How should non-emergency EMS presentations be managed? A thematic analysis of politicians’, policymakers’, clinicians’ and consumers’ viewpoints

• Published in: BMJ open 2024-07, Vol.14 (7), p.e083866
• Main Authors: Wilkinson-Stokes, Matt, Yap, Celene, Crellin, Di, Bange, Ray, Braitberg, George, Gerdtz, Marie
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: ACCIDENT & EMERGENCY MEDICINE; Consumers; Emergency medical care; Focus groups; Health policy; Health Services Research; Interviews; Medical research; Mortality; Nursing care; Organisation of health services; Original Research; Paramedics; Patient-Centered Care; Primary care; PUBLIC HEALTH; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; Stakeholders
• ISSN: 2044-6055; 2044-6055
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-083866

ObjectiveIn 2023, Australian government emergency medical services (EMS) responded to over 4 million consumers, of which over 56% were not classified as an ‘emergency’, at the cost of AU$5.5 billion. We explored the viewpoints of politicians, policymakers, clinicians and consumers on how these non-emergency requests should be managed.DesignA realist framework was adopted; a multidisciplinary team (including paramedicine, medicine and nursing) was formed; data were collected via semistructured focus groups or interviews, and thematic analysis was performed.Setting and participants56 participants were selected purposefully and via open advertisement: national and state parliamentarians (n=3); government heads of healthcare disciplines (n=3); government policymakers (n=5); industry policymakers in emergency medicine, general practice and paramedicine (n=6); EMS chief executive officers, medical directors and managers (n=7); academics (n=8), frontline clinicians in medicine, nursing and paramedicine (n=8); and consumers (n=16).ResultsThree themes emerged: first, the reality of the EMS workload (theme titled ‘facing reality’); second, perceptions of what direction policy should take to manage this (‘no silver bullet’) and finally, what the future role of EMS in society should be (‘finding the right space’). Participants provided 16 policy suggestions, of which 10 were widely supported: increasing public health literacy, removing the Medical Priority Dispatch System, supporting multidisciplinary teams, increasing 24-hour virtual emergency departments, revising undergraduate paramedic university education to reflect the reality of the contemporary role, increasing use of management plans for frequent consumers, better paramedic integration with the healthcare system, empowering callers by providing estimated wait times, reducing ineffective media campaigns to ‘save EMS for emergencies’ and EMS moving away from hospital referrals and towards community care.ConclusionsThere is a need to establish consensus on the role of EMS within society and, particularly, on whether the scope should continue expanding beyond emergency care. This research reports 16 possible ideas, each of which may warrant consideration, and maps them onto the standard patient journey.