Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:52:29.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Decision-Support Tool in Prehospital Care: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2011

Magnus Hagiwara ,
Maria Henricson ,
Anders Jonsson  and
Björn-Ove Suserud
Magnus Hagiwara
Affiliation:
University of Borås, School of Health Sciences, Borås, Sweden
Maria Henricson
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Jönköping University, School of Health Sciences, Jönköping
Anders Jonsson
Affiliation:
Borås University, School of Health Sciences; Associate Professor, Swedish Armed Forces, Centre for Defence Medicine, Sweden
Björn-Ove Suserud
Affiliation:
University of Borås, School of Health Sciences, Borås, Sweden
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of the decision support tool (DST) on the assessment of the acutely ill or injured out-of-hospital patient.

Methods: This study included systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCT) where the DST was compared to usual care in and out of the hospital setting. The databases scanned include: (1) Cochrane Reviews (up to January 2010); (2) Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials (1979 to January 2010); (3) Cinahl (1986 to January 2010); and (4) Pubmed/Medline (1926 to January 2010). In addition, information was gathered from related magazines, prehospital home pages, databases for theses, conferences, grey literature and ongoing trials.

Results: Use of the DST in prehospital care may have the possibility to decrease “time to definitive care” and improve diagnostic accuracy among prehospital personnel, but more studies are needed.

Conclusions: The amount of data in this review is too small to be able to draw any reliable conclusions about the impact of the use of the DST on prehospital care. The research in this review indicates that there are very few RCTs that evaluate the use of the DST in prehospital care.

