IntroductionEmergency Medical Service (EMS) personnel often respond to dangerous scenes and encounter hostile individuals without police support. No recent data describes the frequency of physical or verbal assaults or which providers have increased fear for their safety. This information may help to guide interventions to improve safety. Our objective was to describe self-reported abuse and perceptions of safety and to determine if there are differences between gender, shift, and years of experience in a busy two-tiered, third service urban EMS system.MethodsThis was a secondary analysis of an anonymous, cross-sectional work safety survey of EMS providers. This survey included demographics, years of experience, history of verbal and physical assault, safety behavior following an assault and perceptions of safety. Descriptive statistics were generated.ResultsEighty-nine percent (196/221) of EMS providers completed the survey. Most were male (72%) and between the ages of 25 and 50 years (66%). The majority of providers had worked in this service for more than five years (54%), and many for more than ten years (37%). Verbal assaults were reported by 88% (172/196, 95% CI [82.4%–91.6%]). Although 80% (156/196, 95% CI [73.4%–84.6%]) reported physical assaults, only 40% (62/156, 95% CI [32.4%–47.6%]) sought medical care and 49% (76/156, 95% CI [41%–56.6%]) reported the assault to police. The proportion of those who sought medical care and reported the assault to the police was not the same across years of experience (p<0.0001). Fear for personal safety was reported by 68% (134/196, 95% CI [61.6%–74.5%]). There was no statistical difference in assault by gender; however, females feared more for their safety compared to men (38/50, 76% v 96/142, 68%, p=0.02). The proportion of those who have ever been physically assaulted was not the same across shift worked (p=0.01).ConclusionThe majority of EMS providers surveyed reported an assault and certain groups had a higher rate of assault. Most assaults were not reported to the police and medical care was infrequently sought following an event. The majority of providers reported feeling fear for their personal safety. Further research into enhancing safety mechanisms is needed.
IntroductionPennsylvania, among other states, includes surgical airway management, or cricothyrotomy, within the paramedic scope of practice. However, there is scant literature that evaluates paramedic perception of clinical competency in cricothyrotomy. The goal of this project is to assess clinical exposure, education and self-perceived competency of ground paramedics in cricothyrotomy.MethodsEighty-six paramedics employed by four ground emergency medical services agencies completed a 22-question written survey that assessed surgical airway attempts, training, skills verification, and perceptions about procedural competency. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate responses.ResultsOnly 20% (17/86, 95% CI [11–28%]) of paramedics had attempted cricothyrotomy, most (13/17 or 76%, 95% CI [53–90%]) of whom had greater than 10 years experience. Most subjects (63/86 or 73%, 95% CI [64–82%]) did not reply that they are well-trained to perform cricothyrotomy and less than half (34/86 or 40%, 95% CI [30–50%]) felt they could correctly perform cricothyrotomy on their first attempt. Among subjects with five or more years of experience, 39/70 (56%, 95% CI [44–68%]) reported 0–1 hours per year of practical cricothyrotomy training within the last five years. Half of the subjects who were able to recall (40/80, 50% 95% CI [39–61%]) reported having proficiency verification for cricothyrotomy within the past five years.ConclusionParamedics surveyed indicated that cricothyrotomy is rarely performed, even among those with years of experience. Many paramedics felt that their training in this area is inadequate and did not feel confident to perform the procedure. Further study to determine whether to modify paramedic scope of practice and/or to develop improved educational and testing methods is warranted.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.