gms | German Medical Science

19. Deutscher Kongress für Versorgungsforschung

Deutsches Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung e. V.

30.09. - 01.10.2020, digital

What is known about the quality of out-of-hospital emergency medical services in the Arabian Gulf States?

Meeting Abstract

  • Hassan Moafa - Maastricht University, Health Services Research, Maastricht, Niederlande; Faculty of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Health Services Research, Jazan, Saudi-Arabien
  • Sander M.J. van Kuijk - Academic Hospital Maastricht, Clinical Epidemiology and Health Technology Assessment, Maastricht, Niederlande
  • G Franssen - Maastricht University Inner City Library, Maastricht, Niederlande
  • Mohammad Moukhyer - Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Jizan, Saudi-Arabien
  • Harm R. Haak - Máxima MC Eindhoven, Internal Medicine, Eindhoven, Niederlande; Academic Hospital Maastricht, Internal Medicine, Maastricht, Niederlande; Maastricht University, Maastricht, Niederlande

19. Deutscher Kongress für Versorgungsforschung (DKVF). sine loco [digital], 30.09.-01.10.2020. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2020. Doc20dkvf110

doi: 10.3205/20dkvf110, urn:nbn:de:0183-20dkvf1102

Published: September 25, 2020

© 2020 Moafa et al.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. See license information at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.


Outline

Text

Background and current state of (inter)national research: The Emergency Medical Services (EMS) have been developed in the Arabian Gulf States (AGS) in the last three decades. The EMS needs continuous quality assessment of their performance to improve and provide the best out-of-hospital care.

Research questions and objectives: This study aims to assess the quality of EMS in the AGS according to the six quality domains of the Institute of Medicine [1].

Methods or hypothesis: We searched four databases (i.e., PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL) for studies that reported on the quality of EMS in any of the AGS using clinical or non-clinical performance indicators. To quantify study quality and risk of bias, the adapted Newcastle Ottawa Scale was used [2]. We focused on structural and functional indicators, clinical and non-clinical.

Results: Twenty-five studies were eligible for inclusion. One study contained result of safety, fifteen time-centeredness, twenty effectiveness, five patient-centeredness, and thirteen studies reported on equity of EMS. None of the studies reported on efficiency of EMS. A significant proportion of studies showed high scores on the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Limited studies on EMS quality were available, not covering all relevant quality domains and not covering the whole AGS region. The equity domain showed the best outcome performance finding, whereas finding of the patient-centeredness domain showed room for improvement in the foreseeable future.

Discussion: Limited studies on EMS quality were available, not covering all relevant quality domains and not covering the whole AGS region. This review highlights the need to improve the quality of EMS in AGS particularly in the domains of effectiveness and patient safety. The equity domain showed the best outcome performance indicators. The patient-centeredness domain has room for improvement in the foreseeable future.

Practical implications: This review highlights the need for more and better studies of sufficient quality about all domains of quality in EMS in all the AGS. EMS research in Kuwait and Bahrain is warranted, as currently studies of EMS quality are unavailable for these States. Moreover, efficiency researches exploring this discipline should be conducted specially no studies were found has been searching this domain.


References

1.
Institute of Medicine. Emergency Medical Services: At the Crossroads. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2007. DOI: 10.17226/11629 External link
2.
Herzog R, Álvarez-Pasquin MJ, Díaz C, Del Barrio JL, Estrada JM, Gil Á. Are healthcare workers' intentions to vaccinate related to their knowledge, beliefs and attitudes? A systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2013 Feb;13:154. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-154 External link