Limitations in Prehospital Communication Between Trauma Helicopter, Ambulance Services, and Dispatch Centers

Annelieke Maria Karien Harmsen, Georgios Giannakopoulos, Gaby Franschman, Herman Christiaans, Frank Bloemers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background Prehospital communication with Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is carried out in hectic situations. Proper communication among all medical personal is required to enhance collaboration, to provide the best care and enable shared situational awareness. Objective The objective of this article was to give insight into current Dutch prehospital emergency care communication among all EMS and evaluate the usage of a new physician staffed helicopter EMS (P-HEMS) cancellation model. Methods Trauma-related P-HEMS dispatches between November 1, 2014 and May 31, 2015 for the Lifeliner 1 were included; a random sample of 100 dispatches was generated. Tape recordings on all verbal prehospital communication between the dispatch center, EMS, and P-HEMS were transcribed and analyzed. Qualitative content analysis was performed, using open coding to code key messages. Results Ninety-two tape recordings were analyzed. The most frequent reason for P-HEMS dispatch was suspicion of brain injury (24%). The cancellation model was followed in 66%, overruled in 9%, and not applicable in 25%. The main reason for not adhering to the model was hemodynamic stability. In 5% of P-HEMS dispatches, a complete ABCD (airway, breathing, circulation, disability) methodology was used for handover, in 9% a complete Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation technique, in 2% a complete Mechanism-Injuries-Signs-Treatment method was used. The other handovers were incomplete. Conclusions Prehospital handover between EMS on-scene and P-HEMS often entails insufficient information. The cancellation model for P-HEMS is frequently used and promotes adequate information transfer. To increase joined decision-making, more patient and situational information needs to be handed over. Standardization of prehospital trauma handovers will facilitate this and improve trauma patient's outcome.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)504-512
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Emergency Medicine
Volume52
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2017

Cite this

Harmsen, Annelieke Maria Karien ; Giannakopoulos, Georgios ; Franschman, Gaby ; Christiaans, Herman ; Bloemers, Frank. / Limitations in Prehospital Communication Between Trauma Helicopter, Ambulance Services, and Dispatch Centers. In: Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2017 ; Vol. 52, No. 4. pp. 504-512.
@article{bce22bad6be943068956596b03e6092b,
title = "Limitations in Prehospital Communication Between Trauma Helicopter, Ambulance Services, and Dispatch Centers",
abstract = "Background Prehospital communication with Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is carried out in hectic situations. Proper communication among all medical personal is required to enhance collaboration, to provide the best care and enable shared situational awareness. Objective The objective of this article was to give insight into current Dutch prehospital emergency care communication among all EMS and evaluate the usage of a new physician staffed helicopter EMS (P-HEMS) cancellation model. Methods Trauma-related P-HEMS dispatches between November 1, 2014 and May 31, 2015 for the Lifeliner 1 were included; a random sample of 100 dispatches was generated. Tape recordings on all verbal prehospital communication between the dispatch center, EMS, and P-HEMS were transcribed and analyzed. Qualitative content analysis was performed, using open coding to code key messages. Results Ninety-two tape recordings were analyzed. The most frequent reason for P-HEMS dispatch was suspicion of brain injury (24{\%}). The cancellation model was followed in 66{\%}, overruled in 9{\%}, and not applicable in 25{\%}. The main reason for not adhering to the model was hemodynamic stability. In 5{\%} of P-HEMS dispatches, a complete ABCD (airway, breathing, circulation, disability) methodology was used for handover, in 9{\%} a complete Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation technique, in 2{\%} a complete Mechanism-Injuries-Signs-Treatment method was used. The other handovers were incomplete. Conclusions Prehospital handover between EMS on-scene and P-HEMS often entails insufficient information. The cancellation model for P-HEMS is frequently used and promotes adequate information transfer. To increase joined decision-making, more patient and situational information needs to be handed over. Standardization of prehospital trauma handovers will facilitate this and improve trauma patient's outcome.",
keywords = "ambulances, communication, Emergency Medical Services, helicopter, prehospital, trauma",
author = "Harmsen, {Annelieke Maria Karien} and Georgios Giannakopoulos and Gaby Franschman and Herman Christiaans and Frank Bloemers",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jemermed.2016.11.010",
language = "English",
volume = "52",
pages = "504--512",
journal = "Journal of Emergency Medicine",
issn = "0736-4679",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "4",

}

Limitations in Prehospital Communication Between Trauma Helicopter, Ambulance Services, and Dispatch Centers. / Harmsen, Annelieke Maria Karien; Giannakopoulos, Georgios; Franschman, Gaby; Christiaans, Herman; Bloemers, Frank.

