首页> 外文期刊>Prehospital emergency care >Characteristics of Statewide Protocols for Emergency Medical Services in the United States
【24h】

Characteristics of Statewide Protocols for Emergency Medical Services in the United States

机译:美国紧急医疗服务全州协议的特征

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective. We sought to categorize and characterize the utilization of statewide emergency medical services (EMS) protocols as well as state recognition of specialty receiving facilities for trauma and time-sensitive conditions in the United States. Methods. A survey of all state EMS offices was conducted to determine which states use mandatory or model statewide EMS protocols and to characterize these protocols based on the process for authorizing such protocols. The survey also inquired as to which states formally recognize specialty receiving facilities for trauma, STEMI, stroke, cardiac arrest, and burn as well as whether or not states have mandatory or model statewide destination protocols for these specialty centers. Results. Thirty-eight states were found to have either mandatory or model statewide EMS protocols. Twenty-one states had mandatory statewide EMS protocols at either the basic life support (BLS) or advanced life support (ALS) level, and in 16 of these states, mandatory protocols covered both BLS and ALS levels of care. Seventeen states had model statewide protocols at either the BLS or ALS level, and in 14 of these states, the model protocols covered both BLS and ALS levels of care. Twenty states had separate protocols for the care of pediatric patients, while 18 states combined pediatric and adult care within the same protocols. When identified, the median age used to consider a patient for pediatric care was <14 years (range <8 to < 17 years). Three states' protocols used a child's height based on a length-based dosage tool as the threshold for identifying a pediatric patient for care using their pediatric protocols. States varied in recognition of receiving centers for EMS patients with special medical needs: 46 recognized trauma centers, 25 recognized burn centers, 22 recognized stroke centers, 11 recognized centers capable of percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and 3 recognized centers for patients surviving cardiac arrest. Conclusion. Statewide mandated EMS treatment protocols exist in 21 states, and optional model protocol guidelines are provided by 17 states. There is wide variation in the format and characteristics of these protocols and the recognition of specialty receiving centers for patients with time-sensitive illnesses.
机译:目的。我们试图对全州紧急医疗服务(EMS)协议的使用进行分类和特征化,以及对美国针对创伤和对时间敏感的状况的专业接收设施的州认可。方法。对所有州EMS办事处进行了调查,以确定哪些州使用强制性或模型化的州范围EMS协议,并根据授权协议的过程对这些协议进行表征。该调查还询问哪些州正式承认创伤,STEMI,中风,心脏骤停和烧伤的专业接受机构,以及各州是否对这些专业中心具有强制性或示范性的全州目的地协议。结果。发现38个州具有强制性的或模型化的州范围EMS协议。 21个州在基本生命支持(BLS)或高级生命支持(ALS)级别具有强制性的全州EMS协议,其中16个州的强制性协议涵盖了BLS和ALS护理级别。有17个州在BLS或ALS级别上有州范围内的模型协议,其中14个州的模型协议涵盖了BLS和ALS护理级别。 20个州有单独的护理小儿患者的方案,而18个州在同一方案中结合了儿科和成人护理。一旦确定,用于考虑儿科护理的患者的中位年龄为<14岁(范围<8至<17岁)。三个州的协议使用基于长度的剂量工具的儿童身高,作为使用其儿童协议确定要护理的儿童患者的阈值。州对具有特殊医疗需求的EMS患者的接收中心的认可程度各不相同:46个公认的创伤中心,25个公认的烧伤中心,22个公认的中风中心,11个能够对ST抬高型心肌梗死进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的公认中心,以及3个公认的可用于ST抬高心肌梗死的中心心脏骤停幸存的患者。结论。全州范围内的授权EMS治疗协议存在于21个州,而17个州提供了可选的模型协议指南。这些协议的格式和特征以及对时间敏感疾病患者的专业接收中心的认可都存在很大差异。

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