评估肯尼亚西部地区急救人员(LFR)急救包的使用和适当性。

IF 0.9 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Pan African Medical Journal Pub Date : 2024-08-12 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.11604/pamj.2024.48.169.44049
Ashwin Jitendra Kulkarni, Anagha Balaji Thiagarajan, Simon Ochieng Ogana, Dinnah Akosa Okwiri, John Arudo, Nathanael Smith, Zachary Eisner, Peter Delaney
{"title":"评估肯尼亚西部地区急救人员(LFR)急救包的使用和适当性。","authors":"Ashwin Jitendra Kulkarni, Anagha Balaji Thiagarajan, Simon Ochieng Ogana, Dinnah Akosa Okwiri, John Arudo, Nathanael Smith, Zachary Eisner, Peter Delaney","doi":"10.11604/pamj.2024.48.169.44049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) disproportionately bear 90% of global mortality from trauma, yet robust emergency medical services (EMS) are often lacking to address the prehospital injury burden. Training lay-first responders (LFRs) is the first step toward formal (EMS) development in (LMICs). However, a gap remains as LFR first aid kit supply usage, appropriateness, and decay rates have yet to be studied but remain critical information for building sustainable LFR programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>we trained and equipped 101 LFRs in Kakamega County, Kenya in December 2023. During 3-month follow-up post-training, LFRs were surveyed with a 24-question multiple choice and free-response cross-sectional survey. Survey items included LFR demographics, patient encounters, first aid kit supplies usage, supply appropriateness, and local capacity for re-supply. Demographic data, usage statistics, appropriateness of current and potential kit additions, and local manufacturing capacity were collected and analyzed. Likert scales were utilized for categories consisting of \"recommendation\", \"potential recommendation\", and \"not recommended\" based on 100% - 75.0%, 74.9% - 60%, and 59.9% - 0% agreement, thresholds used in prior Delphi studies and meta-analyses. The survey design followed the Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS) guidelines to ensure quality standards.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>of 101 total LFRs, 82 participated (82/101= 81.2% response rate). Participating LFRs were 80.5% men, and 65.9% had transportation-related occupations. LFRs reported 394 assisted incidents over three months (median= 4.0, IQR: 3.0, 5,0). Gloves, gauze/bandages, and towels were the most used supplies employed in 88.9%, 61.3%, and 34.7% of incidents, respectively. For current first aid kit item appropriateness, LFRs reached a consensus agreement on gloves (92.7%), gauze/bandages (91.5%), and towels (79.3%). For potential first aid kit additions, LFRs recommended alcohol wipes/hand sanitizer (89.0%) and tape (77.2%) but did not recommend water bottles or traffic cones. Lay-first responders (LFRs) agreed (90.2%) on the importance of local supply production and desired a streamlined resupply protocol.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>a survey on first aid kit supplies usage and appropriateness from Western Kenya demonstrated materials for body substance isolation, wound care, and hemorrhage management are critical to supply. Organized protocols for local materials resupply are essential to ensure program sustainability and continuity.</p>","PeriodicalId":48190,"journal":{"name":"Pan African Medical Journal","volume":"48 ","pages":"169"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11614117/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating lay first responder (LFR) first aid kit supplies usage and appropriateness in Western Kenya.\",\"authors\":\"Ashwin Jitendra Kulkarni, Anagha Balaji Thiagarajan, Simon Ochieng Ogana, Dinnah Akosa Okwiri, John Arudo, Nathanael Smith, Zachary Eisner, Peter Delaney\",\"doi\":\"10.11604/pamj.2024.48.169.44049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) disproportionately bear 90% of global mortality from trauma, yet robust emergency medical services (EMS) are often lacking to address the prehospital injury burden. Training lay-first responders (LFRs) is the first step toward formal (EMS) development in (LMICs). However, a gap remains as LFR first aid kit supply usage, appropriateness, and decay rates have yet to be studied but remain critical information for building sustainable LFR programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>we trained and equipped 101 LFRs in Kakamega County, Kenya in December 2023. During 3-month follow-up post-training, LFRs were surveyed with a 24-question multiple choice and free-response cross-sectional survey. Survey items included LFR demographics, patient encounters, first aid kit supplies usage, supply appropriateness, and local capacity for re-supply. Demographic data, usage statistics, appropriateness of current and potential kit additions, and local manufacturing capacity were collected and analyzed. Likert scales were utilized for categories consisting of \\\"recommendation\\\", \\\"potential recommendation\\\", and \\\"not recommended\\\" based on 100% - 75.0%, 74.9% - 60%, and 59.9% - 0% agreement, thresholds used in prior Delphi studies and meta-analyses. The survey design followed the Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS) guidelines to ensure quality standards.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>of 101 total LFRs, 82 participated (82/101= 81.2% response rate). Participating LFRs were 80.5% men, and 65.9% had transportation-related occupations. LFRs reported 394 assisted incidents over three months (median= 4.0, IQR: 3.0, 5,0). Gloves, gauze/bandages, and towels were the most used supplies employed in 88.9%, 61.3%, and 34.7% of incidents, respectively. For current first aid kit item appropriateness, LFRs reached a consensus agreement on gloves (92.7%), gauze/bandages (91.5%), and towels (79.3%). For potential first aid kit additions, LFRs recommended alcohol wipes/hand sanitizer (89.0%) and tape (77.2%) but did not recommend water bottles or traffic cones. Lay-first responders (LFRs) agreed (90.2%) on the importance of local supply production and desired a streamlined resupply protocol.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>a survey on first aid kit supplies usage and appropriateness from Western Kenya demonstrated materials for body substance isolation, wound care, and hemorrhage management are critical to supply. Organized protocols for local materials resupply are essential to ensure program sustainability and continuity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48190,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pan African Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\"48 \",\"pages\":\"169\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11614117/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pan African Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2024.48.169.44049\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pan African Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2024.48.169.44049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs)不成比例地承担了全球90%的创伤死亡率,但往往缺乏强有力的紧急医疗服务(EMS)来解决院前伤害负担。培训基层急救人员(LFRs)是中低收入国家正式(EMS)发展的第一步。然而,由于LFR急救包的使用情况、适当性和衰减率有待研究,因此仍然存在差距,但这仍然是建立可持续LFR项目的关键信息。方法:我们于2023年12月在肯尼亚卡卡梅加县培训并装备了101名lfr。在培训后3个月的随访期间,对LFRs进行了24个问题的多项选择和自由回答横断面调查。调查项目包括LFR人口统计、患者遭遇、急救包用品使用情况、供应适当性和当地再供应能力。收集和分析了人口统计数据、使用统计数据、当前和潜在的工具包添加的适当性以及当地的制造能力。Likert量表用于“推荐”、“潜在推荐”和“不推荐”类别,基于100% - 75.0%、74.9% - 60%和59.9% - 0%的一致性阈值,这些阈值在先前的Delphi研究和meta分析中使用。调查设计遵循调查研究报告核对表(CROSS)指导方针,以确保质量标准。结果:101例lfr患者中,82例参与治疗(82/101= 81.2%有效率)。参与调查的lfr中,80.5%为男性,65.9%从事与交通相关的职业。lfr在三个月内报告了394例辅助事件(中位数= 4.0,IQR: 3.0, 5.0)。手套、纱布/绷带和毛巾是使用最多的用品,分别占88.9%、61.3%和34.7%。对于当前急救箱物品的适当性,lfr对手套(92.7%)、纱布/绷带(91.5%)和毛巾(79.3%)达成了共识。对于潜在的急救箱添加物,LFRs建议使用酒精湿巾/洗手液(89.0%)和胶带(77.2%),但不建议使用水瓶或交通锥。90.2%的人同意本地供应生产的重要性,并希望有一个简化的再补给方案。结论:对肯尼亚西部急救包用品使用和适当性的调查表明,用于身体物质隔离、伤口护理和出血管理的材料对供应至关重要。有组织的当地材料补给协议对于确保项目的可持续性和连续性至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating lay first responder (LFR) first aid kit supplies usage and appropriateness in Western Kenya.

