TY - JOUR
T1 - Use of a limited lights and siren protocol in the prehospital setting vs standard usage
AU - Merlin, Mark A.
AU - Baldino, Kimberly T.
AU - Lehrfeld, David P.
AU - Linger, Matt
AU - Lustiger, Eliyahu
AU - Cascio, Anthony
AU - Ohman-Strickland, Pamela
AU - Dossantos, Frank
PY - 2012/5
Y1 - 2012/5
N2 - Objective: Our objective was to determine if implementing a standard lights and sirens (L&S) protocol would reduce their use and if this had any effect on patient disposition. Methods: In a prospective cohort study, we trained emergency medical services (EMS) personnel from 4 towns in an L&S protocol and enrolled control personnel from 4 addition towns that were not using the protocol. We compare the use of L&S between them over a 6-month period. Our protocol restricted the usage of L&S to patients who had maladies requiring expedited transport. Emergency medical services personnel from the control towns had no such restrictions and were not aware that we were tracking their usage of L&S. We also considered if patient disposition was affected by the judicious usage of L&S. Results: Prehospital EMS personnel who were trained in an L&S protocol were 5.6 times less likely to use L&S when compared with those not trained. Of the 808 patients transported by both types of workers, no difference in patient disposition was observed. Conclusions: Our protocol significantly reduced the use of L&S. Judicious use of L&S has significant implications for transport safety. By allowing for selective transport with L&S usage, we observed no impact in patient disposition.
AB - Objective: Our objective was to determine if implementing a standard lights and sirens (L&S) protocol would reduce their use and if this had any effect on patient disposition. Methods: In a prospective cohort study, we trained emergency medical services (EMS) personnel from 4 towns in an L&S protocol and enrolled control personnel from 4 addition towns that were not using the protocol. We compare the use of L&S between them over a 6-month period. Our protocol restricted the usage of L&S to patients who had maladies requiring expedited transport. Emergency medical services personnel from the control towns had no such restrictions and were not aware that we were tracking their usage of L&S. We also considered if patient disposition was affected by the judicious usage of L&S. Results: Prehospital EMS personnel who were trained in an L&S protocol were 5.6 times less likely to use L&S when compared with those not trained. Of the 808 patients transported by both types of workers, no difference in patient disposition was observed. Conclusions: Our protocol significantly reduced the use of L&S. Judicious use of L&S has significant implications for transport safety. By allowing for selective transport with L&S usage, we observed no impact in patient disposition.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84861149587&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84861149587&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajem.2011.01.014
DO - 10.1016/j.ajem.2011.01.014
M3 - Article
C2 - 21570233
AN - SCOPUS:84861149587
SN - 0735-6757
VL - 30
SP - 519
EP - 525
JO - American Journal of Emergency Medicine
JF - American Journal of Emergency Medicine
IS - 4
ER -