A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Establishing Core elements for a Prehospital Emergency Care Systems Evaluation Tool (PECSET) for systems in early stages of development: A Delphi consensus. | LitMetric

Objectives: International Prehospital Emergency Care (PEC) standards have been primarily developed by and for high resource settings. Most PEC systems in Asia, which are still in the early stages of development, struggle to achieve these standards. There is a need for an evaluation tool which can define achievable basic building blocks for PEC systems in low resource settings to improve quality of PEC. We aimed to identify the core, basic elements (building blocks of a PEC system) for a Prehospital Emergency Care Systems Evaluation Tool (PECSET) for low resource settings in Asia.

Methods: A 4-stage modified Delphi consensus method was used to engage 32 PEC experts from 12 Asian countries. Participants voted on 32 elements identified from a prior scoping review, focus group discussions, and survey. Each round of voting was conducted through an anonymous, web-based application and followed by face-to-face group discussions. The first two rounds aimed to answer, "Is the element important and feasible in a low resource setting?" The last two stages aimed to answer "Should this element be prioritized as core in the tool?" A thematic analysis of the recorded and transcribed discussions was used to identify participants' rationale for prioritization.

Results: After four rounds of voting, 12 elements were identified as core elements: 1) dispatch assisted instructions, 2) protocols for screening, triage and destination, (3) medical direction, 4) standardized training programs, 5) minimum ambulance standards, 6) operational metrics, 7) quality assurance, 8) operational safety protools, 9) essential patient care documentation, 10) medical records management, 11) layperson awareness and education and 12) universal access emergency number. However, the participants decided to include all 32 elements in the tool grouped into broader categories by percent agreement for a tiered approach for early, intermediate, and advanced PEC systems. Rationales for prioritization included a need for focus on basic infrastructure and building resilience in resource-stretched systems.

Conclusions: Through a Delphi consensus process, stakeholders identified core elements for PEC systems in low resource settings. These findings will inform the development of a tool for quality assurance and monitoring in low resource settings in South and Southeast Asian countries.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10903127.2024.2443472DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

resource settings
20
low resource
20
pec systems
16
core elements
12
prehospital emergency
12
emergency care
12
evaluation tool
12
delphi consensus
12
care systems
8
systems evaluation
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!