Keywords

Prehospital decision support toolprehospital careemergency medical servicesemergency medical technician
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 26 , Issue 5 , October 2011 , pp. 319 - 329
Copyright
Copyright Hagiwara © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Shaban, R, Wyatt Smith, CM, Cumming, J: Uncertainty, error and risk in human clinical judgment: Introductory theoretical frameworks in paramedic practice. Journal of Emergency Primary Health Care 2004;2(1–2).Google Scholar
Brazier, H, Murphy, AW, Lynch, C, Bury, G: Searching for the evidence in prehospital care: A review of randomised controlled trials. On behalf of the Ambulance Response Time Sub-Group of the National Ambulance Advisory Committee. J Accid Emerg Med 1999;16(1):18–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunnarsson, BM, Warrén Stomberg, M: Factors influencing decision making among ambulance nurses in emergency care situations. Int Emerg Nurs 2009;17(2):83–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wireklint Sundström, B: Förberedd på att vara oförberedd : En fenomenologisk studie av vårdande bedömning och dess lärande i ambulanssjukvård. 2005, Växjö: Växjö University Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, S Jr, Grant, J: New and emerging roles in out of hospital emergency care: A review of the international literature. Int Emerg Nurs 2009;17(2):90–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, T, Atcherson, K, Federiuk, C, et al: Evaluation of protocols allowing emergency medical technicians to determine need for treatment and transport. Acad Emerg Med 2000;7(6):663–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, LH, Hubble, MW, Cone, DC, et al: Paramedic determinations of medical necessity: A meta-analysis. Prehosp Emerg Care 2009;13(4):516–527.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rotter, T, Kinsman, L, James, EL, et al: Clinical pathways: Effects on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of stay and hospital costs. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006632.pub2.Google Scholar
Snooks, H, Evans, A, Wells, B, et al: What are the highest priorities for research in pre-hospital care? Results of a review and Delphi consultation exercise. Journal of Emergency Primary Health Care 2008;6(4):20.Google Scholar
Garg, AX, Adhikari, NK, McDonald, H, et al: Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: A systematic review. JAMA 2005;293(10):1223–1238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kawamoto, K, Houlihan, CA, Balas, EA, Lobach, DR: Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: A systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ 2005;330(7494):765–768.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tan, KRF, Dear, P, Newell Simon, J: Clinical decision support systems for neonatal care. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004211.pub2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sintchenko, V, Magrabi, F, Tipper, S: Are we measuring the right end-points? Variables that affect the impact of computerised decision support on patient outcomes: A systematic review. Medical Informatics & the Internet in Medicine 2007;32(3):225–240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shojania Kaveh, G, Jennings, A, Mayhew, A, et al: The effects of on-screen, point of care computer reminders on processes and outcomes of care. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001096.pub2; 2009.Google ScholarPubMed
Deeks, J, Dinnes, J, D’Amico, R, et al: Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technology Assessment 2003;7(27):1–173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network 2010 3/08/09.Google Scholar
Shukla, VK, et al: Systematic review of quality assessment instruments for randomized control trials: Selection of SIGN50 methodological checklist [abstract]. XV Cochrane Colloquium; 2007 October 23–27; Sao Paulo, Brazil, 101.Google Scholar
Wyatt, J, Spiegelhalter, D: Field trials of medical decision-aids: Potential problems and solutions. in Proceedings/The Annual Symposium On Computer Application [Sic] In Medical Care. Symposium On Computer Applications In Medical Care. 1991.Google ScholarPubMed
Perreault, LMJ: A pragmatic framework for understanding clinical decision support. Journal of Healthcare Information Management 1999;13(2):15–21.Google Scholar
Peterson, ED, Roe, MT, Mulgund, J, et al: Association between hospital process performance and outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndromes. JAMA 2006;295(16):1912–1920.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Luca, A, Toni, D, Lauria, L, et al: (2009) An emergency clinical pathway for stroke patients–Results of a cluster randomised trial. BMC Health Services Research 2009;9(14).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woollard, M, Hayward, AJ, Taylor, NC: Limited benefits of ambulance telemetry in delivering early thrombolysis: A randomised controlled trial. Emerg Med J 2005;22(3):209–215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bray, JE, Martin, J, Cooper, G, et al: An interventional study to improve paramedic diagnosis of stroke. Prehosp Emerg Care 2005;9(3):297–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cayten, CG, Oler, J, Staroscik, R, et al: Clinical algorithms for prehospital cardiac care. Medical Care 1983;21(2):147–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ortolani, P, Marzocchi, A, Marrozzini, C, et al: Usefulness of prehospital triage in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol 2007;100(5):787–792.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, DP, Graydon, C, Stein, R, et al: The positive predictive value of paramedic versus emergency physician interpretation of the prehospital 12-lead electrocardiogram. Prehosp Emerg Care 2007;11(4):399–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dhruva, VN, Abdelhadi, SI, Anis, A, et al: ST-segment analysis using wireless technology in acute myocardial infarction (STAT-MI) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50(6):509–513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Watts, D, Hanfling, D, Waller, M, et al: An evaluation of the use of guidelines in prehospital management of brain injury. Prehospital Emergency Care 2004;8(3): 254–261.Google ScholarPubMed
