospective identification of medication related adverse events in the emergency medical services through the analysis of a patient safety register

Adverse drug events encompass a wide range of potential unintended and harmful events, from adverse drug reactions to medication errors, many of which in retrospect, are considered preventable. However, the primary challenge towards reducing their burden lies in consistently identifying and monitoring these occurrences, a challenge faced across the spectrum of healthcare, including the emergency medical services. The aim of this study was to identify and describe medication related adverse events (AEs) in the out-of-hospital setting. The medication components of a dedicated patient safety register were analysed and described for the period Jan 2017–Sept 2020. Univariate descriptive analysis was used to summarize and report on basic case and patient demographics, intervention related AEs, medication related AEs, and AE severity. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the odds of AE severity, by AE type. A total of 3475 patient records were assessed where 161 individual medication AEs were found in 150 (4.32%), 12 of which were categorised as harmful. Failure to provide a required medication was found to be the most common error (1.67%), followed by the administration of medications outside of prescribed practice guidelines (1.18%). There was evidence to suggest a 63% increase in crude odds of any AE severity [OR 1.63 (95% CI 1.03–2.6), p = 0.035] with the medication only AEs when compared to the intervention only AEs. Prehospital medication related adverse events remain a significant threat to patient safety in this setting and warrant greater widespread attention and future identification of strategies aimed at their reduction.

The status of prehospital care delivery for COVID-19 patients in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: The study emphasizing adverse events occurring in prehospital transport and associated factors

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 patients may require emergency medical services for emergent treatment and/or transport to a hospital for further treatment. However, it is common for the patients to experience adverse events during transport, even the shortest transport may cause life-threatening conditions. Most of the studies that have been done on prehospital care of COVID-19 patients were conducted in developed countries. Differences in population demographics and economy may limit the generalizability of available studies. So, this study was aimed at investigating the status of prehospital care delivery for COVID-19 patients in Addis Ababa focusing on adverse events that occurred during transport and associated factors.

METHODS

A total of 233 patients consecutively transported to Saint Paul's Hospital Millennium Medical College from November 6 to December 31, 2020, were included in the study. A team of physicians and nurses collected the data using a structured questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data, and ordinal logistic regression was carried out to assess the association between explanatory variables and the outcome variable. Results are presented using frequency, percentage, chi-square, crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

The overall level of adverse events in prehospital setting was 44.2%. Having history of at least one chronic medical illness, [AOR3.2 (95%; CI; 1.11-9.53)]; distance traveled to reach destination facility, [AOR 0.11(95%; CI; 0.02-0.54)]; failure to recognize and administer oxygen to the patient in need of oxygen, [AOR 15.0(95%; CI; 4.0-55.7)]; absent or malfunctioned suctioning device, [AOR 4.0(95%; CI; 1.2-13.0)]; patients handling mishaps, [AOR 12.7(95%; CI; 2.9-56.8)] were the factors associated with adverse events in prehospital transport of COVID-19 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

There were a significant proportion of adverse events in prehospital care among COVID-19 patients. Most of the adverse events were preventable. There is an urgent need to strengthen prehospital emergency care in Ethiopia by equipping the ambulances with essential and properly functioning equipment and trained manpower. Awareness creation and training of transport staff in identifying potential hazards, at-risk patients, adequate documentation, and patient handling during transport could help to prevent or minimize adverse events in prehospital care.

How safe is prehospital care? A systematic review

Background

As compared to other domains of healthcare, little is known about patient safety incidents (PSIs) in prehospital care. The aims of our systematic review were to identify how the prevalence and level of harm associated with PSIs in prehospital care are assessed; the frequency of PSIs in prehospital care; and the harm associated with PSIs in prehospital care.

Method

Searches were conducted of Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete and the grey literature. Reference lists of included studies and existing related reviews were also screened. English-language, peer-reviewed studies reporting data on number/frequency of PSIs and/or harm associated with PSIs were included. Two researchers independently extracted data from the studies and carried out a critical appraisal using the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs (QATSDD).

Results

Of the 22 included papers, 16 (73%) used data from record reviews, and 6 (27%) from incident reports. The frequency of PSIs in prehospital care was found to be a median of 5.9 per 100 records/transports/patients. A higher prevalence of PSIs was identified within studies that used record review data (9.9 per 100 records/transports/patients) as compared to incident reports (0.3 per records/transports/patients). Across the studies that reported harm, a median of 15.6% of PSIs were found to result in harm. Studies that utilized record review data reported that a median of 6.5% of the PSIs resulted in harm. For data from incident reporting systems, a median of 54.6% of incidents were associated with harm. The mean QATSDD score was 25.6 (SD = 4.1, range = 16–34).

