The impact of COVID-19 on the mental health and well-being of ambulance care professionals: A rapid review

The COVID-19 pandemic has a significant impact on the health and well-being of all healthcare professionals. However, for ambulance care professionals it is unknown on which health outcomes the impact of COVID-19 is measured, and what the actual impact on these health outcomes is. Therefore, the aim of this study was to gain insight in a) which type of health outcomes were measured in relation to the impact of COVID-19 among ambulance care professionals, and b) to determine the actual impact on these outcomes. A rapid review was performed in PubMed (including MEDLINE) and APA PsycInfo (EBSCO). All types of study designs on health and well-being of ambulance care professionals were included. Selection on title an abstract was performed by pairs of two reviewers. Full text selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by one reviewer, with a check by a second independent reviewer. The systematic searches identified 3906 unique hits, seven articles meeting selection criteria were included. Six studies quantitatively measured distress (36,0%) and PTSD (18.5%-30.9%), anxiety (14.2%-65.6%), depression (12.4%-15.3%), insomnia (60.9%), fear of infection and transmission of infection (41%-68%), and psychological burden (49.4%-92.2%). These studies used a variety of instruments, ranging from internationally validated instruments to self-developed and unvalidated questionnaires. One study qualitatively explored coping with COVID-19 by ambulance care professionals and reported that ambulance care professionals use five different strategies to cope with the impact of COVID-19. There is limited attention for the health and well-being of ambulance care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although the included number of studies and included outcomes are too limited to draw strong conclusions, our results indicate higher rates of distress, PTSD and insomnia compared to the pre-COVID-19 era. Our results urge the need to investigate the health and well-being of ambulance care professionals during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.publishedVersio

Pain Management in the Emergency Chain: The Use and Effectiveness of Pain Management in Patients With Acute Musculoskeletal Pain

Objective While acute musculoskeletal pain is a frequent complaint in emergency care, its management is often neglected, placing patients at risk for insufficient pain relief. Our aim is to investigate how often pain management is provided in the prehospital phase and emergency department (ED) and how this affects pain relief. A secondary goal is to identify prognostic factors for clinically relevant pain relief. Design This prospective study (PROTACT) includes 697 patients admitted to ED with musculoskeletal extremity injury. Data regarding pain, injury, and pain management were collected using questionnaires and registries. Results Although 39.9% of the patients used analgesics in the prehospital phase, most patients arrived at the ED with severe pain. Despite the high pain prevalence in the ED, only 35.7% of the patients received analgesics and 12.5% received adequate analgesic pain management. More than two-third of the patients still had moderate to severe pain at discharge. Clinically relevant pain relief was achieved in only 19.7% of the patients. Pain relief in the ED was higher in patients who received analgesics compared with those who did not. Besides analgesics, the type of injury and pain intensity on admission were associated with pain relief. Conclusions There is still room for improvement of musculoskeletal pain management in the chain of emergency care. A high percentage of patients were discharged with unacceptable pain levels. The use of multimodal pain management or the implementation of a pain management protocol might be useful methods to optimize pain relief. Additional research in these areas is neede

Risk stratification tools for patients with syncope in emergency medical services and emergency departments: a scoping review

Abstract Background Patients with a syncope constitute a challenge for risk stratification in (prehospital) emergency care. Professionals in EMS and ED need to differentiate the high-risk from the low-risk syncope patient, with limited time and resources. Clinical decision rules (CDRs) are designed to support professionals in risk stratification and clinical decision-making. Current CDRs seem unable to meet the standards to be used in the chain of emergency care. However, the need for a structured approach for syncope patients remains. We aimed to generate a broad overview of the available risk stratification tools and identify key elements, scoring systems and measurement properties of these tools. Methods We performed a scoping review with a literature search in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science from January 2010 to May 2022. Study selection was done by two researchers independently and was supervised by a third researcher. Data extraction was performed through a data extraction form, and data were summarised through descriptive synthesis. A quality assessment of included studies was performed using a generic quality assessment tool for quantitative research and the AMSTAR-2 for systematic reviews. Results The literature search identified 5385 unique studies; 38 were included in the review. We discovered 19 risk stratification tools, one of which was established in EMS patient care. One-third of risk stratification tools have been validated. Two main approaches for the application of the tools were identified. Elements of the tools were categorised in history taking, physical examination, electrocardiogram, additional examinations and other variables. Evaluation of measurement properties showed that negative and positive predictive value was used in half of the studies to assess the accuracy of tools. Conclusion A total of 19 risk stratification tools for syncope patients were identified. They were primarily established in ED patient care; most are not validated properly. Key elements in the risk stratification related to a potential cardiac problem as cause for the syncope. These insights provide directions for the key elements of a risk stratification tool and for a more advanced process to validate risk stratification tools

