Swedish emergency medical services’ identification of potential candidates for primary healthcare: Retrospective patient record study

Abstract

Objective: To investigate patients who called the emergency medical services (EMS) for primary healthcare (PHC) problems.Design: A retrospective and exploratory patient record study from an EMS perspective, comparing two groups: those who were potential candidates for PHC and those who were not. All data were gathered from EMS and hospital records.Settings: The study was completed at the EMS and five hospital areas in the western region of Sweden.Subjects: The patients (n = 3001) who called the EMS in 2011. Data were missing for 10%.Main outcome measures: The frequency and the clinical characteristics of the patients who called the EMS and were actually potential candidates for PHC.Results: Of a total of 2703 patients, a group of 426 (16%) were assessed as potential candidates for PHC and could thus be treated at a level of care other than the emergency department. Patients who were classified as suitable for PHC were found at all priority levels and within all symptom groups, but were younger and healthier than the other group.Conclusion: Numerous patients seeking help from the EMS do not end up at the most appropriate level in the healthcare system.Implications: In the EMS, guidelines are needed to enable pre-hospital emergency nurses to assess and triage patients to the most appropriate level of healthcare.Key pointsPatients calling the emergency medical services do not always end up at an appropriate level of healthcare.In total, 16% of patients were identified by the Swedish emergency medical services as potential candidates for primary healthcare.These patients were younger and healthier than those needing care at the emergency department.They were found at all priority levels and within all symptom groups.

Dyadic teams and nursing care: A critical incident study of nurses in the emergency medical service

“…This diversity of goals may be the result not only of differing professional views on nursing care, but also of a paradigm shift in the EMS role. The care has changed from providing out-of-hospital urgent and emergency medical treatment, to a care based on assessing the patients multiple needs (Edwards, Bassett, Sinden, & Fothergill, 2014) and less acute conditions (Durant & Fahimi, 2012), in order to define an appropriate level of care (Lederman, Löfvenmark, Djärv, Lindström, & Elmqvist, 2019;Norberg, Wireklint Sundstrom, Christensson, Nystrom, & Herlitz, 2015). Hence, the assessment of the patient may generate several possible solutions, for example nonconveyance with self-care advice or conveyance to primary care services.…”

Prehospital factors associated with an acute life-threatening condition in non-traumatic chest pain patients — A systematic review

“…The vast majority of chest pain patients contacting the EMS today are transported to the emergency department regardless of the seriousness of their condition, despite the fact that a considerable group of patients contacting the EMS due to chest pain have less severe conditions suitable for primary care [9]. It has also been shown that some chest pain patients have an increased risk of serious complications when waiting in crowded emergency departments [10] and would possibly benefit from direct admission to a more appropriate care unit.…”

Ambulance nurses' experiences of deciding a patient does not require ambulance care

“…More than 15% of the patients remain at home after assessment of ambulance staff. They get recommendations for self‐care or to seek care at different level of care than hospitals (Hjälte, Suserud, Herlitz, & Karlberg, ; Norberg, Wireklint Sundström, Christensson, Nyström, & Herlitz, ). Carret, Fassa, and Kawachi () show that resources in the form of alternative care levels are not utilized to a sufficient extent or is not available.…”