Conclusions

This systematic review gives direction as to how to advance methods for identifying PSIs in prehospital care and assessing the extent to which patients are harmed.

Measurement and monitoring patient safety in prehospital care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Prehospital care is potentially hazardous with the possibility for patients to experience an adverse event. However, as compared to secondary care, little is known about how patient safety is managed in prehospital care settings.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this systematic review were to identify and classify the methods of measuring and monitoring patient safety that have been used in prehospital care using the five dimensions of the Measuring and Monitoring Safety (MMS) framework and use this classification to identify where there are safety 'blind spots' and make recommendations for how these deficits could be addressed.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in January 2020, with no limit on publication year, using Medline, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Web of Science and Academic Search. Reference lists of included studies and existing related reviews were also screened. English-language, peer-reviewed studies concerned with measuring and monitoring safety in prehospital care were included. Two researchers independently extracted data from studies and applied a quality appraisal tool (the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs).

RESULTS

A total of 5301 studies were screened, with 52 included in the review. A total of 73% (38/52) of the studies assessed past harm, 25% (13/52) the reliability of safety critical processes, 1.9% (1/52) sensitivity to operations, 38.5% (20/52) anticipation and preparedness and 5.8% (3/52) integration and learning. A total of 67 methods for measuring and monitoring safety were used across the included studies. Of these methods, 38.8% (26/67) were surveys, 29.9% (20/67) were patient records reviews, 14.9% (10/67) were incident reporting systems, 11.9% (8/67) were interviews or focus groups and 4.5% (3/67) were checklists.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no single method of measuring and monitoring safety in prehospital care. Arguably, most safety monitoring systems have evolved, rather than been designed. This leads to safety blind spots in which information is lacking, as well as to redundancy and duplication of effort. It is suggested that the findings from this systematic review, informed by the MMS framework, can provide a structure for critically thinking about how safety is being measured and monitored in prehospital care. This will support the design of a safety surveillance system that provides a comprehensive understanding of what is being done well, where improvements should be made and whether safety interventions have had the desired effect.

Physiological responses during paramedics' simulated driving tasks

BACKGROUND

Most ambulance collisions happen in emergency driving conditions and are caused by human factors.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the influence of human factors associated with time pressure, patient-care intervention, and health status on the physiological responses of simulated emergency driving tasks.

METHODS

A cohort of seventeen experienced paramedics performed a battery of three simulated diving tasks. The driving tasks were a non-urgent and two urgent driving simulations (one to the scene and one to the hospital). The second urgent driving task was preceded by a patient-care simulation (unstable cardiac patient with cardiopulmonary resuscitation).

RESULTS

The physiological responses between the three driving tasks were not significantly different due to time pressure and patient-care intervention. It is postulated that the physiological response of experienced paramedics was influenced by the fact that they are accustomed to handling stressful situations daily. Furthermore, it was observed that paramedics with health conditions were more physiologically aroused during the urgent driving scenarios (pre and post-intervention), suggesting they might have an elevated risk of collision when they drive with urgency. Paramedics with health conditions also had higher physiological responses for the post-intervention baseline, leading to a longer recovery time period, which might represent an elevated risk of developing chronic health problems or amplifying existing ones.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this research suggest that experienced paramedics manage the influence of time pressure and the impact of challenging patient-care well. Paramedics with health conditions represent an elevated risk of collision.

Registered nurses' experiences of near misses in ambulance care - A critical incident technique study

BACKGROUND

In hospitals, potentially harmful near misses occur daily exposing patients to adverse events and safety risks. The same applies to ambulance care, but it is unclear what the risks are and why near misses arise.

AIM

To explore registered nurses' experiences and behaviours associated with near misses where patient safety in the ambulance service was jeopardized.

METHODS

Based on critical incident technique, a retrospective and descriptive design with individual qualitative interviews was used. Ten men and five women from the Swedish ambulance service participated.

RESULTS

Seventy-three critical incidents of near misses constituted four main areas: Drug management; Human-technology interactions; Assessment and care and Patient protection actions. Incidents were found in drug management with incorrect drug mixing and dosage. In human-technology interactions, near misses were found in handling of electrocardiography, mechanical chest compression devices and other equipment. Misjudgement and delayed treatment were found in patient assessments and care measures while patient protection actions failed in transport safety, hygiene and local area knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Experiencing near misses led to stress, guilt and shame. The typical behaviour in response to near misses was to immediately correct the action. Occasionally, however, the near miss was not discovered until later without causing any harm.