A nurse-initiated pain protocol in the ED improves pain treatment in patients with acute musculoskeletal pain

While acute musculoskeletal pain is a frequent complaint, its management is often neglected. An implementation of a nurse-initiated pain protocol based on the algorithm of a Dutch pain management guideline in the emergency department might improve this. A pre–post intervention study was performed as part of the prospective PROTACT follow-up study. During the pre- (15 months, n = 504) and post-period (6 months, n = 156) patients' self-reported pain intensity and pain treatment were registered. Analgesic provision in patients with moderate to severe pain (NRS ≥4) improved from 46.8% to 68.0%. Over 10% of the patients refused analgesics, resulting into an actual analgesic administration increase from 36.3% to 46.1%. Median time to analgesic decreased from 10 to 7 min (P < 0.05), whereas time to opioids decreased from 37 to 15 min (P < 0.01). Mean pain relief significantly increased to 1.56 NRS-points, in patients who received analgesic treatment even up to 2.02 points. The protocol appeared to lead to an increase in analgesic administration, shorter time to analgesics and a higher clinically relevant pain relief. Despite improvements, suffering moderate to severe pain at ED discharge was still common. Protocol adherence needs to be studied in order to optimize pain management

Quality included quantitative studies.

The COVID-19 pandemic has a significant impact on the health and well-being of all healthcare professionals. However, for ambulance care professionals it is unknown on which health outcomes the impact of COVID-19 is measured, and what the actual impact on these health outcomes is. Therefore, the aim of this study was to gain insight in a) which type of health outcomes were measured in relation to the impact of COVID-19 among ambulance care professionals, and b) to determine the actual impact on these outcomes. A rapid review was performed in PubMed (including MEDLINE) and APA PsycInfo (EBSCO). All types of study designs on health and well-being of ambulance care professionals were included. Selection on title an abstract was performed by pairs of two reviewers. Full text selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by one reviewer, with a check by a second independent reviewer. The systematic searches identified 3906 unique hits, seven articles meeting selection criteria were included. Six studies quantitatively measured distress (36,0%) and PTSD (18.5%-30.9%), anxiety (14.2%-65.6%), depression (12.4%-15.3%), insomnia (60.9%), fear of infection and transmission of infection (41%-68%), and psychological burden (49.4%-92.2%). These studies used a variety of instruments, ranging from internationally validated instruments to self-developed and unvalidated questionnaires. One study qualitatively explored coping with COVID-19 by ambulance care professionals and reported that ambulance care professionals use five different strategies to cope with the impact of COVID-19. There is limited attention for the health and well-being of ambulance care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although the included number of studies and included outcomes are too limited to draw strong conclusions, our results indicate higher rates of distress, PTSD and insomnia compared to the pre-COVID-19 era. Our results urge the need to investigate the health and well-being of ambulance care professionals during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.</div

Quality included qualitative study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has a significant impact on the health and well-being of all healthcare professionals. However, for ambulance care professionals it is unknown on which health outcomes the impact of COVID-19 is measured, and what the actual impact on these health outcomes is. Therefore, the aim of this study was to gain insight in a) which type of health outcomes were measured in relation to the impact of COVID-19 among ambulance care professionals, and b) to determine the actual impact on these outcomes. A rapid review was performed in PubMed (including MEDLINE) and APA PsycInfo (EBSCO). All types of study designs on health and well-being of ambulance care professionals were included. Selection on title an abstract was performed by pairs of two reviewers. Full text selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by one reviewer, with a check by a second independent reviewer. The systematic searches identified 3906 unique hits, seven articles meeting selection criteria were included. Six studies quantitatively measured distress (36,0%) and PTSD (18.5%-30.9%), anxiety (14.2%-65.6%), depression (12.4%-15.3%), insomnia (60.9%), fear of infection and transmission of infection (41%-68%), and psychological burden (49.4%-92.2%). These studies used a variety of instruments, ranging from internationally validated instruments to self-developed and unvalidated questionnaires. One study qualitatively explored coping with COVID-19 by ambulance care professionals and reported that ambulance care professionals use five different strategies to cope with the impact of COVID-19. There is limited attention for the health and well-being of ambulance care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although the included number of studies and included outcomes are too limited to draw strong conclusions, our results indicate higher rates of distress, PTSD and insomnia compared to the pre-COVID-19 era. Our results urge the need to investigate the health and well-being of ambulance care professionals during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.</div

Additional file 1 of Patient factors associated with conveyance decision-making by Emergency Medical Services professionals in patients with a syncope: a cross-sectional factorial survey design

Supplementary Material