Emergency Medical Services and Public Health Perspectives on Alternative Emergency Response Models

Author:

Miller Alison K.ORCID,Gage Christopher B.,Parrish Matthew,Toliver Isaac,Ulintz Alexander,Powell Jonathan,Frey Jennifer A.,Panchal Ashish R.

Abstract

Context: New approaches to emergency response are a national focus due to evolving needs and growing demands on the system, but perspectives of first responders and potential partners have not been evaluated. Objective: This project aimed to inform the development and implementation of alternative emergency response models, including interdisciplinary partnerships, by identifying the perspectives of the frontline workforce regarding their evolving roles. Design: An electronic survey was sent, querying respondents about their perceived roles in emergency response, interdisciplinary partnerships, and resources needed. Setting: This study took place in a metropolitan, midwestern county with participants from 2 public health agencies and 1 emergency medical services (EMS) agency. Participants: The survey was completed by 945 EMS clinicians and 58 public health workers. Main Outcome Measures: The main outcome measures were agreement levels on each group’s roles in prevention, response, and recovery after emergencies, as well as general feedback on new models. Results: Overall, 97% of EMS clinicians and 42% of public health workers agreed that they have a role in immediate response to 9-1-1 emergencies. In mental health emergencies, 87% of EMS clinicians and 52% of public health workers agreed that they have a role, compared to 87% and 30%, respectively, in violent emergencies. Also, 84% of respondents felt multidisciplinary models are a needed change. However, 35% of respondents felt their agency has the resources necessary for changes. Conclusions: We observed differences between EMS clinicians and public health workers in their perceived roles during emergency response and beliefs about the types of emergencies within their scope. There is strong support for alternative approaches and a perception that this model may improve personal well-being and job satisfaction, but a need for additional resources to develop and implement.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3