Introduction: low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) disproportionately bear 90% of global mortality from trauma, yet robust emergency medical services (EMS) are often lacking to address the prehospital injury burden. Training lay-first responders (LFRs) is the first step toward formal (EMS) development in (LMICs). However, a gap remains as LFR first aid kit supply usage, appropriateness, and decay rates have yet to be studied but remain critical information for building sustainable LFR programs.

Methods: we trained and equipped 101 LFRs in Kakamega County, Kenya in December 2023. During 3-month follow-up post-training, LFRs were surveyed with a 24-question multiple choice and free-response cross-sectional survey. Survey items included LFR demographics, patient encounters, first aid kit supplies usage, supply appropriateness, and local capacity for re-supply. Demographic data, usage statistics, appropriateness of current and potential kit additions, and local manufacturing capacity were collected and analyzed. Likert scales were utilized for categories consisting of "recommendation", "potential recommendation", and "not recommended" based on 100% - 75.0%, 74.9% - 60%, and 59.9% - 0% agreement, thresholds used in prior Delphi studies and meta-analyses. The survey design followed the Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS) guidelines to ensure quality standards.

Results: of 101 total LFRs, 82 participated (82/101= 81.2% response rate). Participating LFRs were 80.5% men, and 65.9% had transportation-related occupations. LFRs reported 394 assisted incidents over three months (median= 4.0, IQR: 3.0, 5,0). Gloves, gauze/bandages, and towels were the most used supplies employed in 88.9%, 61.3%, and 34.7% of incidents, respectively. For current first aid kit item appropriateness, LFRs reached a consensus agreement on gloves (92.7%), gauze/bandages (91.5%), and towels (79.3%). For potential first aid kit additions, LFRs recommended alcohol wipes/hand sanitizer (89.0%) and tape (77.2%) but did not recommend water bottles or traffic cones. Lay-first responders (LFRs) agreed (90.2%) on the importance of local supply production and desired a streamlined resupply protocol.

Conclusion: a survey on first aid kit supplies usage and appropriateness from Western Kenya demonstrated materials for body substance isolation, wound care, and hemorrhage management are critical to supply. Organized protocols for local materials resupply are essential to ensure program sustainability and continuity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pan African Medical Journal
Pan African Medical Journal PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
691
×
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