In: Journal of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 52, No. 4, 01.04.2017, p. 504-512.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Limitations in Prehospital Communication Between Trauma Helicopter, Ambulance Services, and Dispatch Centers

AU - Harmsen, Annelieke Maria Karien

AU - Giannakopoulos, Georgios

AU - Franschman, Gaby

AU - Christiaans, Herman

AU - Bloemers, Frank

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - Background Prehospital communication with Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is carried out in hectic situations. Proper communication among all medical personal is required to enhance collaboration, to provide the best care and enable shared situational awareness. Objective The objective of this article was to give insight into current Dutch prehospital emergency care communication among all EMS and evaluate the usage of a new physician staffed helicopter EMS (P-HEMS) cancellation model. Methods Trauma-related P-HEMS dispatches between November 1, 2014 and May 31, 2015 for the Lifeliner 1 were included; a random sample of 100 dispatches was generated. Tape recordings on all verbal prehospital communication between the dispatch center, EMS, and P-HEMS were transcribed and analyzed. Qualitative content analysis was performed, using open coding to code key messages. Results Ninety-two tape recordings were analyzed. The most frequent reason for P-HEMS dispatch was suspicion of brain injury (24%). The cancellation model was followed in 66%, overruled in 9%, and not applicable in 25%. The main reason for not adhering to the model was hemodynamic stability. In 5% of P-HEMS dispatches, a complete ABCD (airway, breathing, circulation, disability) methodology was used for handover, in 9% a complete Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation technique, in 2% a complete Mechanism-Injuries-Signs-Treatment method was used. The other handovers were incomplete. Conclusions Prehospital handover between EMS on-scene and P-HEMS often entails insufficient information. The cancellation model for P-HEMS is frequently used and promotes adequate information transfer. To increase joined decision-making, more patient and situational information needs to be handed over. Standardization of prehospital trauma handovers will facilitate this and improve trauma patient's outcome.

AB - Background Prehospital communication with Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is carried out in hectic situations. Proper communication among all medical personal is required to enhance collaboration, to provide the best care and enable shared situational awareness. Objective The objective of this article was to give insight into current Dutch prehospital emergency care communication among all EMS and evaluate the usage of a new physician staffed helicopter EMS (P-HEMS) cancellation model. Methods Trauma-related P-HEMS dispatches between November 1, 2014 and May 31, 2015 for the Lifeliner 1 were included; a random sample of 100 dispatches was generated. Tape recordings on all verbal prehospital communication between the dispatch center, EMS, and P-HEMS were transcribed and analyzed. Qualitative content analysis was performed, using open coding to code key messages. Results Ninety-two tape recordings were analyzed. The most frequent reason for P-HEMS dispatch was suspicion of brain injury (24%). The cancellation model was followed in 66%, overruled in 9%, and not applicable in 25%. The main reason for not adhering to the model was hemodynamic stability. In 5% of P-HEMS dispatches, a complete ABCD (airway, breathing, circulation, disability) methodology was used for handover, in 9% a complete Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation technique, in 2% a complete Mechanism-Injuries-Signs-Treatment method was used. The other handovers were incomplete. Conclusions Prehospital handover between EMS on-scene and P-HEMS often entails insufficient information. The cancellation model for P-HEMS is frequently used and promotes adequate information transfer. To increase joined decision-making, more patient and situational information needs to be handed over. Standardization of prehospital trauma handovers will facilitate this and improve trauma patient's outcome.

KW - ambulances

KW - communication

KW - Emergency Medical Services

KW - helicopter

KW - prehospital

KW - trauma

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85008660737&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jemermed.2016.11.010

DO - 10.1016/j.jemermed.2016.11.010

M3 - Article

VL - 52

SP - 504

EP - 512

JO - Journal of Emergency Medicine

JF - Journal of Emergency Medicine

SN - 0736-4679

IS - 4

ER -