Variation in the delivery of telephone advice by emergency medical services: a qualitative study in three services.
health services research
prehospital care
qualitative research
Journal
BMJ quality & safety
ISSN: 2044-5423
Titre abrégé: BMJ Qual Saf
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101546984
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2019
07 2019
Historique:
received:
11
05
2018
revised:
15
10
2018
accepted:
03
11
2018
pubmed:
14
1
2019
medline:
9
4
2020
entrez:
14
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
An emergency ambulance is not always the appropriate response for emergency medical service patients. Telephone advice aims to resolve low acuity calls over the phone, without sending an ambulance. In England, variation in rates of telephone advice and patient recontact between services raises concerns about inequities in care. To understand this variation, this study aimed to explore operational factors influencing the provision of telephone advice. This is a multimethod qualitative study in three emergency medical services in England with different rates of telephone advice and recontact. Non-participant observation (120 hours) involved 20 call handlers and 27 clinicians (eg, paramedics). Interviews were conducted with call handlers, clinicians and clinician managers (n=20). Services varied in their views of the role of telephone advice, selection of their workforce, tasks clinicians were expected and permitted to do, and access to non-ambulance responses. Telephone advice was viewed either as an acceptable approach to managing demand or a way of managing risk. The workforce could be selected for their expertise or their inability to work 'on-the-road'. Some services permitted proactive identification of calls for a lower priority response and provided access to a wider range of response options. The findings aligned with telephone advice rates for each service, particularly explaining why one service had lower rates. Some of the variation observed can be explained by operational differences between services and some of it by access to alternative response options in the wider urgent and emergency care system. The findings indicate scope for greater consistency in the delivery of telephone advice to ensure the widest range of options to meet the needs of different populations, regardless of geographical location.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
An emergency ambulance is not always the appropriate response for emergency medical service patients. Telephone advice aims to resolve low acuity calls over the phone, without sending an ambulance. In England, variation in rates of telephone advice and patient recontact between services raises concerns about inequities in care. To understand this variation, this study aimed to explore operational factors influencing the provision of telephone advice.
METHODS
This is a multimethod qualitative study in three emergency medical services in England with different rates of telephone advice and recontact. Non-participant observation (120 hours) involved 20 call handlers and 27 clinicians (eg, paramedics). Interviews were conducted with call handlers, clinicians and clinician managers (n=20).
RESULTS
Services varied in their views of the role of telephone advice, selection of their workforce, tasks clinicians were expected and permitted to do, and access to non-ambulance responses. Telephone advice was viewed either as an acceptable approach to managing demand or a way of managing risk. The workforce could be selected for their expertise or their inability to work 'on-the-road'. Some services permitted proactive identification of calls for a lower priority response and provided access to a wider range of response options. The findings aligned with telephone advice rates for each service, particularly explaining why one service had lower rates.
CONCLUSION
Some of the variation observed can be explained by operational differences between services and some of it by access to alternative response options in the wider urgent and emergency care system. The findings indicate scope for greater consistency in the delivery of telephone advice to ensure the widest range of options to meet the needs of different populations, regardless of geographical location.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30636202
pii: bmjqs-2018-008330
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008330
pmc: PMC6593649
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
556-563Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : HS&DR/13/54/75
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2001 Apr-Jun;5(2):174-80
pubmed: 11339729
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Mar 23;13:111
pubmed: 23522021
Oman Med J. 2010 Oct;25(4):320-3
pubmed: 22043368
BMJ Open. 2017 Aug 3;7(8):e016832
pubmed: 28775192
Palliat Med. 2012 Dec;26(8):1048-54
pubmed: 22179595
Emerg Med J. 2015 Jun;32(6):486-92
pubmed: 24788598
BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Dec;26(12):1015-1021
pubmed: 28971880
Int J Nurs Stud. 2002 Nov;39(8):857-66
pubmed: 12379303
Med J Aust. 2011 Jun 6;194(11):574-8
pubmed: 21644869
Aust Health Rev. 2016 Sep;40(4):378-384
pubmed: 26568037
Acad Emerg Med. 2017 Sep;24(9):1137-1149
pubmed: 28493626