Novel Methodology for linking 911 dispatch categories with a death registry: Mortality rates of selected dispatch categories.

Objectives: Medical Priority Dispatch System (MPDS) is a system used to assign medical 9-1-1 calls to one of 35 chief complaints that are further categorized in order of increasing priority, Alpha through Echo. In this descriptive study we demonstrate the methodology of matching MPDS codes to a county mortality registry. We also evaluated the ability of select MPDS codes (fall, respiratory, sick person, and abdominal pain) to predict mortality up to 30 days for all ages transported by Alameda County Emergency Medical Services (EMS).Methods: Using Alameda County EMS data, we conducted a retrospective review of all EMS encounters that occurred from November 1, 2011, to November 1, 2016. To describe mortality in this population, we identified unique patients and linked them to the Alameda County Public Health Death Registry. We identified mortality at 48 hours, 7 days, and 30 days after an EMS encounter.Results: Approximately 99% of the EMS encounters were matched with unique patient identifiers, yielding a study sample of 202,431 (4% less than age 18, 53% between ages 18-65, and 43% over age 65). Patients with a respiratory chief complaint had the highest mortality percentage in each age group (0.23%, 2.7%, and 14.55% respectively). There was no correlation between MPDS code and mortality for patients less than age 18. An increase in Alpha through Echo designation for respiratory complaints in patients 18-65 and older than 65 years corresponded with an increase in 30-day mortality.Conclusions: This study demonstrates an upward trend in mortality with increasing acuity of Alpha through Echo designations for adult patients with respiratory complaints. Mortality increased with age in this cohort. Most of the deaths occurred after 7 days.

Physical restraint use in children with mental and behavioral health emergencies in the prehospital setting.

Objective: Emergency medical services (EMS) transport for mental and behavioral health (MBH) emergencies occurs frequently in children, yet little is understood regarding prehospital physical restraint use despite the potential for serious adverse events. We aim to describe restraint use prevalence and primary impressions among children with MBH emergencies. Methods: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of children with MBH emergencies evaluated by Alameda County (ALCO), California EMS from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018. Patient demographics and clinical variables were collected from the EMS records including sex, age at time of encounter, year of encounter, transport destination, medication use, and primary impression(s). The primary outcome was the use of physical restraints. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the primary outcome and associated demographic and diagnostic features, as well as temporal use patterns. Sex and age were compared between restrained and non-restrained youth using chi-square analysis. Results: Over the 7-year study period, ALCO EMS transported 9775 children with MBH emergencies. Of these transports, 1205 (12.3%) were physically restrained. Most children restrained had the primary impression of "behavioral/psychiatric crisis" (51.1%), "psychiatric crisis" (27.4%), and "behavioral-other" (12.4%) and the remaining children (9.1%) had a non-psychiatric/behavioral health primary impression. Over time, there was no statistically significant change in either number of children with MBH emergencies transported or physical restraint rate. Conclusions: More than 1 in 8 children with MBH emergencies are being physically restrained during EMS transport. Restraint rate did not substantially change over time. Further studies to understand existing restraint rates and EMS resources available to address acute agitation in children are needed to inform quality and care enhancing initiatives.

Safety of a prehospital emergency medical services protocol for an alternative destination for pediatric behavioral emergencies in Alameda County.

Background: Pediatric patients with behavioral health emergencies (BHEs) are often transported to an emergency department (ED) by emergency medical services (EMS), despite having no physical medical complaints, to await psychiatric evaluation and treatment. This process leads to significant delays in their care. We examined the safety of directly transporting pediatric patients with BHEs from the field to an alternative destination of a psychiatric emergency service (PES) facility using an EMS protocol. Methods: A retrospective review from November 1, 2011, to November 1, 2016, was conducted for pediatric EMS encounters using EMS data from Alameda County, California. Our primary outcome was the safety of a prehospital alternative destination protocol. We identified the proportion of patients who required retransport to an ED within 24 h after arriving at PES (defined as a failed diversion). We also describe the mortality of all patients being transported for a BHE. Results: There were 38,241 total pediatric encounters, with 20.1% for BHEs. A total of 3122 (41%) BHE encounters met protocol criteria and were transported directly to the PES. Only 16 (0.5%) patients had a secondary transport (failed diversion) to an ED within 24 h of arrival. No patients with a BHE transported to the PES died within 30 days of the EMS encounter. Conclusion: Death and adverse clinical outcomes are extremely rare in pediatric patients using a prehospital alternative destination protocol. This information could significantly improve the care of children with BHEs.

