Paramedic versus emergency physician emergency medical service: role of the anaesthesiologist and the European versus the Anglo-American concept.

Department of Anaesthesiology, Emergency and Intensive Care Medicine, Georg-August University, Goettingen, Germany.
Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology (Impact Factor: 2.53). 05/2008; 21(2):222-7. DOI: 10.1097/ACO.0b013e3282f5f4f7
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Much controversy exists about who can provide the best medical care for critically ill patients in the prehospital setting. The Anglo-American concept is on the whole to provide well trained paramedics to fulfil this task, whereas in some European countries emergency medical service physicians, particularly anaesthesiologists, are responsible for the safety of these patients.
Currently there are no convincing level I studies showing that an emergency physician-based emergency medical service leads to a decrease in overall mortality or morbidity of prehospital treated patients, but many methodical, legal and ethical issues make such studies difficult. Looking at specific aspects of prehospital care, differences in short-term survival and outcome have been reported when patients require cardiopulmonary resuscitation, advanced airway management or other invasive procedures, well directed fluid management and pharmacotherapy as well as fast diagnostic-based decisions.
Evidence suggests that some critically ill patients benefit from the care provided by an emergency physician-based emergency medical service, but further studies are needed to identify the characteristics and early recognition of these patients.


Available from: Sebastian Russo, May 05, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Airway management is essential in critically ill or injured patients. In a "can't intubate, can't oxygenate" scenario, an emergency surgical airway (ESA), similar to a cricothyroidotomy, is the final step in airway management. This procedure is infrequently performed in the prehospital or clinical setting. The incidence of ESA may differ between physician- and non-physician-staffed emergency medical services (EMS). We examined the indications and results of ESA procedures among our physician-staffed EMS compared with non-physician-staffed services. Data for all forms of airway management were obtained from our EMS providers and analyzed and compared with data from non-physician-staffed EMS found in the literature. Among 1871 patients requiring a secured airway, the incidence of a surgical airway was 1.6% (n=30). Fourteen patients received a primary ESA. In 16 patients, a secondary ESA was required after failed endotracheal intubation. The total prehospital ESA tracheal access success rate was 96.7%. The incidence of ESA in our patient population was low compared with those reported in the literature from non-physician-staffed EMS. Advanced intubation skills might be a contributing factor, thus reducing the number of ESAs required. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Injury 11/2014; 56. DOI:10.1016/j.injury.2014.11.024 · 2.46 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Together with the ambulances staffed with emergency medical technicians (EMTs), general practitioners (GPs) on call are the primary resources for handling emergencies outside hospitals in Norway. The benefit of the GP accompanying the ambulance to pre-hospital calls is a matter of controversy in Norway. The purpose of the present study was to gain better insight into the EMT¿s experiences with the role of the GPs in the care for critically ill patients in the pre-hospital setting.Methods We conducted four focus group interviews with EMTs at four different ambulance stations in Norway. Three of the stations were located at least 2 hours driving distance from the nearest hospital. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using systematic text condensation.ResultsThe EMTs described increasing confidence in emergency medicine during the last few years. However, they felt the need for GP participation in the ambulance when responding to a critically ill patient. The presence of GPs made the EMTs feel more confident, especially in unclear and difficult cases that did not fit into EMT guidelines. The main contributions of the GPs were described as diagnosis and decision-making. Bringing the physician to the patient shortened transportation time to the hospital and important medication could be started earlier. Several examples of sub-optimal treatment in the absence of the GP were given. The EMTs described discomfort with GPs not responding to the calls. They also experienced GPs responding to calls that did not function in the pre-hospital emergency setting. The EMTs reported a need for professional requirements for GPs taking part in out-of-hours work and mandatory interdisciplinary training on a regular basis.ConclusionsEMTs want GPs to be present in challenging pre-hospital emergency settings. The presence of GPs is perceived as improving patient care. However, professional requirements are needed for GPs taking part in out-of-hours work, and the informants suggested a formalized area for training between EMTs and GPs on call.
    Scandinavian Journal of Trauma Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine 08/2014; 22(1):47. DOI:10.1186/s13049-014-0047-1 · 1.93 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Anaesthesia 11/2008; 63(11). DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05714.x · 3.85 Impact Factor