“每一天都是一条学习曲线”:在英国救护车服务中实施COVID-19分诊方案——对员工经验的定性研究。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Alison Porter, Fiona Bell, Mike Brady, Shona Brown, Andrew Carson-Stevens, Timothy Driscoll, Bridie Angela Evans, Theresa Foster, John Gallanders, Imogen Gunson, Robert Harris-Mayes, Mark Kingston, Ronan Lyons, Elisha Miller, Andy Rosser, Aloysius Niroshan Siriwardena, Robert Spaight, Victoria Williams, Helen Snooks
{"title":"“每一天都是一条学习曲线”:在英国救护车服务中实施COVID-19分诊方案——对员工经验的定性研究。","authors":"Alison Porter, Fiona Bell, Mike Brady, Shona Brown, Andrew Carson-Stevens, Timothy Driscoll, Bridie Angela Evans, Theresa Foster, John Gallanders, Imogen Gunson, Robert Harris-Mayes, Mark Kingston, Ronan Lyons, Elisha Miller, Andy Rosser, Aloysius Niroshan Siriwardena, Robert Spaight, Victoria Williams, Helen Snooks","doi":"10.1136/emermed-2024-214495","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>TRIM (What TRIage model is safest and most effective for the Management of 999 callers with suspected COVID-19? A linked outcome study) was an evaluation of models used to triage and manage emergency ambulance service care for patients with suspected COVID-19. In an embedded qualitative component, we aimed to understand experiences and concerns of clinical and managerial staff about processes for responding to patients with suspected COVID-19, in the call centre and on scene.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Research paramedics in four study sites across England interviewed purposively selected stakeholders from ambulance services (call handlers, clinical advisors in call centres, clinicians providing emergency response, managers) and emergency department clinical staff. Interviews (n=25) were conducted remotely, recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis was conducted by a group of researchers and PPI (patient and public involvement) partners working together.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We present four themes, developed from the data. Services made efforts to target their response to those most in need, while trying to minimise infection risk; they reduced face-to-face contact where possible, dealing with more calls remotely. Adjustments by other providers in the wider healthcare system affected the flow of patients to and from ambulance services. There was substantial work and heavy cognitive load for staff at all levels in updating knowledge and repeatedly implementing changes. Staff working in the range of roles in ambulance services also carried a heavy emotional load.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Services made flexible changes to triage processes using the best level of understanding available at the time, in a healthcare setting which always operates in high levels of uncertainty. Implementing triage protocols in response to the COVID-19 pandemic was a complex and fluid process which had to be actively managed by a range of front-line staff, dealing with external pressures and a heavy emotional load. Increased understanding of the way in which services and staff had to adapt, and the cognitive and emotional burden this entailed, may help in planning for future pandemics.</p>","PeriodicalId":11532,"journal":{"name":"Emergency Medicine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"'Every day was a learning curve': implementing COVID-19 triage protocols in UK ambulance services-a qualitative study of staff experiences.\",\"authors\":\"Alison Porter, Fiona Bell, Mike Brady, Shona Brown, Andrew Carson-Stevens, Timothy Driscoll, Bridie Angela Evans, Theresa Foster, John Gallanders, Imogen Gunson, Robert Harris-Mayes, Mark Kingston, Ronan Lyons, Elisha Miller, Andy Rosser, Aloysius Niroshan Siriwardena, Robert Spaight, Victoria Williams, Helen Snooks\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/emermed-2024-214495\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>TRIM (What TRIage model is safest and most effective for the Management of 999 callers with suspected COVID-19? A linked outcome study) was an evaluation of models used to triage and manage emergency ambulance service care for patients with suspected COVID-19. In an embedded qualitative component, we aimed to understand experiences and concerns of clinical and managerial staff about processes for responding to patients with suspected COVID-19, in the call centre and on scene.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Research paramedics in four study sites across England interviewed purposively selected stakeholders from ambulance services (call handlers, clinical advisors in call centres, clinicians providing emergency response, managers) and emergency department clinical staff. Interviews (n=25) were conducted remotely, recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis was conducted by a group of researchers and PPI (patient and public involvement) partners working together.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We present four themes, developed from the data. Services made efforts to target their response to those most in need, while trying to minimise infection risk; they reduced face-to-face contact where possible, dealing with more calls remotely. Adjustments by other providers in the wider healthcare system affected the flow of patients to and from ambulance services. There was substantial work and heavy cognitive load for staff at all levels in updating knowledge and repeatedly implementing changes. Staff working in the range of roles in ambulance services also carried a heavy emotional load.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Services made flexible changes to triage processes using the best level of understanding available at the time, in a healthcare setting which always operates in high levels of uncertainty. Implementing triage protocols in response to the COVID-19 pandemic was a complex and fluid process which had to be actively managed by a range of front-line staff, dealing with external pressures and a heavy emotional load. Increased understanding of the way in which services and staff had to adapt, and the cognitive and emotional burden this entailed, may help in planning for future pandemics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11532,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Emergency Medicine Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Emergency Medicine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2024-214495\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergency Medicine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2024-214495","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:对于疑似COVID-19的999呼叫者的管理,哪种分类模式最安全、最有效?(一项相关结果研究)是对用于对疑似COVID-19患者进行分诊和管理紧急救护车服务护理的模型的评估。在嵌入式定性组件中,我们旨在了解临床和管理人员在呼叫中心和现场应对疑似COVID-19患者的过程中的经验和担忧。方法:在英格兰四个研究地点的研究护理人员有目的地从救护车服务中选择利益相关者(呼叫处理人员、呼叫中心的临床顾问、提供紧急响应的临床医生、管理人员)和急诊科临床工作人员进行访谈。访谈(n=25)远程进行,录音和转录。专题分析由一组研究人员和PPI(患者和公众参与)合作伙伴共同进行。结果:根据数据,我们提出了四个主题。服务部门努力针对最需要的人作出反应,同时尽量减少感染风险;他们尽可能减少面对面的接触,更多地远程处理电话。在更广泛的医疗保健系统中,其他提供者的调整影响了救护车服务的患者流量。各级工作人员在更新知识和反复实施变革方面有大量的工作和繁重的认知负荷。在救护车服务中担任各种角色的工作人员也承受着沉重的情感负担。结论:在始终处于高度不确定性的医疗环境中,服务部门利用当时可用的最佳理解水平,对分诊流程进行了灵活的更改。为应对COVID-19大流行实施分诊方案是一个复杂而多变的过程,必须由一系列一线工作人员积极管理,应对外部压力和沉重的情绪负担。加深对服务机构和工作人员必须适应的方式以及由此带来的认知和情感负担的了解,可能有助于规划未来的大流行病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
'Every day was a learning curve': implementing COVID-19 triage protocols in UK ambulance services-a qualitative study of staff experiences.

