Can first responders be sent to selected 9-1-1 emergency medical services calls without an ambulance?

Craig B. Key, Paul E. Pepe, David E. Persse, Darrell Calderon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of initially dispatching only first responders (FRs) to selected low-risk 9-1-1 requests for emergency medical services. First responders are rapidly-responding fire crews on apparatus without transport capabilities, with firefighters trained to at least a FR level and in most cases to the basic emergency medical technician (EMT) level. Low-risk 9-1-1 requests include automatic medical alerts (ALERTs), motor vehicle incidents (MVIs) for which the caller was unable to answer any medical dispatch questions designed to prioritize the call, and 9-1-1 call disconnects (D/Cs). Methods: A before-and-after study of patient dispositions was conducted using historical controls for comparison. During the historical control phase of six months, one year prior to the study phase, basic life support ambulances (staffed with two basic EMTs) were dispatched to selected low-risk 9-1-1 incidents. During the six-month study phase, a fire FR crew equipped with automated external defibrillators (AEDs) was sent initially without an ambulance to these incidents. Results: For ALERTs (n = 290 in historical group vs. 330 in study group), there was no statistical difference in the transport rate (7% vs 10%), but there was a statistically significant increase in the follow-up use of advanced life support (ALS) (1% vs 4%, p = 0.009). No patient in the ALERTs historical group required airway management, while one patient in the study group received endotracheal intubation. No patient required defibrillation in either group. Analysis of the MVIs showed a significant decrease (p < 0.0001) in the patient transport rate from 39% of controls to 33% of study patients, but no change in the follow-up use of ALS interventions (2% for each group). For both the ALERTs and MVIs, the FR's mean response time was faster than ambulances (p < 0.0001). Among the 9-1-1 D/Cs with FRs only (n = 1,028), 15% were transported and 43 (4%) received subsequent ALS care. Four of these patients (0.4%) received intubation and two (0.2%) required defibrillation. However, no patient was judged to have had adverse outcomes as a result of the dispatch protocol change. Conclusions: Fire apparatus crews trained in the use of AEDs can safely be used to initially respond alone (without ambulances) to selected, low-risk 9-1-1 calls. This tactic improves response intervals while reducing ambulance responses to these incidents.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)339-346
Number of pages8
JournalAcademic Emergency Medicine
Volume10
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2003

Fingerprint

Ambulances
Emergency Medical Services
Motor Vehicles
Defibrillators
Emergency Medical Technicians
Life Support Care
Firefighters
Airway Management
Intratracheal Intubation
Intubation
Reaction Time
Safety

Keywords

  • Accidents
  • Ambulance
  • Defibrillation
  • Dispatch
  • Emergency medical services
  • Emergency medical technician
  • EMS
  • EMT
  • First responder
  • Medical priority
  • Tiered
  • Traffic
  • Triage

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Emergency Medicine

Cite this

Can first responders be sent to selected 9-1-1 emergency medical services calls without an ambulance? / Key, Craig B.; Pepe, Paul E.; Persse, David E.; Calderon, Darrell.

In: Academic Emergency Medicine, Vol. 10, No. 4, 01.04.2003, p. 339-346.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Key, Craig B. ; Pepe, Paul E. ; Persse, David E. ; Calderon, Darrell. / Can first responders be sent to selected 9-1-1 emergency medical services calls without an ambulance?. In: Academic Emergency Medicine. 2003 ; Vol. 10, No. 4. pp. 339-346.
@article{ec8797e1eeee46a1936ada6912e4aef7,
title = "Can first responders be sent to selected 9-1-1 emergency medical services calls without an ambulance?",
abstract = "Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of initially dispatching only first responders (FRs) to selected low-risk 9-1-1 requests for emergency medical services. First responders are rapidly-responding fire crews on apparatus without transport capabilities, with firefighters trained to at least a FR level and in most cases to the basic emergency medical technician (EMT) level. Low-risk 9-1-1 requests include automatic medical alerts (ALERTs), motor vehicle incidents (MVIs) for which the caller was unable to answer any medical dispatch questions designed to prioritize the call, and 9-1-1 call disconnects (D/Cs). Methods: A before-and-after study of patient dispositions was conducted using historical controls for comparison. During the historical control phase of six months, one year prior to the study phase, basic life support ambulances (staffed with two basic EMTs) were dispatched to selected low-risk 9-1-1 incidents. During the six-month study phase, a fire FR crew equipped with automated external defibrillators (AEDs) was sent initially without an ambulance to these incidents. Results: For ALERTs (n = 290 in historical group vs. 330 in study group), there was no statistical difference in the transport rate (7{\%} vs 10{\%}), but there was a statistically significant increase in the follow-up use of advanced life support (ALS) (1{\%} vs 4{\%}, p = 0.009). No patient in the ALERTs historical group required airway management, while one patient in the study group received endotracheal intubation. No patient required defibrillation in either group. Analysis of the MVIs showed a significant decrease (p < 0.0001) in the patient transport rate from 39{\%} of controls to 33{\%} of study patients, but no change in the follow-up use of ALS interventions (2{\%} for each group). For both the ALERTs and MVIs, the FR's mean response time was faster than ambulances (p < 0.0001). Among the 9-1-1 D/Cs with FRs only (n = 1,028), 15{\%} were transported and 43 (4{\%}) received subsequent ALS care. Four of these patients (0.4{\%}) received intubation and two (0.2{\%}) required defibrillation. However, no patient was judged to have had adverse outcomes as a result of the dispatch protocol change. Conclusions: Fire apparatus crews trained in the use of AEDs can safely be used to initially respond alone (without ambulances) to selected, low-risk 9-1-1 calls. This tactic improves response intervals while reducing ambulance responses to these incidents.",
keywords = "Accidents, Ambulance, Defibrillation, Dispatch, Emergency medical services, Emergency medical technician, EMS, EMT, First responder, Medical priority, Tiered, Traffic, Triage",
author = "Key, {Craig B.} and Pepe, {Paul E.} and Persse, {David E.} and Darrell Calderon",
year = "2003",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1197/aemj.10.4.339",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
pages = "339--346",
journal = "Academic Emergency Medicine",
issn = "1069-6563",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Can first responders be sent to selected 9-1-1 emergency medical services calls without an ambulance?

AU - Key, Craig B.

AU - Pepe, Paul E.

AU - Persse, David E.

AU - Calderon, Darrell

PY - 2003/4/1

Y1 - 2003/4/1

N2 - Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of initially dispatching only first responders (FRs) to selected low-risk 9-1-1 requests for emergency medical services. First responders are rapidly-responding fire crews on apparatus without transport capabilities, with firefighters trained to at least a FR level and in most cases to the basic emergency medical technician (EMT) level. Low-risk 9-1-1 requests include automatic medical alerts (ALERTs), motor vehicle incidents (MVIs) for which the caller was unable to answer any medical dispatch questions designed to prioritize the call, and 9-1-1 call disconnects (D/Cs). Methods: A before-and-after study of patient dispositions was conducted using historical controls for comparison. During the historical control phase of six months, one year prior to the study phase, basic life support ambulances (staffed with two basic EMTs) were dispatched to selected low-risk 9-1-1 incidents. During the six-month study phase, a fire FR crew equipped with automated external defibrillators (AEDs) was sent initially without an ambulance to these incidents. Results: For ALERTs (n = 290 in historical group vs. 330 in study group), there was no statistical difference in the transport rate (7% vs 10%), but there was a statistically significant increase in the follow-up use of advanced life support (ALS) (1% vs 4%, p = 0.009). No patient in the ALERTs historical group required airway management, while one patient in the study group received endotracheal intubation. No patient required defibrillation in either group. Analysis of the MVIs showed a significant decrease (p < 0.0001) in the patient transport rate from 39% of controls to 33% of study patients, but no change in the follow-up use of ALS interventions (2% for each group). For both the ALERTs and MVIs, the FR's mean response time was faster than ambulances (p < 0.0001). Among the 9-1-1 D/Cs with FRs only (n = 1,028), 15% were transported and 43 (4%) received subsequent ALS care. Four of these patients (0.4%) received intubation and two (0.2%) required defibrillation. However, no patient was judged to have had adverse outcomes as a result of the dispatch protocol change. Conclusions: Fire apparatus crews trained in the use of AEDs can safely be used to initially respond alone (without ambulances) to selected, low-risk 9-1-1 calls. This tactic improves response intervals while reducing ambulance responses to these incidents.

AB - Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of initially dispatching only first responders (FRs) to selected low-risk 9-1-1 requests for emergency medical services. First responders are rapidly-responding fire crews on apparatus without transport capabilities, with firefighters trained to at least a FR level and in most cases to the basic emergency medical technician (EMT) level. Low-risk 9-1-1 requests include automatic medical alerts (ALERTs), motor vehicle incidents (MVIs) for which the caller was unable to answer any medical dispatch questions designed to prioritize the call, and 9-1-1 call disconnects (D/Cs). Methods: A before-and-after study of patient dispositions was conducted using historical controls for comparison. During the historical control phase of six months, one year prior to the study phase, basic life support ambulances (staffed with two basic EMTs) were dispatched to selected low-risk 9-1-1 incidents. During the six-month study phase, a fire FR crew equipped with automated external defibrillators (AEDs) was sent initially without an ambulance to these incidents. Results: For ALERTs (n = 290 in historical group vs. 330 in study group), there was no statistical difference in the transport rate (7% vs 10%), but there was a statistically significant increase in the follow-up use of advanced life support (ALS) (1% vs 4%, p = 0.009). No patient in the ALERTs historical group required airway management, while one patient in the study group received endotracheal intubation. No patient required defibrillation in either group. Analysis of the MVIs showed a significant decrease (p < 0.0001) in the patient transport rate from 39% of controls to 33% of study patients, but no change in the follow-up use of ALS interventions (2% for each group). For both the ALERTs and MVIs, the FR's mean response time was faster than ambulances (p < 0.0001). Among the 9-1-1 D/Cs with FRs only (n = 1,028), 15% were transported and 43 (4%) received subsequent ALS care. Four of these patients (0.4%) received intubation and two (0.2%) required defibrillation. However, no patient was judged to have had adverse outcomes as a result of the dispatch protocol change. Conclusions: Fire apparatus crews trained in the use of AEDs can safely be used to initially respond alone (without ambulances) to selected, low-risk 9-1-1 calls. This tactic improves response intervals while reducing ambulance responses to these incidents.

KW - Accidents

KW - Ambulance

KW - Defibrillation

KW - Dispatch

KW - Emergency medical services

KW - Emergency medical technician

KW - EMS

KW - EMT

KW - First responder

KW - Medical priority

KW - Tiered

KW - Traffic

KW - Triage

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037389420&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037389420&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1197/aemj.10.4.339

DO - 10.1197/aemj.10.4.339

M3 - Article

C2 - 12670847

AN - SCOPUS:0037389420

VL - 10

SP - 339

EP - 346

JO - Academic Emergency Medicine

JF - Academic Emergency Medicine

SN - 1069-6563

IS - 4

ER -