Hostname: page-component-669899f699-ggqkh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T21:35:59.064Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feedback to Emergency Medical Services Providers: The Good, the Bad, and the Ignored

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Elisabeth F. Mock ,
Keith D. Wrenn ,
Seth W. Wright ,
T. Chadwick Eustis  and
Corey M. Slovis
Elisabeth F. Mock
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
Keith D. Wrenn*
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
Seth W. Wright
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
T. Chadwick Eustis
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
Corey M. Slovis
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
*
Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, 703 Oxford House, Nashville, Tennessee 37212USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hypothesis:

To determine the type and frequency of immediate unsolicited feedback received by emergency medical service (EMS) providers from patients or their family members and emergency department (ED) personnel.

Methods:

Prospective, observational study of 69 emergency medical services providers in an urban emergency medical service system and 12 metropolitan emergency departments. Feedback was rated by two medical student observers using a prospectively devised original scale.

Results:

In 295 encounters with patients or family, feedback was rated as follows: 1) none in 224 (76%); 2) positive in 51 (17%); 3) negative in 19 (6%); and 4) mixed in one (<1%). Feedback from 254 encounters with emergency department personnel was rated as: 1) none in 185 (73%); 2) positive in 46 (18%); 3) negative in 21 (8%); and 4) mixed in 2 (1%). Patients who had consumed alcohol were more likely to give negative feedback than were patients who had not consumed alcohol. Feedback from emergency department personnel occurred more often when the emergency medical service provider considered the patient to be critically ill.

Conclusion:

The two groups provided feedback to emergency medical service providers in approximately one quarter of the calls. When feedback was provided, it was positive more than twice as often as it was negative. Emergency physicians should give regular and constructive feedback to emergency medical services providers more often than currently is the case.

Keywords

complaintscriticismemergency departmentemergency medical servicesfeedbackpatient satisfaction
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , June 1997 , pp. 74 - 77
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Hudson, T: Caring important in ED patient satisfaction survey. Hospitals 1992;2:36–38.Google Scholar
2. Krishel, SW, Baraff, LJ: Effect of emergency department information on patient satisfaction. Ann Emerg Med 1993;22:568–572.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Bursch, B, Beezy, J, Shaw, R: Emergency department satisfaction: What matters most? Ann Emerg Med 1993;22:586–591.Google Scholar
4. Swor, RA: Quality assurance in emergency medical service systems. Emerg Med Clin N Amer 1992;10:597–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Polsky, SS, Weigand, JV: Quality assurance in emergency medical service systems. Emerg Med Clin N Amer 1990;8:75–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Soumerai, SB, Avom, J: Principles of educational outreach (“academic detailing”) to improve clinical decision making. JAMA 1990;263:549–556.Google Scholar
7. Fontanarosa, PB: Occupational considerations for the prehospital care provider. Emerg Med Clin N Amer 1990;8:119–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Neale, AV: Work stress in emergency medical technicians. J Qccup Med 1991;33:991–997.Google Scholar