Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorHauståker, Henrik
dc.contributor.authorØsterås, Øyvind
dc.contributor.authorNystøyl, Dag Ståle
dc.contributor.authorHeltne, Jon-Kenneth
dc.contributor.authorZakariassen, Erik
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-21T09:13:39Z
dc.date.available2022-03-21T09:13:39Z
dc.date.created2022-01-07T12:56:09Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationScandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care. 2021, 39 (2), 240-246.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0281-3432
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2986362
dc.description.abstractBackground Until autumn 2018 the GPs in Bergen Municipality did not attend emergency patients outside the emergency primary care centre. The ambulance staff handled emergencies on their own or were assisted by an anaesthesiologist from the helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS). The aim of this study was to investigate procedures performed by the HEMS anaesthesiologist and to assess the level of skills needed to perform these procedures. Methods This study was a retrospective assessment of data from the period 2011 to 2013 on all emergency missions in which patients were dealt with by HEMS, using a rapid-response car in Bergen Municipality. All emergency missions were sorted into three categories: No intervention, Basic or Advanced intervention. This list was made by a research group with anaesthesiologists working for Bergen HEMS and GPs with OOH experience. The list is based on curriculum found in acute medicine courses. Results HEMS responded to 716 (2.3%) out of a total of 31,696 emergencies in Bergen Municipality during the three years. In more than two-thirds (71%) of these missions, no intervention or only a basic intervention was performed. Most advanced procedures were performed in patients with cardiac arrest. Conclusion By retrospective evaluation of HEMS missions by car in Bergen municipality, we found that nearly one-third of the patients received advanced procedures. Cardiac arrest was the medical condition in which the most advanced procedures were performed. More research is needed to evaluate procedures and the importance of clinical evaluation and physicians’ experience in treating these patient groups. KEY POINTS Both HEMS and on-call GPs are needed in emergency care, and more knowledge will be useful to highlight the level of practical skills needed in these missions. There is a need for better prioritization of when to use HEMS resources and when to use on-call GPs in emergency missions. More than two-thirds of the patients involved in emergency missions received no intervention or just a basic intervention when dealt with by HEMS. This raises the issue of whether an on-call GP could have adequately treated many of the patients in this study in terms of practical skills.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleGeneral practitioners not available – out-of-hospital emergency patients handled by anaesthesiologist in a large Norwegian municipalityen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.rights.holder© The Authors, 2021en_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/02813432.2021.1922833
dc.identifier.cristin1976551
dc.source.journalScandinavian Journal of Primary Health Careen_US
dc.source.volume39en_US
dc.source.issue2en_US
dc.source.pagenumber240-246en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal