Hospitals Infrequently Receive EMS Patient Care Reports in the Era of Electronic Medical Records: A Preliminary Report.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
John Shanley, Joseph Marcero, Robert Swor
{"title":"Hospitals Infrequently Receive EMS Patient Care Reports in the Era of Electronic Medical Records: A Preliminary Report.","authors":"John Shanley, Joseph Marcero, Robert Swor","doi":"10.1080/10903127.2024.2438392","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Emergency Medical Services (EMS) patient care reports (PCRs) are an important component for the transfer of patient care from EMS systems to hospitals and a foundational element of EMS quality improvement (QI). The PCR may serve as the only objective source of information for EMS patient presentation. Surprisingly little data, either objective or anecdotal, exists regarding the reliability of this process. Our objective is to describe the frequency of missing PCRs and the time of their receipt following EMS transport to hospital emergency departments (EDs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective study of EMS PCR provision for patients transported to a large single eight hospital health system in Southeast Michigan from 1/1/2022 to 7/1/2023. We included agencies who transported >100 patients annually to system hospitals. All PCRs are transmitted by fax or to email server and manually uploaded into the system's EPIC<sup>®</sup> EMR (Electronic Medical Record). We stratified agencies by whether they were primarily 9-1-1 responders or interfacility transport. The PCR receipt by hospital and time of upload were obtained from EPIC Toad Data Point<sup>®</sup> queries. Our primary outcome was frequency of PCRs received (in aggregate and by agency) and uploaded to EPIC<sup>®</sup>. Our secondary outcome was the interval from EMS arrival to EMR upload. We report descriptive statistics including receipt of PCR (mean, median) by hospital and agency.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 155,423 patients transported by 63 EMS agencies. Overall, receipt of PCRs varied substantially by hospital mean (SD) 50.6% (23.5), median (IQR) 44.0% (33.9, 70.2). A minority 26.3% (26.2) of these were uploaded within 120 min of hospital arrival. PCRs receipt also varied substantially by agency, with overall median (IQR) of 56.8% (17.2, 83.1).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Many PCRs are missing after EMS transport, with marked variation in submission rates and time to upload by agency and hospital. Many PCRs were infrequently available for use in a timely manner. Further assessment is needed to quantify the degree to which the lack of transfer of documentation of EMS patient care exists across emergency care systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":20336,"journal":{"name":"Prehospital Emergency Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-5"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prehospital Emergency Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10903127.2024.2438392","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Emergency Medical Services (EMS) patient care reports (PCRs) are an important component for the transfer of patient care from EMS systems to hospitals and a foundational element of EMS quality improvement (QI). The PCR may serve as the only objective source of information for EMS patient presentation. Surprisingly little data, either objective or anecdotal, exists regarding the reliability of this process. Our objective is to describe the frequency of missing PCRs and the time of their receipt following EMS transport to hospital emergency departments (EDs).

Methods: We performed a retrospective study of EMS PCR provision for patients transported to a large single eight hospital health system in Southeast Michigan from 1/1/2022 to 7/1/2023. We included agencies who transported >100 patients annually to system hospitals. All PCRs are transmitted by fax or to email server and manually uploaded into the system's EPIC® EMR (Electronic Medical Record). We stratified agencies by whether they were primarily 9-1-1 responders or interfacility transport. The PCR receipt by hospital and time of upload were obtained from EPIC Toad Data Point® queries. Our primary outcome was frequency of PCRs received (in aggregate and by agency) and uploaded to EPIC®. Our secondary outcome was the interval from EMS arrival to EMR upload. We report descriptive statistics including receipt of PCR (mean, median) by hospital and agency.

Results: There were 155,423 patients transported by 63 EMS agencies. Overall, receipt of PCRs varied substantially by hospital mean (SD) 50.6% (23.5), median (IQR) 44.0% (33.9, 70.2). A minority 26.3% (26.2) of these were uploaded within 120 min of hospital arrival. PCRs receipt also varied substantially by agency, with overall median (IQR) of 56.8% (17.2, 83.1).

Conclusions: Many PCRs are missing after EMS transport, with marked variation in submission rates and time to upload by agency and hospital. Many PCRs were infrequently available for use in a timely manner. Further assessment is needed to quantify the degree to which the lack of transfer of documentation of EMS patient care exists across emergency care systems.

电子病历时代医院很少收到EMS患者护理报告:初步报告。
目的:紧急医疗服务(EMS)患者护理报告(pcr)是将患者护理从EMS系统转移到医院的重要组成部分,也是EMS质量改进(QI)的基本要素。PCR可以作为EMS患者表现的唯一客观信息来源。令人惊讶的是,关于这一过程的可靠性,无论是客观的还是轶事的数据都很少。我们的目标是描述丢失pcr的频率和他们的接收后EMS运送到医院急诊科(EDs)的时间。方法:我们对从2022年1月1日至2023年7月1日运送到密歇根州东南部一个大型单一八家医院卫生系统的患者进行了EMS PCR提供的回顾性研究。我们纳入了每年向系统医院运送100万名患者的机构。所有pcr都通过传真或电子邮件服务器传输,并手动上传到系统的EPIC®EMR(电子病历)中。我们根据他们主要是911急救人员还是设施间运输来对机构进行分层。通过EPIC Toad Data Point®查询获得医院PCR接收和上传时间。我们的主要终点是收到的pcr的频率(总的和按机构),并上传到EPIC®。我们的次要指标是从EMS到达到EMR上传的时间间隔。我们报告了描述性统计数据,包括医院和机构的PCR接收(平均值,中位数)。结果:63家急救机构共运送155423例患者。总的来说,pcr的接受情况在医院平均(SD) 50.6%(23.5),中位数(IQR) 44.0%(33.9, 70.2)。少数26.3%(26.2)是在到达医院后120分钟内上传的。pcr的接受情况也因机构而异,总体中位数(IQR)为56.8%(17.2,83.1)。结论:许多pcr在EMS转运后丢失,各机构和医院在提交率和上传时间上存在显著差异。许多pcr很少能及时使用。需要进一步评估,以量化在紧急护理系统中存在的缺乏EMS患者护理文件转移的程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Prehospital Emergency Care
Prehospital Emergency Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
137
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Prehospital Emergency Care publishes peer-reviewed information relevant to the practice, educational advancement, and investigation of prehospital emergency care, including the following types of articles: Special Contributions - Original Articles - Education and Practice - Preliminary Reports - Case Conferences - Position Papers - Collective Reviews - Editorials - Letters to the Editor - Media Reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信