Adverse events in prehospital emergency care: a trigger tool study

Background

Prehospital emergency care has developed rapidly during the past decades. The care is given in a complex context which makes prehospital care a potential high-risk activity when it comes to patient safety. Patient safety in the prehospital setting has been only sparsely investigated. The aims of the present study were 1) To investigate the incidence of adverse events (AEs) in prehospital care and 2) To investigate the factors contributing to AEs in prehospital care.

Methods

We used a retrospective study design where 30 randomly selected prehospital medical records were screened for AEs each month in three prehospital organizations in Sweden during a period of one year. A total of 1080 prehospital medical records were included. The record review was based on the use of 11 screening criteria.

Results

The reviewers identified 46 AEs in 46 of 1080 (4.3%) prehospital medical records. Of the 46 AEs, 43 were classified as potential for harm (AE1) (4.0, 95% CI = 2.9–5.4) and three as harm identified (AE2) (0.3, 95% CI = 0.1–0.9). However, among patients with a life-threatening condition (priority 1), the risk of AE was higher (16.5%). The most common factors contributing to AEs were deviations from standard of care and missing, incomplete, or unclear documentation. The most common cause of AEs was the result of action(s) or inaction(s) by the emergency medical service (EMS) crew.

Conclusions

There were 4.3 AEs per 100 ambulance missions in Swedish prehospital care. The majority of AEs originated from deviations from standard of care and incomplete documentation. There was an increase in the risk of AE among patients who the EMS team assessed as having a life-threatening condition. Most AEs were possible to avoid.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12873-019-0228-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Application of the emergency medical services trigger tool to measure adverse events in prehospital emergency care: a time series analysis

BACKGROUND

Emergency Care has previously been identified as an area of significant concern regarding the prevalence of Adverse Events (AEs). However, the majority of this focus has been on the in-hospital setting, with little understanding of the identification and incidence of AEs in the prehospital environment.

METHOD

The early development and testing of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) specific triggers for the identification of AEs and Harm has been previously described. To operationalise the Emergency Medical Services Trigger Tool (EMSTT), the processes developed by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement for use with the Global Trigger Tool were adapted to a prehospital emergency care setting. These were then applied using a stepwise approach to the analysis of 36 consecutive samples of patient care records over an 18-month period (n = 710). Inter-rater reliability was measured for each trigger item and level of Harm classification. Total Triggers per 10,000 Patient Encounters, AEs per 10,000 Patient Encounters and Harm per 10,000 Patient Encounters were measured. All measures were plotted on Statistical Process Control Charts.

RESULTS

There was a high level of inter-rater agreement across all items (range: 85.6-100%). The EMSTT found an average rate of 8.20 Triggers per 10,000 Patient Encounters, 2.48 AEs per 10,000 Patient Encounters and 0.34 Harm events per 10,000 Patient Encounters. Three triggers: Change in Systolic Blood Pressure Greater Than 20%; Temp > 38 °C without subsequent reduction; and SpO₂ < 94% without supplemental Oxygen or SpO₂ < 85% without assisted ventilation accounted for 93% (n = 180) of the triggers found throughout the longitudinal analysis.

DISCUSSION

With sufficient focus on implementation and data collection, as well as the inclusion of a contextually relevant system for classifying AE/Harm, the EMSTT represents a potentially successful strategy towards identifying the rate of AEs within EMS across a large patient population with limited commitment of time and resources.

The Effect of Team Configuration on the Incidence of Adverse Events in Pediatric Critical Care Transport

OBJECTIVE

Specialty pediatric transport teams are widely used for pediatric interfacility transport in the United States, with little industry consensus on optimal team configuration. The aim of this study is to assess the quality of the nurse/paramedic specialty team configuration as indirectly measured by the rate of adverse events in these transports.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of pediatric transport data from a hospital-based dedicated pediatric/neonatal transport team was conducted for patients transported in 2016. Data were categorized by general characteristics of transport and analyzed for the occurrence of adverse events.

RESULTS

Five hundred sixty-four cases were analyzed. Cases were described by team configuration and then by transport mode, duration, time, patient age and acuity, and disposition. The overall rate of adverse event incidence was 8.3%, chiefly centered in device and process domains. There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse events between team configurations.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse event occurrence in nurse/paramedic team configurations versus nurse/nurse configuration. Using critical care paramedics on pediatric transport teams enables a larger volume of patients to be transported to definitive care without concerns for decrease in quality or safety.

Out-of-Hospital Pediatric Patient Safety Events: Results of the CSI Chart Review

OBJECTIVE

Studies of adult hospital patients have identified medical errors as a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Little is known about the frequency and nature of pediatric patient safety events in the out-of-hospital setting. We sought to quantify pediatric patient safety events in EMS and identify patient, call, and care characteristics associated with potentially severe events.

