Community paramedicine (CP) uses emergency medical services (EMS) providers to help rural communities increase access to primary care and public health services. This study examined goals, activities, and outcomes of 31 rural-serving CP programs through structured interviews of program leaders and document review. Common goals included managing chronic disease (90.3%); and reducing emergency department visits (83.9%), hospital admissions/readmissions (83.9%), and costs (83.9%). Target populations included the chronically ill (90.3%), post-hospital discharge patients (80.6%), and frequent EMS users (64.5%). Community paramedicine programs engaged in bi-directional referrals most often with primary care facilities (67.7%), hospitals (54.8%), and home health (38.7%). Programs provided assessment, testing, preventive care, and post-discharge services. Reported outcomes were promising, but few programs used rigorous evaluation methods. Rural-serving CP programs provided services to shift costs to less expensive settings and provide appropriate care where vulnerable patients live, but more evidence is needed that care is safe, effective, and economical.

Community paramedic roles are expanding internationally, and no review of the literature could be found to guide services in the formation of community paramedicine programmes. For this reason, the aim of this restricted review was to explore and better understand the successes and learnings of community paramedic programmes across five domains being; education requirements, models of delivery, clinical governance and supervision, scope of roles and outcomes. This restricted review was conducted by searching four databases (CENTRAL, ERIC, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Google Scholar) as well as grey literature search from 2001 until 28/12/2021. After screening, 98 articles were included in the narrative synthesis. Most studies were from

Purpose In North America, delegated practice “medical direction” models are often used as a proxy for clinical quality and safety in paramedic services. Other developed countries favor a combination of professional regulatory boards and clinical governance frameworks that feature paramedics taking lead clinician roles. The purpose of this paper is to bring together the evidence for medical direction and clinical governance in paramedic services through the prism of paramedic self-regulation. Design/methodology/approach This narrative synthesis critically examines the long-established North American Emergency Medical Services medical direction model and makes some comparisons with the UK inspired clinical governance approaches that are used to monitor and manage the quality and safety in several other Anglo-American paramedic services. The databases searched were CINAHL and Medline, with Google Scholar used to capture further publications. Findings Synthesis of the peer-reviewed literature found little high quality evidence supporting the effectiveness of medical direction. The literature on clinical governance within paramedic services described a systems approach with shared responsibility for quality and safety. Contemporary paramedic clinical leadership papers in developed countries focus on paramedic professionalization and the self-regulation of paramedics. Originality/value The lack of strong evidence supporting medical direction of the paramedic profession in developed countries challenges the North American model of paramedics practicing as a companion profession to medicine under delegated practice model. This model is inconsistent with the international vision of paramedicine as an autonomous, self-regulated health profession.

No abstract

Implementation of paramedic practitioner models in frontier and remote settings raises challenging policy and practice issues, including changes in scopes of practice, design of education programs, self-regulation of paramedics, and reimbursement.