...
首页> 外文期刊>Western Journal of Emergency Medicine >Emergency Physician Awareness of Prehospital Procedures and Medications
【24h】

Emergency Physician Awareness of Prehospital Procedures and Medications

机译:急诊医师对院前程序和药物的认识

获取原文

摘要

Introduction: Maintaining patient safety during transition from prehospital to emergency department (ED) care depends on effective handoff communication between providers. We sought to determine emergency physicians’ (EP) knowledge of the care provided by paramedics in terms of both procedures and medications, and whether the use of a verbal report improved physician accuracy. Methods: We conducted a 2-phase observational survey of a convenience sample of EPs in an urban, academic ED. In this large ED paramedics have no direct contact with physicians for non-critical patients, giving their report instead to the triage nurse. In Phase 1, paramedics gave verbal report to the triage nurse only. In Phase 2, a research assistant (RA) stationed in triage listened to this report and then repeated it back verbatim to the EPs caring for the patient. The RA then queried the EPs 90 minutes later regarding their patients’ prehospital procedures and medications. We compared the accuracy of these 2 reporting methods. Results: There were 163 surveys completed in Phase 1 and 116 in Phase 2. The oral report had no effect on EP awareness that the patient had been brought in by ambulance (86% in Phase 1 and 85% in Phase 2.) The oral report did improve EP awareness of prehospital procedures, from 16% in Phase 1 to 45% in Phase 2, OR=4.28 (2.5-7.5). EPs were able to correctly identify all oral medications in 18% of Phase 1 cases and 47% of Phase 2 cases, and all IV medications in 42% of Phase 1 cases and 50% of Phase 2 cases. The verbal report led to a mild improvement in physician awareness of oral medications given, OR=4.0 (1.09-14.5), and no improvement in physician awareness of IV medications given, OR=1.33 (0.15-11.35). Using a composite score of procedures plus oral plus IV medications, physicians had all three categories correct in 15% of Phase 1 and 39% of Phase 2 cases (p<0.0001). Conclusion: EPs in our ED were unaware of many prehospital procedures and medications regardless of the method used to provide this information. The addition of a verbal hand-off report resulted in a modest improvement in overall accuracy. [West J Emerg Med. 2014;15(4):504-510.].
机译:简介:在从院前过渡到急诊(ED)护理期间维持患者安全取决于提供商之间的有效交接沟通。我们试图确定急诊医师对医护人员在程序和药物方面的护理知识,以及使用口头报告是否能提高医师的准确性。方法:我们对城市学术急诊室的EP便利样本进行了两阶段观察性调查。在这种大型急诊科医护人员中,非危重患者没有与医生直接接触,而是将他们的报告交给分诊护士。在第一阶段中,护理人员仅向分诊护士口头报告。在第2阶段,派驻分流的研究助手(RA)听了此报告,然后逐字重复地将其重复发送给照顾患者的EP。然后,RA在90分钟后询问了EP,询问患者的院前程序和用药情况。我们比较了这两种报告方法的准确性。结果:在第一阶段完成了163项调查,在第二阶段完成了116项调查。口头报告对EP意识没有影响,因为该病人是由救护车带入的(第一阶段为86%,第二阶段为85%)。报告确实提高了EP对院前程序的认识,从第一阶段的16%上升到第二阶段的45%,OR = 4.28(2.5-7.5)。 EP能够正确地识别出18%的1期患者和47%的2期患者的所有口服药物,以及所有IV药物的1期患者的42%和2期患者的50%。口头报告导致医师对口服药物的认识有轻微改善,OR = 4.0(1.09-14.5),而医师对静脉药物的认识没有改善,OR = 1.33(0.15-11.35)。使用综合程序评分加上口服加IV药物治疗,医师在15%的1期患者和39%的2期患者中对所有这三种类别进行了纠正(p <0.0001)。结论:我们急诊室的EP并未意识到许多院前程序和药物,无论采用何种方法提供此信息。口头交接报告的增加导致整体准确性的适度提高。 [西急救医学杂志。 2014; 15(4):504-510。]。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号