METHODS

As part of the Children's Safety Initiative -EMS, expert panels independently reviewed charts of pediatric critical ambulance transports in a metropolitan area over a three-year period. Regression models were used to identify factors associated with increased risk of potentially severe safety events. Patient safety events were categorized as: Unintended injury; Near miss; Suboptimal action; Error; or Management complication ("UNSEMs") and their severity and potential preventability were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 265 of 378 (70.1%) unique charts contained at least one UNSEM, including 146 (32.8%) errors and 199 (44.7%) suboptimal actions. Sixty-one UNSEMs were categorized as potentially severe (23.3% of UNSEMs) and nearly half (45.3%) were rated entirely preventable. Two factors were associated with heightened risk for a severe UNSEM: (1) age 29 days to 11 months (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.25-8.68); (2) cases requiring resuscitation (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.16-8.28). Severe UNSEMs were disproportionately higher among cardiopulmonary arrests (8.5% of cases, 34.4% of severe UNSEMs).

CONCLUSIONS

During high-risk out-of-hospital care of pediatric patients, safety events are common, potentially severe, and largely preventable. Infants and those requiring resuscitation are important areas of focus to reduce out-of-hospital pediatric patient safety events.

Development of a trigger tool to identify adverse events and harm in Emergency Medical Services

BACKGROUND

Adverse event(AE) detection in healthcare has traditionally relied upon several methods including: patient care documentation review, mortality and morbidity review, voluntary reporting, direct observation and complaint systems. A novel sampling strategy, known as the trigger tool (TT) methodology, has been shown to provide a more robust and valid method of detection. The aim of this research was to develop and assess a TT specific to ground-based Emergency Medical Services, to identify cases with the potential risk for adverse events and harm.

METHODS

The study was conducted between March and December 2015. A literature review identified 57 potential triggers, which were grouped together by experts using an affinity process. Triggers for other areas of potential AE/harm were additionally considered for inclusion. An interim TT consisting of nine triggers underwent five iterative rounds of derivation tests of 20 random patient care records (n=100) in two emergency medical services. A final eight-item trigger list underwent a large sample (n=9836) assessment of test characteristics.

RESULTS

The final eight-item TT consisted of triggers divided amongst four categories: Clinical, Medication, Procedural and Return-Call. The TT demonstrated an AE identification rate of 41.5% (sensitivity 79.8% (95% CI, 69.9% to 87.6%); specificity 58.5% (95% CI, 52% to 64.8%)). When identifying potential risk for harm, the TT demonstrated a harm identification rate of 19.3% (sensitivity 97.1% (95% CI, 84.7% to 99.9%); specificity 53.5% (95% CI, 47.7% to 59.3%)).

DISCUSSION

The Emergency Medical Services Trigger Tool (EMSTT) may be used as a sampling strategy similar to the Global Trigger Tool, to identify and measure AE and harm over time, and monitor the success of improvement initiatives within the Emergency Medical Services setting.

Improving the governance of patient safety in emergency care: a systematic review of interventions

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review interventions that aim to improve the governance of patient safety within emergency care on effectiveness, reliability, validity and feasibility.

DESIGN

A systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and PsychInfo were searched for studies published between January 1990 and July 2014. We included studies evaluating interventions relevant for higher management to oversee and manage patient safety, in prehospital emergency medical service (EMS) organisations and hospital-based emergency departments (EDs). Two reviewers independently selected candidate studies, extracted data and assessed study quality. Studies were categorised according to study quality, setting, sample, intervention characteristics and findings.

RESULTS

Of the 18 included studies, 13 (72%) were non-experimental. Nine studies (50%) reported data on the reliability and/or validity of the intervention. Eight studies (44%) reported on the feasibility of the intervention. Only 4 studies (22%) reported statistically significant effects. The use of a simulation-based training programme and well-designed incident reporting systems led to a statistically significant improvement of safety knowledge and attitudes by ED staff and an increase of incident reports within EDs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Characteristics of the interventions included in this review (eg, anonymous incident reporting and validation of incident reports by an independent party) could provide useful input for the design of an effective tool to govern patient safety in EMS organisations and EDs. However, executives cannot rely on a robust set of evidence-based and feasible tools to govern patient safety within their emergency care organisation and in the chain of emergency care. Established strategies from other high-risk sectors need to be evaluated in emergency care settings, using an experimental design with valid outcome measures to strengthen the evidence base.

