Cargando…
Advising and limiting medical treatment during phone consultation: a prospective multicentre study in HEMS settings
BACKGROUND: We investigated paramedic-initiated consultation calls and advice given via telephone by Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) physicians focusing on limitations of medical treatment (LOMT). METHODS: A prospective multicentre study was conducted on four physician-staffed HEMS bases...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8905861/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35264211 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-022-01002-8 |
_version_ | 1784665283035660288 |
---|---|
author | Kangasniemi, Heidi Setälä, Piritta Huhtala, Heini Olkinuora, Anna Kämäräinen, Antti Virkkunen, Ilkka Tirkkonen, Joonas Yli-Hankala, Arvi Jämsen, Esa Hoppu, Sanna |
author_facet | Kangasniemi, Heidi Setälä, Piritta Huhtala, Heini Olkinuora, Anna Kämäräinen, Antti Virkkunen, Ilkka Tirkkonen, Joonas Yli-Hankala, Arvi Jämsen, Esa Hoppu, Sanna |
author_sort | Kangasniemi, Heidi |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: We investigated paramedic-initiated consultation calls and advice given via telephone by Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) physicians focusing on limitations of medical treatment (LOMT). METHODS: A prospective multicentre study was conducted on four physician-staffed HEMS bases in Finland during a 6-month period. RESULTS: Of all 6115 (mean 8.4/base/day) paramedic-initiated consultation calls, 478 (7.8%) consultation calls involving LOMTs were included: 268 (4.4%) cases with a pre-existing LOMT, 165 (2.7%) cases where the HEMS physician issued a new LOMT and 45 (0.7%) cases where the patient already had an LOMT and the physician further issued another LOMT. The most common new limitation was a do-not-attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) order (n = 122/210, 58%) and/or ‘not eligible for intensive care’ (n = 96/210, 46%). In 49 (23%) calls involving a new LOMT, termination of an initiated resuscitation attempt was the only newly issued LOMT. The most frequent reasons for issuing an LOMT during consultations were futility of the overall situation (71%), poor baseline functional status (56%), multiple/severe comorbidities (56%) and old age (49%). In the majority of cases (65%) in which the HEMS physician issued a new LOMT for a patient without any pre-existing LOMT, the physician felt that the patient should have already had an LOMT. The patient was in a health care facility or a nursing home in half (49%) of the calls that involved issuing a new LOMT. Access to medical records was reported in 29% of the calls in which a new LOMT was issued by an HEMS physician. CONCLUSION: Consultation calls with HEMS physicians involving patients with LOMT decisions were common. HEMS physicians considered end-of-life questions on the phone and issued a new LOMT in 3.4% of consultations calls. These decisions mainly concerned termination of resuscitation, DNACPR, intubation and initiation of intensive care. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13049-022-01002-8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8905861 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89058612022-03-18 Advising and limiting medical treatment during phone consultation: a prospective multicentre study in HEMS settings Kangasniemi, Heidi Setälä, Piritta Huhtala, Heini Olkinuora, Anna Kämäräinen, Antti Virkkunen, Ilkka Tirkkonen, Joonas Yli-Hankala, Arvi Jämsen, Esa Hoppu, Sanna Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Original Research BACKGROUND: We investigated paramedic-initiated consultation calls and advice given via telephone by Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) physicians focusing on limitations of medical treatment (LOMT). METHODS: A prospective multicentre study was conducted on four physician-staffed HEMS bases in Finland during a 6-month period. RESULTS: Of all 6115 (mean 8.4/base/day) paramedic-initiated consultation calls, 478 (7.8%) consultation calls involving LOMTs were included: 268 (4.4%) cases with a pre-existing LOMT, 165 (2.7%) cases where the HEMS physician issued a new LOMT and 45 (0.7%) cases where the patient already had an LOMT and the physician further issued another LOMT. The most common new limitation was a do-not-attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) order (n = 122/210, 58%) and/or ‘not eligible for intensive care’ (n = 96/210, 46%). In 49 (23%) calls involving a new LOMT, termination of an initiated resuscitation attempt was the only newly issued LOMT. The most frequent reasons for issuing an LOMT during consultations were futility of the overall situation (71%), poor baseline functional status (56%), multiple/severe comorbidities (56%) and old age (49%). In the majority of cases (65%) in which the HEMS physician issued a new LOMT for a patient without any pre-existing LOMT, the physician felt that the patient should have already had an LOMT. The patient was in a health care facility or a nursing home in half (49%) of the calls that involved issuing a new LOMT. Access to medical records was reported in 29% of the calls in which a new LOMT was issued by an HEMS physician. CONCLUSION: Consultation calls with HEMS physicians involving patients with LOMT decisions were common. HEMS physicians considered end-of-life questions on the phone and issued a new LOMT in 3.4% of consultations calls. These decisions mainly concerned termination of resuscitation, DNACPR, intubation and initiation of intensive care. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13049-022-01002-8. BioMed Central 2022-03-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8905861/ /pubmed/35264211 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-022-01002-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Kangasniemi, Heidi Setälä, Piritta Huhtala, Heini Olkinuora, Anna Kämäräinen, Antti Virkkunen, Ilkka Tirkkonen, Joonas Yli-Hankala, Arvi Jämsen, Esa Hoppu, Sanna Advising and limiting medical treatment during phone consultation: a prospective multicentre study in HEMS settings |
title | Advising and limiting medical treatment during phone consultation: a prospective multicentre study in HEMS settings |
title_full | Advising and limiting medical treatment during phone consultation: a prospective multicentre study in HEMS settings |
title_fullStr | Advising and limiting medical treatment during phone consultation: a prospective multicentre study in HEMS settings |
title_full_unstemmed | Advising and limiting medical treatment during phone consultation: a prospective multicentre study in HEMS settings |
title_short | Advising and limiting medical treatment during phone consultation: a prospective multicentre study in HEMS settings |
title_sort | advising and limiting medical treatment during phone consultation: a prospective multicentre study in hems settings |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8905861/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35264211 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-022-01002-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kangasniemiheidi advisingandlimitingmedicaltreatmentduringphoneconsultationaprospectivemulticentrestudyinhemssettings AT setalapiritta advisingandlimitingmedicaltreatmentduringphoneconsultationaprospectivemulticentrestudyinhemssettings AT huhtalaheini advisingandlimitingmedicaltreatmentduringphoneconsultationaprospectivemulticentrestudyinhemssettings AT olkinuoraanna advisingandlimitingmedicaltreatmentduringphoneconsultationaprospectivemulticentrestudyinhemssettings AT kamarainenantti advisingandlimitingmedicaltreatmentduringphoneconsultationaprospectivemulticentrestudyinhemssettings AT virkkunenilkka advisingandlimitingmedicaltreatmentduringphoneconsultationaprospectivemulticentrestudyinhemssettings AT tirkkonenjoonas advisingandlimitingmedicaltreatmentduringphoneconsultationaprospectivemulticentrestudyinhemssettings AT ylihankalaarvi advisingandlimitingmedicaltreatmentduringphoneconsultationaprospectivemulticentrestudyinhemssettings AT jamsenesa advisingandlimitingmedicaltreatmentduringphoneconsultationaprospectivemulticentrestudyinhemssettings AT hoppusanna advisingandlimitingmedicaltreatmentduringphoneconsultationaprospectivemulticentrestudyinhemssettings |