Gladstone, DJ, Rodan, LH, Sahlas, DJ, et al: A citywide prehospital protocol increases access to stroke thrombolysis in toronto. Stroke 2009;40(12):3841–3844.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le May, MR, Davies, RF, Dionne, R, et al: Comparison of early mortality of paramedic-diagnosed ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with immediate transport to a designated primary percutaneous coronary intervention center to that of similar patients transported to the nearest hospital. Am J Cardiol 2006;98(10):1329–1333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muhr, MD, Seabrook, DL, Wittwer, LK: Paramedic use of a spinal injury clearance algorithm reduces spinal immobilization in the out-of-hospital setting. Prehosp Emerg Care 1999;3(1):1–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quain, DA, Parsons, MW, Loudfoot, AR, et al: Improving access to acute stroke therapies: A controlled trial of organised pre-hospital and emergency care. Med J Aust 2008;189(8):429–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wojner-Alexandrov, AW, Alexandrov, AV, Rodriguez, D, et al: Houston Paramedic and Emergency Stroke Treatment and Outcomes Study (HoPSTO). Stroke 2005;36(7):15121518.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burton, JH, Harmon, NR, Dunn, MG, Bradshaw, JR: EMS provider findings and interventions with a statewide EMS spine-assessment protocol. Prehosp Emerg Care 2005;9(3):303–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kidwell, CS, Saver, JL, Schubert, GB, et al: Design and retrospective analysis of the Los Angeles Prehospital Stroke Screen (LAPSS). Prehosp Emerg Care 1998;2(4):267–273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fries, GR, McCalla, G, Levitt, MA, Cordova, R: A prospective comparison of paramedic judgment and the trauma triage rule in the prehospital setting. Ann Emerg Med 1994;24(5):885–889.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gray, JT. Wardrope, J: Introduction of non-transport guidelines into an ambulance service: a retrospective review. Emerg Med J 2007;24(10):727–729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haines, CJ, Lutes, RE, Blaser, M, Christopher, NC: Paramedic initiated non-transport of pediatric patients. Prehosp Emerg Care 2006;10(2):213–219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, T, Woollard, M: Paramedic accuracy in using a decision support algorithm when recognising adult death: A prospective cohort study. Emerg Med J 2003;20(5):473–475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kidwell, CS, Starkman, S, Eckstein, M, et al: Identifying stroke in the field : Prospective validation of the Los Angeles Prehospital Stroke Screen (LAPSS). Stroke 2000;31(1):71–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klein, KR, Spillane, LL, Chiumento, S, Schneider, SM: Effects of on-line medical control in the prehospital treatment of atraumatic illness. Prehosp Emerg Care 1997;1(2):80–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knapp, BJ, Tsuchitani, SN, Cheele, JM, et al: Prospective evaluation of an emergency medical services-administered alternative transport protocol. Prehosp Emerg Care 2009;13(4):432–436.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kothari, RU, Pancioli, A, Liu, T, et al: Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale: Reproducibility and validity. Ann Emerg Med 1999;33(4):373–378.Google Scholar
Meisel, ZF, Mathew, R, Wydro, GC, et al: Multicenter validation of the Philadelphia EMS admission rule (PEAR) to predict hospital admission in adult patients using out-of-hospital data. Acad Emerg Med 2009;16(6):519–525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nor, AM, McAllister, C, Louw, SJ, et al: Agreement between ambulance paramedic- and physician-recorded neurological signs with Face Arm Speech Test (FAST) in acute stroke patients. Stroke 2004;35(6):355–1359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norcross, ED, Ford, DW, Cooper, ME, et al: Application of American College of Surgeons’ field triage guidelines by pre-hospital personnel. J Am Coll Surg 1995;181(6):539–544.Google ScholarPubMed
Paul, AO, Kay, MV, Huppertz, T, et al: Validation of the prehospital mSTaRT triage algorithm. A pilot study for the development of a multicenter evaluation. Unfallchirurg 2009;112(1):23–30,32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pointer, JE, Levitt, MA, Young, JC, et al: Can paramedics using guidelines accurately triage patients? Ann Emerg Med 2001;38(3):268–277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramanujan, P, Guluma, KZ, Castillo, EM, et al: Accuracy of stroke recognition by emergency medical dispatchers and paramedics—San Diego experience. Prehosp Emerg Care 2008;12(3):307–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richman, PB, Vadeboncoeur, TF, Chikani, V, et al: Independent evaluation of an out-of-hospital termination of resuscitation (TOR) clinical decision rule. Acad Emerg Med 2008;15(6):517–521.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, TA, Atcheson, R, Federiuk, C, et al: Hospital follow-up of patients categorized as not needing an ambulance using a set of emergency medical technician protocols. Prehosp Emerg Care 2001;5(4):366–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snooks, H, Kearsley, N, Dale, J, et al: Towards primary care for non-serious 999 callers: results of a controlled study of “Treat and Refer” protocols for ambulance crews. Qual Safe Health Care 2004;13(6):435–443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Hof, AWJ, Rasoul, S, van de Wetering, H, et al: Feasibility and benefit of prehospital diagnosis, triage, and therapy by paramedics only in patients who are candidates for primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 2006;151(6):1255.e1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez, RP, Cummings, GR, Phelan, HA, et al: Does increased emergency medical services prehospital time affect patient mortality in rural motor vehicle crashes? A statewide analysis. Am J Surg 2009;197(1):30–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boersma, E, Maas, E, Deckers, JW, Simoons, ML: Early thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction: reappraisal of the golden hour. Lancet 1996;348(9030):771–775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toni, D, Chamorro, A, Kaste, M, et al: Acute treatment of ischaemic stroke. European Stroke Initiative. Cerebrovascular Diseases (Basel, Switzerland), 2004. 17 Suppl 2: p. 30–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bettencourt, N, Mateus, P, Dias, C, et al: Impact of pre-hospital emergency in the management and prognosis of acute myocardial infarction. Revista Portuguesa De Cardiologia: Orgiao Oficial Da Sociedade Portuguesa De Cardiologia 2005;24(6):863–872.Google ScholarPubMed
Colwell, C, Mehler, P, Harper, J, et al: Measuring quality in the prehospital care of chest pain patients. Prehosp Emerg Care 2009;3(2):237–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meisel, ZF, Armstrong, ZF, Mechem, CC, et al: Influence of sex on the out-of-hospital management of chest pain. Acad Emerg Med 17(1):80–87.Google Scholar
Rittenberger, JC, Beck, PW, Paris, PM: Errors of omission in the treatment of prehospital chest pain patients. Prehosp Emerg Care 2005;9(1):2–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woollard, M, Smith, A, Elwood, P: Pre-hospital aspirin for suspected myocardial infarction and acute coronary syndromes: a headache for paramedics? Emerg Med J 200;18(6):478–481.Google Scholar
Silvestri, S, Rothrock, SG, Kennedy, D, et al: Can paramedics accurately identify patients who do not require emergency department care? Journal of Emergency Medicine 2002. 6(4): p. 387–390.Google Scholar
Hopewell, S, McDonald, S, Clarke, M, Egger, M: Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000010.pub3.Google Scholar
Snooks, H, Cheung, W-Y, Close, J, Dale, J, Gaze, S, Humphreys, I, et al: Support and Assessment for Fall Emergency Referrals (SAFER 1) trial protocol. Computerised on-scene decision support for emergency ambulance staff to assess and plan care for older people who have fallen: evaluation of cost and benefits using a pragmatic cluster randomised trial. BMC Emergency Medicine. 2010;10:2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed