首页> 外文期刊>Prehospital emergency care >IMPACT OF A NOVEL COLLABORATIVE LONG-TERM CARE - EMS MODEL: A BEFORE-AND-AFTER COHORT ANALYSIS OF AN EXTENDED CARE PARAMEDIC PROGRAM
【24h】

IMPACT OF A NOVEL COLLABORATIVE LONG-TERM CARE - EMS MODEL: A BEFORE-AND-AFTER COHORT ANALYSIS OF AN EXTENDED CARE PARAMEDIC PROGRAM

机译:新型协作式长期护理-EMS模型的影响:扩展护理古籍计划的前后队列分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

To compare system and clinical outcomes before and after an extended care paramedic (ECP) program was implemented to better address the emergency needs of long-term care (LTC) residents. Data were collected from emergency medical services (EMS), hospital, and ten LTC facility charts for two five-month time periods, before and after ECP implementation. Outcomes include: number of EMS patients transported to emergency department (ED) and several clinical, safety, and system secondary outcomes. Statistics included descriptive, chi-squared, t-tests, and ANOVA; = <0.05. 413 cases were included (before: n = 136, 33%; after n = 277, 67%). Median patient age was 85years (IQR 77-91years) and 292/413 (70.7%) were female. The number of transports to ED before implementation was 129/136 (94.9%), with 147/224 (65.6%) after, p < 0.001. In the after period, fewer patients seen by ECP were transported: 58/128 (45.3%) vs. 89/96 (92.7%) of those not seen by ECP, p < 0.001. Hospital admissions were similar between phases: 39/120 (32.5%) vs. 56/213 (29.4%), p = NS, but in the after phase, fewer ECP patients were admitted vs. non-ECP: 21/125 (16.8%) vs. 35/88 (39.8%), p < 0.001. Mean EMS call time (dispatch to arrive ED or clear scene) was shorter before than after: 25 minutes vs. 57 minutes, p < 0.001. In the after period, calls with ECP were longer than without ECP: 1hour, 35 minutes vs. 30 minutes, p < 0.001. The mean patient ED length-of-stay was similar before and after: 7hours, 29 minutes compared to 8hours, 11 minutes; p = NS. In the after phase, ED length-of-stay was somewhat shorter with ECPs vs. no ECPs: 7hours, 5 minutes vs. 9hours, p = NS. There were zero relapses after no-transport in the before phase and three relapses from 77 calls not transported in the after phase (3/77, 3.9%); two involved ECP (2/70, 2.8%). Reductions were observed in the number of LTC patients transported to the ED when the ECP program was introduced, with fewer patients admitted to the hospital. EMS calls take longer with ECP involved. The addition of ECP to the LTC model of care appears to be beneficial and safe, with few relapse calls identified.
机译:为了比较实施扩展护理护理人员(ECP)计划前后的系统和临床结果,以更好地解决长期护理(LTC)居民的紧急需求。在实施ECP之前和之后的两个五个月时间段内,从紧急医疗服务(EMS),医院和十个LTC设施图收集了数据。结果包括:转移到急诊室(ED)的EMS患者数量,以及一些临床,安全和系统二级结果。统计数据包括描述性,卡方,t检验和方差分析。 = <0.05。包括413例(之前:n = 136,33%;之后n = 277,67%)。患者中位年龄为85岁(IQR 77-91岁),女性为292/413(70.7%)。在实施之前,到ED的传输数量为129/136(94.9%),之后为147/224(65.6%),p <0.001。在随后的时期中,经ECP诊治的患者减少了:58/128(45.3%)与经ECP诊治的患者的89/96(92.7%),p <0.001。在两个阶段之间的入院率相似:39/120(32.5%)与56/213(29.4%),p = NS,但在随后的阶段,与非ECP相比,入院的ECP患者更少:21/125(16.8) %)vs.35 / 88(39.8%),p <0.001。之前的平均EMS呼叫时间(到达ED或到达清晰场景的调度)比之后短:25分钟vs. 57分钟,p <0.001。在此之后的期间,使用ECP的呼叫要比不使用ECP的呼叫长:1小时35分钟对30分钟,p <0.001。 ED的平均住院时间在前后比较相似:7小时29分钟,而8小时11分钟; p = NS。在随后的阶段中,使用ECP的ED住院时间短于未使用ECP的患者:7小时5分钟vs. 9小时,p = NS。前阶段无传输后的零复发和后阶段未传输的77个呼叫的3次复发(3 / 77,3.9%);其中两个涉及ECP(2 / 70,2.8%)。引入ECP计划后,被运送到急诊室的LTC患者数量有所减少,住院患者减少了。涉及ECP的EMS呼叫花费的时间更长。在LTC护理模式中增加ECP似乎是有益且安全的,很少发现复发病例。

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