CHARACTERISTICS OF MIDSIZED URBAN EMS SYSTEMS

被引:37
作者
BRAUN, O
MCCALLION, R
FAZACKERLEY, J
机构
[1] Northern California Center for Prehospital Research and Training, University of California, San Francisco, CA
[2] San Francisco Paramedic Association, San Francisco, CA
[3] University of California Berkeley Graduate School of Public Policy, Berkeley, CA
关键词
emergency medical services systems;
D O I
10.1016/S0196-0644(05)82186-9
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Emergency medical services (EMS) systems in 25 midsized cities (population, 400,000 to 900,000) are described. Information describing EMS system configuration and performance was collected by written and telephone surveys with follow-ups. Responding cities provide either one- or two-tier systems. In a one-tier system, an advanced life support (ALS) unit responds to and transports all patients who use 911 to activate the system. Three types of two-tier systems are identified. In system A, ALS units respond to all calls. Once on scene, an ALS unit can turn a patient over to a basic life support (BLS) unit for transport. In system B, ALS units do not respond to all calls; BLS units may be sent for noncritical calls. In system C, a nontransport ALS unit is dispatched with a transporting BLS unit. For ALS calls, ALS personnel join BLS personnel for transport. Overall, cities staff an average of one ambulance per 51,223 population. One-tier systems average one ambulance per 53,291 compared with two-tier systems, which average one ambulance per 47,546. In the two-tiered system B, the average ALS unit serves 118,956 population. In the 60% of cities that use a one-tier system, one ALS unit serves 58,336 (P < .0005). Overall, the code 3 response time for all cities is an average of 6.6 minutes. The average response time of two-tier systems is 5.9 minutes versus 7.0 minutes for one-tier systems (.05 < P < .1). These data suggest that the two-tiered system B allows for a given number of ALS units to serve a much larger population while maintaining a rapid code 3 response time. © 1990 American College of Emergency Physicians.
引用
收藏
页码:536 / 546
页数:11
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Adgey, Scott, Allen, Et al., Management of VF outside hospital, Lancet, 1, pp. 1169-1171, (1969)
  • [2] Pantridge, Geddes, Mobile intensive-care unit in the management of myocardial infarction, The Lancet, pp. 271-275, (1967)
  • [3] Cobb, Baum, Alvarez, Et al., Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest Use of electrophysiologic testing in the prediction of long-term outcome, New England Journal of Medicine, 318, pp. 19-24, (1988)
  • [4] Eisenberg, Bergner, Hallstrom, Paramedic programs and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: 1. Factors associated with successful resuscitation, Am J Public Health, 69, pp. 30-38, (1979)
  • [5] Liberthson, Nagel, Hirschman, Et al., Prehospital ventricular defibrillation, N Engl J Med, 291, pp. 317-321, (1974)
  • [6] Lewis, Lanese, Stang, Et al., Reduction of mortality from prehospital myocardial infarction by prudent patient activation of mobile coronary care system, Am Heart J, 103, pp. 123-130, (1982)
  • [7] Dean, Haug, Hawker, Effect of mobile paramedic units on outcome in patients with myocardial infarction, Ann Emerg Med, 17, pp. 1034-1041, (1988)
  • [8] Shuster, Chong, Pharmacologic intervention in prehospital care: A critical appraisal, Ann Emerg Med, 18, pp. 192-196, (1989)
  • [9] Reines, Bartlett, Chudy, Et al., Is advanced life support appropriate for victims of motor vehicle accidents: The South Carolina Highway Trauma Project, J Trauma, 28, pp. 563-570, (1988)
  • [10] Potter, Goldstein, Fung, Et al., A controlled trial of prehospital advanced life support in trauma, Ann Emerg Med, 17, pp. 582-588, (1988)