Objectives: To establish consensus on the most important clinical decisions paramedics make during high-acuity emergency calls and to visualize these decisions on a process map of an emergency call. A secondary objective was to measure agreement among paramedics and medical director panel members. Methods: A multiround online survey of Canadian paramedics and medical directors. In round 1, participants listed important clinical decisions. In round 2, participants scored each decision in terms of its importance for patient outcome and safety. In rounds 3 and 4, participants could revise their scores. Consensus was defined a priori: 80% or more agreement that a decision was important or extremely important. The included decisions were plotted on a process map of a typical emergency call. Results: The panel response rates were as follows: round 1, 96%; round 2, 92%; round 3, 83%; and round 4, 96%. Consensus was reached on 42 decisions, grouped into six categories: airway management (n 5 13); assessment (n 5 3); cardiac management (n 5 7); drug administration (n 5 9); scene management (n 5 4); and general treatment (n 5 6). The on-scene treatment phase of the process map was found to have the highest decision density. Paramedics and medical directors differed in their scoring in 5 of 42 decisions (p , 0.05 or less). Conclusion: Consensus was reached among paramedics and medical directors on 42 decisions important for clinical outcome and patient safety. These decisions were visualized on a process map of an emergency call to learn more about where decision density exists during a typical call.
RÉ SUMÉObjectifs : É tablir un consensus sur les dé cisions cliniques les plus importantes que les ambulanciers ont à prendre lors des appels d'urgence de gravité é levé e et illustrer ces dé cisions sur un diagramme du processus de l'appel d'urgence. Un objectif secondaire é tait de mesurer l'accord entre les ambulanciers et les membres du groupe de directeurs mé dicaux. Mé thodes : Sondage é chelonné , effectué en ligne par les ambulanciers et directeurs mé dicaux canadiens. Pendant le cycle 1, les participants ont é tabli la liste des dé cisions cliniques importantes. Au cycle 2, les participants ont accordé une note à chaque dé cision en ce qui a trait à son importance pour les ré sultats et la sé curité du patient. Aux cycles 3 et 4, les participants pouvaient ré viser leurs notes. Le consensus a é té dé fini a priori: l'accord à 80% ou plus sur le fait qu'une dé cision é tait importante ou extrê mement importante. Les dé cisions incluses é taient inscrites sur le diagramme du processus d'un appel d'urgence typique. Ré sultats : Les taux de ré ponse du panel é taient les suivantes: cycle 1, 96%; cycle 2, 92%; cycle 3, 83%; cycle 4, 96%. Un consensus a é té atteint pour 42 dé cisions, regroupé es en six caté gories: gestion des voies respiratoires (n 5 13); é valuation (n 5 3); gestion cardiaque (n 5 7); administration de mé dicaments (n 5 9); gestion des lieux (n 5 4) et traitement gé né ral (n 5 6). La phase de t...