Gauging U.S. Emergency Medical Services Workers' Willingness to Respond to Pandemic Influenza Using a Threat- and Efficacy-Based Assessment Framework

Emergency Medical Services workers' willingness to report to duty in an influenza pandemic is essential to healthcare system surge amidst a global threat. Application of Witte's Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) has shown utility for revealing influences of perceived threat and efficacy on non-EMS public health providers' willingness to respond in an influenza pandemic. We thus propose using an EPPM-informed assessment of EMS workers' perspectives toward fulfilling their influenza pandemic response roles.We administered an EPPM-informed snapshot survey about attitudes and beliefs toward pandemic influenza response, to a nationally representative, stratified random sample of 1,537 U.S. EMS workers from May-June 2009 (overall response rate: 49%). Of the 586 respondents who met inclusion criteria (currently active EMS providers in primarily EMS response roles), 12% indicated they would not voluntarily report to duty in a pandemic influenza emergency if asked, 7% if required. A majority (52%) indicated their unwillingness to report to work if risk of disease transmission to family existed. Confidence in personal safety at work (OR = 3.3) and a high threat/high efficacy ("concerned and confident") EPPM profile (OR = 4.7) distinguished those who were more likely to voluntarily report to duty. Although 96% of EMS workers indicated that they would probably or definitely report to work if they were guaranteed a pandemic influenza vaccine, only 59% had received an influenza immunization in the preceding 12 months.EMS workers' response willingness gaps pose a substantial challenge to prehospital surge capacity in an influenza pandemic. "Concerned and confident" EMS workers are more than four times as likely to fulfill pandemic influenza response expectations. Confidence in workplace safety is a positively influential modifier of their response willingness. These findings can inform insights into interventions for enhancing EMS workers' willingness to respond in the face of a global infectious disease threat

Early versus Later Rhythm Analysis in Patients with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Background In a departure from the previous strategy of immediate defibrillation, the 2005 resuscitation guidelines from the American Heart Association–International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation suggested that emergency medical service (EMS) personnel could provide 2 minutes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) before the first analysis of cardiac rhythm. We compared the strategy of a brief period of CPR with early analysis of rhythm with the strategy of a longer period of CPR with delayed analysis of rhythm. Methods We conducted a cluster-randomized trial involving adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest at 10 Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium sites in the United States and Canada. Patients in the early-analysis group were assigned to receive 30 to 60 seconds of EMS-administered CPR and those in the later-analysis group were assigned to receive 180 seconds of CPR, before the initial electrocardiographic analysis. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge with satisfactory functional status (a modified Rankin scale score of ≤3, on a scale of 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability). Results We included 9933 patients, of whom 5290 were assigned to early analysis of cardiac rhythm and 4643 to later analysis. A total of 273 patients (5.9%) in the later-analysis group and 310 patients (5.9%) in the early-analysis group met the criteria for the primary outcome, with a cluster-adjusted difference of −0.2 percentage points (95% confidence interval, −1.1 to 0.7; P=0.59). Analyses of the data with adjustment for confounding factors, as well as subgroup analyses, also showed no survival benefit for either study group. Conclusions Among patients who had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, we found no difference in the outcomes with a brief period, as compared with a longer period, of EMS-administered CPR before the first analysis of cardiac rhythm. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ROC PRIMED ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00394706.

A Trial of an Impedance Threshold Device in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Background The impedance threshold device (ITD) is designed to enhance venous return and cardiac output during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by increasing the degree of negative intrathoracic pressure. Previous studies have suggested that the use of an ITD during CPR may improve survival rates after cardiac arrest. Methods We compared the use of an active ITD with that of a sham ITD in patients with out-ofhospital cardiac arrest who underwent standard CPR at 10 sites in the United States and Canada. Patients, investigators, study coordinators, and all care providers were unaware of the treatment assignments. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge with satisfactory function (i.e., a score of ≤3 on the modified Rankin scale, which ranges from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability). Results Of 8718 patients included in the analysis, 4345 were randomly assigned to treatment with a sham ITD and 4373 to treatment with an active device. A total of 260 patients (6.0%) in the sham-ITD group and 254 patients (5.8%) in the active-ITD group met the primary outcome (risk difference adjusted for sequential monitoring, −0.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, −1.1 to 0.8; P=0.71). There were also no significant differences in the secondary outcomes, including rates of return of spontaneous circulation on arrival at the emergency department, survival to hospital admission, and survival to hospital discharge. Conclusions Use of the ITD did not significantly improve survival with satisfactory function among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest receiving standard CPR. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ROC PRIMED ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00394706.

Inter-rater agreement of paramedic rhythm labeling

Study hypothesis:Substantial inter-rater agreement is present in the labeling by paramedics of ventricular fibrillation and asystolic rhythms.Design:Prospective, cross-sectional study.Type of participants:One hundred five practicing paramedics from nonvolunteer agencies who are advanced cardiac life support certified.Methods:Five static cardiac arrest rhythm strips, classified by Cummins' average peak amplitude method, were arranged into five different orders of presentation and placed into five booklets. The paramedics were instructed to label each rhythm ventricular fibrillation or asystole based on rhythm recognition, not on treatment plan.Results:The overall [kappa] value for labeling the five rhythms was .63, indicating a moderate degree of inter-rater agreement. However, as the rhythm's amplitude decreased, the amount of inter-rater agreement also decreased. When the amplitude was approximately 1 mm, agreement was no different than chance; the proportion of paramedics labeling the rhythm ventricular fibrillation was .46 (95% confidence interval, .36, .56). Only a flat line (0 mm) demonstrated perfect inter-rater agreement, with no paramedic labeling the rhythm ventricular fibrillation.Conclusion:Inter-rater agreement of ventricular fibrillation rhythm labeling by paramedics in this emergency medical services system was amplitude dependent. An analysis of ventricular fibrillation rhythm data that does not address the degree of inter-rater agreement of rhythm labeling cannot ensure uniform reporting of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest data.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/30457/1/0000085.pd

Emergency Physicians’ Workstation Design: An Observational Study of Interruptions and Perception of Collaboration During Shift-End Handoffs

Background:Frequent external interruptions and lack of collaboration among team members are known to be common barriers in end-of-shift handoffs between physicians in the emergency department. In spite of being the primary location for this crucial and cognitively demanding task, workstations are not designed to limit barriers and support handoffs.Objective:The purpose of this study is to examine handoff characteristics, actual and perceived interruptions, and perceived collaboration among emergency physicians performing end-of-shift handoffs in physician workstations with varying levels of enclosures—(a) open-plan workstation, (b) enclosed workstation, and (c) semi-open workstation.Method:Handoff and interruption characteristics were captured through in-person observations of 60 handoffs using an iPad-based tool. Additionally, physicians participating in the handoffs responded to a survey pertaining to their perception of interruptions and collaboration with clinicians during each phase. Other organizational and demographic data were obtained from the hospital database, surveys, and observations.Results:Physicians working in the open workstation experienced a significantly higher number of interruptions/hour (18.08 int/hr) as compared to the semi-open (13.62 int/hr) and enclosed workstations (11.41 int/hr). Most physicians perceived that they were interrupted in the semi-open and open workstations. In addition, majority of physicians in the enclosed pod perceived high collaboration with clinicians involved in and present in the workstation during handoff.Conclusion:This correlational study showed positive outcomes experienced by physician working in the enclosed workstation as compared to the open and semi-open workstations