We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To determine how often the Ambulance Call Record (ACR) was available to emergency department (ED) physicians and whether it contained information that changed the ED management of patients.
Methods
This was a prospective cohort study of adult patients transported to one of two tertiary care centre EDs. Physicians completed a data collection form for each patient regarding ACR availability and the perceived value of the ACR. This study began shortly after the implementation of a new electronic ACR (eACR) handover process (Round 1). To control for any confounding factors related to this new eACR handover process, the study was repeated 6 months after its implementation (Round 2).
Results
Total of 869 forms were collected: 545 in Round 1, and 324 in Round 2. The ACR was available at first physician assessment for 82 (15.7%) patients in Round 1, and 76 (24.4%) patients in Round 2 (Δ8.7%, 95% CI: 3.1%, 14.5%). The ACR was available at some point during patients’ ED stay for 154 (28.9%) patients in Round 1, compared to 111 (34.5%) patients in Round 2 (Δ5.6%, 95% CI: 0.0%, 12.1%). When the ACR was available for a patient (n=265), physicians believed that information in the ACR changed their treatment plan in 76 (28.8%) cases.
Conclusion
Physicians who review the ACR believe that the ACR contains relevant information that may influence patient management; however, physicians commonly manage patients without reviewing the ACR.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.