EMS World Magazine is the most authoritative source in the world for clinical and educational material designed to improve the delivery of prehospital emergency medical care.
Issue link: https://emsworld.epubxp.com/i/516933
EMS RESEARCH relevant information is obtained, it may be incorrectly entered into a patient care report. In any case, not all jurisdictions collect or report the same data elements. Consequent- ly, data collection by itself is not enough to support EMS research; EMS systems must also strive to ensure good data quality. 27 The biggest problem with the data cur- rently collected by EMS systems is that it frequently lacks information regarding patient outcomes. 28 As a result, data analy- sis in EMS is often focused on prehospital endpoints (such as return of spontaneous circulation following cardiac arrest) rather than clinical outcomes (such as survival to discharge and neurologic outcome). In order to support quality EMS research, EMS sys- tems must work with hospitals to implement data-sharing that links EMS interventions to relevant patient outcomes. For example, electronic health information exchanges that link EMS and hospital records may allow EMS researchers to more easily obtain and analyze outcomes data. How EMS Providers Can Contribute to Research Conducting a research project in EMS can seem intimidating, but it doesn't have to be. Many published studies first start as small, internal quality improvement efforts, often to help internally validate the results of outside research. 38 While these internal efforts may not yield publishable results, they can still promote improvements within a system. Additionally, they can be shared locally with other agencies or at regional and national conferences. Finally, they can serve as the first step toward a more robust research project that can be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The elimination of Lasix from the medi- cal protocols of our own EMS agency is one example of how a small-scale study can inform EMS practice. In 2013 many EMS systems across the country were already in the process of eliminating Lasix from their medication formularies. In addition to its questionable efficacy in the prehospital set- ting, there was also concern regarding the ability of EMS providers to accurately dis- cern the underlying cause of a patient's pul- monary edema, or even distinguish between CHF and other respiratory presentations (such as asthma, COPD or pneumonia). 39 Instead of immediately changing our pro- tocols or ignoring the outside research, we decided to conduct an internal study to see if the results of the published studies held true in our agency. This would not only help us to determine how to interpret the research, but also allow us to translate the research in a way that EMS practitioners in our agency could relate to and accept—overcoming the inertia that often compels EMS providers to continue past practices despite mounting evidence against them. First we reviewed every patient care report from the previous year that docu- mented the administration of Lasix. Next we tasked our medical director (who works in the emergency department of our primary receiving hos- pital) to match each of those PCRs with a hospital patient record for the same episode of care. Finally we looked at whether each patient's hospital record included a diagnosis of CHF. What we found was that about half the patients to whom our providers administered Lasix over the year were not ultimately diagnosed with CHF. On the basis of that finding, and the potential harm from administering Lasix to patients not in fluid overload, we decided to remove Lasix from our ambulances. For this small study, we did not perform any formal statistical analysis or submit to an institutional review board process. Moreover, our results were neither pub- lishable nor generalizable to other EMS systems. Nevertheless, the results allowed our agency to make an informed decision regarding a change to our treatment proto- col for CHF patients. In addition, the ability to present concrete data to our providers helped convince many who had initially resisted the proposed change. Conducting a research study for the pur- pose of publishing results can be a bit more challenging, but there are plenty of oppor- tunities. One barrier is often financial: Most EMS agencies do not prioritize (or even con- template) research when setting budgets or hiring staff. While large research grants are often limited to major research institutions and universities, funding opportunities for smaller studies exist. In 2013, for example, the Alliance for Emergency Medical Edu- cation and Research (AEMER) in Virginia awarded approximately $20,000 in research grants to fund two different EMS-related research projects in the state. One of the projects funded by AEMER is a study by our agency on the feasibility and safety of a protocol that would permit EMS to transport patients who do not require emergency care to alternative destinations such as medical clinics and urgent care cen- ters. The AEMER grant has allowed our agency to defray the costs of developing an alternative destination protocol, train- ing our providers and analyzing the results. The results of our study are forthcoming, and we plan to present our findings at this year's Virginia EMS Symposium. Taking on a true research project was a novel endeavor for our EMS agency, but we made it more feasible by turning to local partners for assistance. The CEO of our local receiving hospital wrote a letter of support during the grant application phase. We also enlisted the help of local emergency and primary care physicians to evaluate the results. In addition, part of our grant funding consists of a small stipend for 36 JUNE 2015 | EMSWORLD.com © Steve Berr y