Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38012723›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

Ambulance personnel use of coercion and use of safety belts in Norway.

Kristin Häikiö, Anne Kristine Bergem, Øyvind Holst, Nina Øye Thorvaldsen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Kristin HäikiöOsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, P.O Box 4 St. Olavs Plass, N-0130, Oslo, Norway. haikio@oslomet.no.
Anne Kristine BergemNorwegian Psychiatric Association, Sentrum, P.O Box 1152, 0107, Oslo, Norway.
Øyvind HolstOsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, P.O Box 4 St. Olavs Plass, N-0130, Oslo, Norway.
Nina Øye ThorvaldsenOsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, P.O Box 4 St. Olavs Plass, N-0130, Oslo, Norway.
OsloMet – Oslo Metropolitan University · NONorwegian Medical Association · NOUniversidad Metropolitana · PR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProviding health care in a moving vehicle requires different considerations regarding safety than in other settings. Use of seatbelts are mandatory, and during ambulance transport patients are fastened to the stretcher with safety straps. However, patients who wriggle out of, or unfasten, their safety straps pose a threat to him/herself and escorting personnel in the ambulance compartment in case of an accident. To prevent harm, ambulance personnel sometimes restrain the patient or unfasten their own seatbelts to keep the patient safe on the stretcher. The prevalence of coercive measures, and the relationship between the use of mechanical restraints comparable to coercion and seatbelt use, are scarcely investigated. Use of coercion normally requires a specific statutory basis. However, coercive measures needed to ensure safety in a moving vehicle while providing healthcare is hardly discussed in the literature. The aim of this study is to explore the use of coercion in ambulance services, the use of safety belts among escorts in situations where they need to keep the patient calm during transportation, and to analyse the relationship between safety belt non-compliance and coercion in these situations.

methodsThis is a retrospective, cross-sectional study using a self-administered, online survey aiming to investigate the use of coercion and use of seatbelts during ambulance transport. Approximately 3,400 ambulance personnel from all 18 Health Trusts in Norway were invited to participate between Oct 2021 and Nov 2022. Descriptive analyses were used to describe the sample and the prevalence of findings, while multiple linear regressions were used to investigate associations.

resultsAltogether, 681 (20%) ambulance personnel completed the survey where 488 (72.4%) stated that they had used coercion during the last six months and 375 (55.7%) had experienced ambulance personnel or escorting personnel working with unfastened seatbelts during transport. The majority of respondents experienced coercion as being unpleasant and more negative feelings were associated with less use of seatbelts.

conclusionsCoercion seems to be used by ambulance personnel frequently. For the study participants, keeping the patient securely fastened was prioritized above escorting personnel's traffic safety, despite feeling uncomfortable doing so. Because coercive measures have negative consequences for patients, is associated with negative feelings for health personnel, and is not discussed ethically and legally in relation to the prehospital context, there is an urgent need for more research on the topic, and for legal preparatory work to address the unique perspectives of the prehospital context in which traffic safety also is an important factor.

Indexed as

AmbulancesCoercionCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMaleNorwayRetrospective StudiesAccidentsAmbulance personnelAmbulancesCoercionEmergency respondersOccupationalParamedicPatient safetySafety beltsTransportation of patientsWorking conditions

Identifiers

PMID38012723
PMCPMC10680207
OpenAlexW4389043180

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.