Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39059805›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

How should non-emergency EMS presentations be managed? A thematic analysis of politicians', policymakers', clinicians' and consumers' viewpoints.

Matt Wilkinson-Stokes, Celene Yap, Di Crellin, Ray Bange, George Braitberg, Marie Gerdtz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Matt Wilkinson-StokesFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia matt.wilkinson-stokes@outlook.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4553-8125
Celene YapFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Di CrellinFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Ray BangeSchool of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia.
George BraitbergFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Marie GerdtzFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn 2023, Australian government emergency medical services (EMS) responded to over 4 million consumers, of which over 56% were not classified as an 'emergency', at the cost of AU$5.5 billion. We explored the viewpoints of politicians, policymakers, clinicians and consumers on how these non-emergency requests should be managed.

designA realist framework was adopted; a multidisciplinary team (including paramedicine, medicine and nursing) was formed; data were collected via semistructured focus groups or interviews, and thematic analysis was performed. SETTING AND

participants56 participants were selected purposefully and via open advertisement: national and state parliamentarians (n=3); government heads of healthcare disciplines (n=3); government policymakers (n=5); industry policymakers in emergency medicine, general practice and paramedicine (n=6); EMS chief executive officers, medical directors and managers (n=7); academics (n=8), frontline clinicians in medicine, nursing and paramedicine (n=8); and consumers (n=16).

resultsThree themes emerged: first, the reality of the EMS workload (theme titled 'facing reality'); second, perceptions of what direction policy should take to manage this ('no silver bullet') and finally, what the future role of EMS in society should be ('finding the right space'). Participants provided 16 policy suggestions, of which 10 were widely supported: increasing public health literacy, removing the Medical Priority Dispatch System, supporting multidisciplinary teams, increasing 24-hour virtual emergency departments, revising undergraduate paramedic university education to reflect the reality of the contemporary role, increasing use of management plans for frequent consumers, better paramedic integration with the healthcare system, empowering callers by providing estimated wait times, reducing ineffective media campaigns to 'save EMS for emergencies' and EMS moving away from hospital referrals and towards community care.

conclusionsThere is a need to establish consensus on the role of EMS within society and, particularly, on whether the scope should continue expanding beyond emergency care. This research reports 16 possible ideas, each of which may warrant consideration, and maps them onto the standard patient journey.

Indexed as

Emergency Medical ServicesAdministrative PersonnelAttitude of Health PersonnelAustraliaFocus GroupsHumansPoliticsACCIDENT & EMERGENCY MEDICINEHealth policyOrganisation of health servicesPatient-Centered CarePUBLIC HEALTHQUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Identifiers

PMID39059805
PMCPMC11284875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.