ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To describe perceptions of providing, and using rapid evidence, to support decision making by two national bodies (one public health policy and one front-line clinical practice) during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Descriptive qualitative study (March-August 2020): 25 semistructured interviews were conducted, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. SETTING: Data were obtained as part of an evaluation of two Irish national projects; the Irish COVID-19 Evidence for General Practitioners project (General Practice (GP) project) which provided relevant evidence to address clinical questions posed by GPs; and the COVID-19 Evidence Synthesis Team (Health Policy project) which produced rapid evidence products at the request of the National Public Health Emergency Team. PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sample of 14 evidence providers (EPs: generated and disseminated rapid evidence) and 11 service ssers (SUs: GPs and policy-makers, who used the evidence). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participant perceptions. RESULTS: The Policy Project comprised 27 EPs, producing 30 reports across 1432 person-work-days. The GP project comprised 10 members from 3 organisations, meeting 49 times and posting evidence-based answers to 126 questions. Four unique themes were generated. 'The Work' highlighted that a structured but flexible organisational approach to producing evidence was essential. Ensuring quality of evidence products was challenging, particularly in the context of absent or poor-quality evidence. 'The Use' highlighted that rapid evidence products were considered invaluable to decision making. Trust and credibility of EPs were key, however, communication difficulties were highlighted by SUs (eg, website functionality). 'The Team' emphasised that a highly skilled team, working collaboratively, is essential to meeting the substantial workload demands and tight turnaround time. 'The Future' highlighted that investing in resources, planning and embedding evidence synthesis support, is crucial to national emergency preparedness. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid evidence products were considered invaluable to decision making. The credibility of EPs, a close relationship with SUs and having a highly skilled and adaptable team to meet the workload demands were identified as key strengths that optimised the utilisation of rapid evidence. ETHICS APPROVAL: Ethical approval was obtained from the National Research Ethics Committee for COVID-19-related Research, Ireland.
ABSTRACT
Background: The National Ambulance Service (NAS) is at the forefront of Ireland's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. As directed in Ireland's National Action Plan, NAS significantly expanded prehospital services, including provision of a novel COVID-19 testing service. Additionally, other health services rely on NAS's capacity to assess, transport and/or treat COVID-19 patients. In a climate of innovation and adaptation, NAS needs to learn from international ambulance services and share experience. Evaluation of the NAS response to COVID-19 is required to facilitate evidence-based planning for subsequent waves or future pandemics, and to identify innovative practice for mainstreaming into routine service provision. Aims: This project aims to test the utility of novel information networks and develop a tool that is tailored to evaluating pandemic-imposed change in an emergency medical service. Methods: The first aim will be to introduce and measure the impact of ambulance-specific research and information updates for NAS. Secondly, the usefulness to members of an international network of senior ambulance and research personnel ('AMBULANCE+COVID19' network), and the clarity and feasibility of a short-survey instrument, the Emergency Medical Services Five Question Survey (EMS-5QS), will be assessed. Finally, an evaluation framework for assessing pandemic-imposed change will be developed to enable NAS determine innovations: (1) for reactivation in another wave or new pandemic; (2) to be sustained as part of routine service. The framework will be developed in collaboration with NAS and the National Quality Improvement Team. The Research Team includes expertise from academia, ambulance services and the National Public Health Emergency Team. Conclusions: This project will facilitate the prompt introduction of information sharing processes to an emergency medical service and assess the impact of those processes. By developing a process for evaluating pandemic-imposed change in NAS, this project will add to the toolbox for future pandemic planning in emergency medical services internationally.