Real-World Midazolam Use and Outcomes With Out-of-Hospital Treatment of Status Epilepticus in the United States.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Guidelines recommend 10-mg intramuscular midazolam as the first-line treatment option for status epilepticus. However, in real-world practice, it is frequently administered intranasally or intravenously and is dosed lower. Therefore, we used conventional and instrumental variable approaches to examine the effectiveness of midazolam in a national out-of-hospital cohort. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of adults with status epilepticus used the ESO Data Collaborative research dataset (January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019). The exposures were the route and dose of midazolam. We performed hierarchical logistic regression and 2-stage least squares regression using agency treatment patterns as an instrument to examine our outcomes, rescue therapy, and ventilatory support. RESULTS: There were 7,634 out-of-hospital encounters from 657 EMS agencies. Midazolam was administered intranasally in 20%, intravenously in 46%, and intramuscularly in 35% of the encounters. Compared with intramuscular administration, intranasal midazolam increased (risk difference [RD], 6.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4% to 10.5%) and intravenous midazolam decreased (RD, -11.1%; 95% CI, -14.7% to -7.5%) the risk of rescue therapy. The differences in ventilatory support were not statistically significant (intranasal RD, -1.5%; 95% CI, -3.2% to 0.3%; intravenous RD, -0.3%; 95% CI, -1.9% to 1.2%). Higher doses were associated with a lower risk of rescue therapy (RD, -2.6%; 95% CI, -3.3% to -1.9%) and increased ventilatory support (RD, 0.4%; 95% CI, 0.1% to 0.7%). The instrumental variable analysis yielded similar results, except that dose was not associated with ventilatory support. CONCLUSION: The route and dose of midazolam affect clinical outcomes. Compared with intramuscular administration, intranasal administration may be less effective and intravenous administration more effective in terminating status epilepticus, although the differences between these and previous results may reflect the nature of real-world data as opposed to randomized data.

Paramedic use of the Physician Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) for medical intervention and transportation decisions.

BACKGROUND: Physician Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment forms (POLST) exist in some format in all 50 states. The objective of this study is to determine paramedic interpretation and application of the California POLST for medical intervention and transportation decisions. METHODS: This study used a prospective, convenience sample of California Bay Area paramedics who reviewed six fictional scenarios of patients and accompanying mock POLST forms. Based on the clinical case and POLST, paramedics identified medical interventions that were appropriate (i.e. non-invasive positive pressure airway) as well as transportation decisions (i.e. non-transport to the hospital against medical advice). EMS provider confidence in their POLST interpretation was also assessed. RESULTS: There were 118 paramedic participants with a mean of 13.3 years of EMS experience that completed the survey. Paramedics routinely identified the selected medical intervention on a patients POLST correctly as either comfort focused, selective or full treatment (113-118;96%-100%). For many clinical scenarios, particularly when a patient's POLST indicated comfort focused treatment, paramedics chose to use online medical oversight through base physician contact (68-73;58%-62%). In one case, a POLST indicated "transport to hospital only if comfort needs cannot be met in current location", 13 (14%) paramedics elected to transport the patient anyway and 51 (43%) chose "Non-transport, Against Medical Advice". The majority of paramedics agreed or strongly agreed that they knew how to use a POLST to decide which medical interventions to provide (106;90%) and how to transport a patient (74;67%). However, after completing the cases, similar proportions of paramedics agreed (42;36%), disagreed (43;36%) or were neutral (30;25%) when asked if they find the POLST confusing. CONCLUSION: The POLST is a powerful tool for paramedics when caring patients with serious illness. Although paramedics are confident in their ability to use a POLST to decide appropriate medical interventions, many still find the POLST confusing particularly when making transportation decisions. Some paramedics rely on online medical oversight to provide guidance in challenging situations. Authors recommend further research of EMS POLST utilization and goal concordant care, dedicated paramedic POLST education, specific EMS hospice and palliative care protocols and better nomenclature for non-transport in order to improve care for patients with serious illness.

Emergency medical service interpretation of Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) in cardiopulmonary arrest.

Objective: Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) forms exist in some form in all 50 states. This study evaluates emergency medical service (EMS) practitioners interpretation of the POLST in cardiopulmonary arrest. Methods: This study used a prospective convenience sample of California Bay Area EMS practitioners who reviewed 6 fictional scenarios of patients in cardiopulmonary arrest and accompanying California POLST forms. Based on the cases and POLST, EMS practitioners identified patient preference for "attempt resuscitation," "do not attempt resuscitation/DNR," or "unsure" and subsequently selected medical interventions (ie, chest compressions, defibrillation, and so on). They also rated their confidence in POLST use and interpretation. Results: In scenarios of cardiopulmonary arrest and POLST that indicated do not resuscitate (DNR)/do not attempt resuscitation (DNAR) and full treatment, only 45%-65% of EMS practitioners correctly identified the patient as DNR/DNAR. EMS practitioners were more likely to interpret the POLST correctly in scenarios where patients were DNR/DNAR but indicated selective treatment (86%; 168/196) or comfort-focused treatment (86%; 169/196). In cardiopulmonary arrest scenarios where the patient was correctly identified as DNR/DNAR, EMS practitioners frequently selected defibrillation, advanced airway, or epinephrine as appropriate treatment. For all 6 scenarios, there was no statistical difference in response selection with level of training (emergency medical technician/paramedics) or type of EMS personnel (fire based/private). Conclusion: The POLST is a powerful tool to convey medical treatment preferences; however, there is significant variation in the interpretation and application by EMS practitioners. To improve the POLST effectiveness, the authors suggest more EMS input into POLST development, concise language that defines resuscitation, and more EMS education about clinical application.