Background: TRIM (What TRIage model is safest and most effective for the Management of 999 callers with suspected COVID-19? A linked outcome study) was an evaluation of models used to triage and manage emergency ambulance service care for patients with suspected COVID-19. In an embedded qualitative component, we aimed to understand experiences and concerns of clinical and managerial staff about processes for responding to patients with suspected COVID-19, in the call centre and on scene.

Methods: Research paramedics in four study sites across England interviewed purposively selected stakeholders from ambulance services (call handlers, clinical advisors in call centres, clinicians providing emergency response, managers) and emergency department clinical staff. Interviews (n=25) were conducted remotely, recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis was conducted by a group of researchers and PPI (patient and public involvement) partners working together.

Results: We present four themes, developed from the data. Services made efforts to target their response to those most in need, while trying to minimise infection risk; they reduced face-to-face contact where possible, dealing with more calls remotely. Adjustments by other providers in the wider healthcare system affected the flow of patients to and from ambulance services. There was substantial work and heavy cognitive load for staff at all levels in updating knowledge and repeatedly implementing changes. Staff working in the range of roles in ambulance services also carried a heavy emotional load.

Conclusions: Services made flexible changes to triage processes using the best level of understanding available at the time, in a healthcare setting which always operates in high levels of uncertainty. Implementing triage protocols in response to the COVID-19 pandemic was a complex and fluid process which had to be actively managed by a range of front-line staff, dealing with external pressures and a heavy emotional load. Increased understanding of the way in which services and staff had to adapt, and the cognitive and emotional burden this entailed, may help in planning for future pandemics.

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
Emergency Medicine Journal
Emergency Medicine Journal 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
6.50%
发文量
262
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Emergency Medicine Journal is a leading international journal reporting developments and advances in emergency medicine and acute care. It has relevance to all specialties involved in the management of emergencies in the hospital and prehospital environment. Each issue contains editorials, reviews, original research, evidence based reviews, letters and more.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信