METHODS AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The on-scene performance during all missions of the emergency physician-operated rescue helicopter and mobile intensive care unit based at a large-city hospital over a period of 1 year was retrospectively analysed; 2,254 hospital discharge reports were available (92% of the patients treated by the emergency physicians [n = 2,493]). The following parameters were investigated: reliability of the primary diagnosis established by the emergency physician (by comparison with the discharge diagnoses); initial on-scene therapeutic measures; means of transportation (with or without accompanying emergency physician); and level of care of the target hospital. RESULTS: The most common reasons for a mission were cardiopulmonary diseases (55%), neurological disorders (18%), and traumatic events (7%). The diagnoses, therapeutic measures, and mode of transportation were correct in 2,033 (90%) patients with a discharge report. Severe errors of assessment by the emergency physician were identified in 73 patients (3%): life-threatening conditions were not recognised and/or grossly incorrect therapeutic measures were taken and/or the chosen means of transportation was unsuitable. Relative errors in assessment occurred in 4% (n = 83): the most crucial diagnosis was not made, but the patient was escorted by the emergency physician (without therapeutic errors) to a suitable hospital. In 3% (n = 65) of the cases, the patient's condition was overestimated by the emergency physician as suggested by the obviously exaggerated on-scene therapy. Underestimations of the severity were most common in patients with cardiopulmonary diseases and increased in frequency and severity with increasing age and the presence of a concomitant neurologic deficit. Underestimations of a severe condition in younger patients were extremely rare; overestimations of the severity and consequent overtreatment were particularly common in traumatised patients independent of age. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of quality management measures, a careful evaluation of on-scene diagnoses, therapeutic measures, and decisions made by the emergency physician is a suitable procedure for identifying systematic errors. A high percentage of correct diagnoses and therapy at the emergency site can only be ensured by clinically experienced physicians who constantly deal with patients with acutely life-threatening conditions.
METHODS AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The on-scene performance during all missions of the emergency physician-operated rescue helicopter and mobile intensive care unit based at a large-city hospital over a period of 1 year was retrospectively analysed; 2,254 hospital discharge reports were available (92% of the patients treated by the emergency physicians [n = 2,493]). The following parameters were investigated: reliability of the primary diagnosis established by the emergency physician (by comparison with the discharge diagnoses); initial on-scene therapeutic measures; means of transportation (with or without accompanying emergency physician); and level of care of the target hospital. RESULTS: The most common reasons for a mission were cardiopulmonary diseases (55%), neurological disorders (18%), and traumatic events (7%). The diagnoses, therapeutic measures, and mode of transportation were correct in 2,033 (90%) patients with a discharge report. Severe errors of assessment by the emergency physician were identified in 73 patients (3%): life-threatening conditions were not recognised and/or grossly incorrect therapeutic measures were taken and/or the chosen means of transportation was unsuitable. Relative errors in assessment occurred in 4% (n = 83): the most crucial diagnosis was not made, but the patient was escorted by the emergency physician (without therapeutic errors) to a suitable hospital. In 3% (n = 65) of the cases, the patient's condition was overestimated by the emergency physician as suggested by the obviously exaggerated on-scene therapy. Underestimations of the severity were most common in patients with cardiopulmonary diseases and increased in frequency and severity with increasing age and the presence of a concomitant neurologic deficit. Underestimations of a severe condition in younger patients were extremely rare; overestimations of the severity and consequent overtreatment were particularly common in traumatised patients independent of age. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of quality management measures, a careful evaluation of on-scene diagnoses, therapeutic measures, and decisions made by the emergency physician is a suitable procedure for identifying systematic errors. A high percentage of correct diagnoses and therapy at the emergency site can only be ensured by clinically experienced physicians who constantly deal with patients with acutely life-threatening conditions.
Authors: Helge Haugland; Oddvar Uleberg; Pål Klepstad; Andreas Krüger; Marius Rehn Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 2.038