[Out of hospital emergencies towards a safety culture]

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to measure the degree of safety culture (CS) among healthcare professional workers of an out-of-hospital Emergency Medical Service. Most patient safety studies have been conducted in relation to the hospital rather than pre-hospital Emergency Medical Services. The objective is to analyze the dimensions with lower scores in order to plan futures strategies.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A descriptive study using the AHRQ (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality) questionnaire. The questionnaire was delivered to all healthcare professionals workers of 061 Advanced Life Support Units of Aragón, during the month of August 2013.

RESULTS

The response rate was 55%. Main strengths detected: an adequate number of staff (96%), good working conditions (89%), tasks supported from immediate superior (77%), teamwork climate (74%), and non-punitive environment to report adverse events (68%). Areas for improvement: insufficient training in patient safety (53%) and lack of feedback of incidents reported (50%).

CONCLUSIONS

The opportunities for improvement identified focus on the training of professionals in order to ensure safer care, while extending the safety culture. Also, the implementation of a system of notification and registration of adverse events in the service is deemed necessary.

A comparative assessment of adverse event classification in the out-of-hospital setting

OBJECTIVES

We sought to test reliability of two approaches to classify adverse events (AEs) associated with helicopter EMS (HEMS) transport.

METHODS

The first approach for AE classification involved flight nurses and paramedics (RN/Medics) and mid-career emergency physicians (MC-EMPs) independently reviewing 50 randomly selected HEMS medical records. The second approach involved RN/Medics and MC-EMPs meeting as a group to openly discuss 20 additional medical records and reach consensus-based AE decision. We compared all AE decisions to a reference criterion based on the decision of three senior emergency physicians (Sr-EMPs). We designed a study to detect an improvement in agreement (reliability) from fair (kappa = 0.2) to moderate (kappa = 0.5). We calculated sensitivity, specificity, percent agreement, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV).

RESULTS

For the independent reviews, the Sr-EMP group identified 26 AEs while individual clinician reviewers identified between 19 and 50 AEs. Agreement on the presence/absence of an AE between Sr-EMPs and three MC-EMPs ranged from κ = 0.20 to κ = 0.25. Agreement between Sr-EMPs and three RN/Medics ranged from κ = 0.11 to κ = 0.19. For the consensus/open-discussion approach, the Sr-EMPs identified 13 AEs, the MC-EMP group identified 18 AEs, and RN/medic group identified 36 AEs. Agreement between Sr-EMPs and MC-EMP group was (κ = 0.30 95%CI -0.12, 0.72), whereas agreement between Sr-EMPs and RN/medic group was (κ = 0.40 95%CI 0.01, 0.79). Agreement between all three groups was fair (κ = 0.33, 95%CI 0.06, 0.66). Percent agreement (58-68%) and NPV (63-76%) was moderately dissimilar between clinicians, while sensitivity (25-80%), specificity (43-97%), and PPV (48-83%) varied.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a higher level of agreement/reliability in AE decisions utilizing a consensus-based approach for review rather than independent reviews.

Measuring adverse events in helicopter emergency medical services: establishing content validity

INTRODUCTION

We sought to create a valid framework for detecting adverse events (AEs) in the high-risk setting of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS).

METHODS

We assembled a panel of 10 expert clinicians (n = 6 emergency medicine physicians and n = 4 prehospital nurses and flight paramedics) affiliated with a large multistate HEMS organization in the Northeast US. We used a modified Delphi technique to develop a framework for detecting AEs associated with the treatment of critically ill or injured patients. We used a widely applied measure, the content validity index (CVI), to quantify the validity of the framework's content.

RESULTS

The expert panel of 10 clinicians reached consensus on a common AE definition and four-step protocol/process for AE detection in HEMS. The consensus-based framework is composed of three main components: (1) a trigger tool, (2) a method for rating proximal cause, and (3) a method for rating AE severity. The CVI findings isolate components of the framework considered content valid.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate a standardized process for the development of a content-valid framework for AE detection. The framework is a model for the development of a method for AE identification in other settings, including ground-based EMS.

The emergency medical services safety champions

The overarching mission of prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) is to deliver lifesaving care for people when their needs are greatest. Fulfilling this mission is challenged by threats to patient and provider safety. The EMS setting is a high-risk one because care is delivered rapidly in the out-of-hospital setting where resources of benefit to patients are limited. There is growing evidence that safety culture varies widely across EMS agencies. A poor safety culture may manifest as error in medication, back injuries, and other poor outcomes for patient and provider. Recently, federal and national leaders of EMS (ie, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) have made improving EMS safety culture a national priority. Unfortunately, few initiatives can help local EMS leaders achieve that priority. The authors describe the successful EMS Champs Fellowship program, supported by the Jewish Healthcare Foundation, designed to train EMS leaders to improve safety for patients and providers.