Effect of a Mobile Integrated Hospice Healthcare Program on Emergency Medical Services Transport to the Emergency Department.

Objective: To evaluate the effect of a Mobile Integrated Hospice Healthcare (MIHH) program including hospice education and expansion of paramedic scope of practice to use hospice medication kits. Primary outcome was the effect on hospice patient transport to the Emergency Department. Secondary outcomes included reasons for patient transport and review of MIHH kit utilization. Methods: In 2015, the project was implemented in Ventura County, California in collaboration with county emergency medical services (EMS) agency, first response/transport organizations, and hospice programs. Paramedic supervisors received 30 hours of hospice training focusing on palliative care, grief and crisis counseling. When 9-1-1 was called for a patient, EMS first responders arrived on scene, determined a patient was enrolled in hospice and then contacted trained MIHH. Results: Six months (2/2015-7/2015) prior to project implementation the percentage of hospice patients transported to the ED averaged 80.3% (98/122). During the first (8/2015-7/2016), second (8/2016-7/2017) and third year (8/2017-7/2018) after project implementation, the percentage of hospice patients transported to the ED was 36.2% (68/188), 33.2% (63/190) and 24.8% (36/145) respectively. A total of 523 hospice patients were cared for by MIHH during this three-year interval. Of those hospice patients transported, the most common reason for transport was fall/trauma. The MIHH hospice kit was only used once in the field. Odds ratio for hospice transportation to the ED before and after project implementation was 0.125 (95% Confidence Interval: 0.077 to 0.201; p < 0.0001). This represents an absolute reduction risk of 46.6% (95% Confidence Interval: 38.53% to 54.72%). Conclusion: MIHH decreased the transportation of hospice patients to the ED. MIHH provided hospice education, provided family grief support and developed treatment plans with hospice nurses. An expanded scope of practice, including a paramedic hospice kit, was not contributory to this decrease.

EMS Experience Caring and Communicating with Patients and Families with a Life-Limiting-Illness.

Introduction: The emergency medical services (EMS) system was designed to reduce death and disability and EMS training focuses on saving lives through resuscitation, aggressive treatment and transportation to the emergency department. EMS providers commonly care for patients who have life-limiting illnesses. The objective was to explore EMS provider challenges, self-perceived roles and training experiences caring for patients and families with life-limiting illness. Methods: Qualitative content analysis of semi-structured interviews with EMS providers (n = 15) in Alameda County, CA. Purposive sampling was used to ensure a variety of perspectives including provider age, years of EMS experience, emergency medical technicians and paramedics, fire-based versus private, transport versus non-transporting. Recorded and transcribed interviews were analyzed using a thematic approach. Results: In their work with patients with life-limiting illness, participating EMS providers were interviewed and reported challenges for which their formal training had not prepared them: responding to grief and emotion expressed by families during traumatic events or death notification, and performing in the moment decision-making to determine the course of action after acute, unexpected, and traumatic events. Many participants reported becoming comfortable with grief counseling and death notification after acquiring some clinical experience. In the moment decision-making was eased when patients and families had had advance care planning discussions, however many patients, especially those from vulnerable and underserved populations, lacked advance care planning. In the face of situations where the course of action was not immediately clear, EMS providers voiced two frames for their role in caring for patients with life-limiting illness: transportation only ("transport people") versus a more "holistic" view, where EMS providers provided counseling and information about available resources. Conclusions: EMS providers interface with patients who have life-limiting illness and their families in the setting of traumatic events where the course of action is often unclear. There is an opportunity to provide formal training to EMS providers around grief counseling as well as how they can assist patients and families in in the moment decision-making to support previously identified goals and align care with patient goals and preferences.

Hospice and Comfort Care Patient Utilization of Emergency Medical Services.

Introduction: Emergency medical services (EMS) were designed to prevent death and disability. When hospice patients call 9-1-1, it can create challenging scenarios for EMS providers, patients, and families. The objective of this investigation is to understand the characteristics of hospice and comfort care patient EMS utilization in Alameda County, California. Methods: This is a 15-month (7/1/2019-10/1/2020) retrospective observational study in Alameda County using electronic patient care reports (PCRs). The search terms "hospice" and "comfort measures only" were applied to PCR narratives. Results: Of the 237,493 EMS provider response calls, 534 (0.2%) were for hospice and comfort care patients. One hundred seventy-four (32.6%) calls were from skilled nursing facilities versus 343 (64.2%) from private residences. Among the most common primary impressions were respiratory complaints (96; 18.0%), altered mental status (96; 18.0%), weakness (58; 10.9%), and cardiac arrest (45; 8.4%). The most common interventions included blood glucose (244; 45.7%), electrocardiogram (181; 33.9%), and intravenous placement (170; 31.8%). Of note, eight (1.5%) patients received cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and an additional eight (1.5%) patients were intubated endotracheally or received a supraglottic airway device for intubation. Sixty-eight (12.7%) patients received medications, the most common of which were fentanyl (17; 3.2%) and albuterol (16; 3.0%). Of note, five (0.9%) patients received naloxone. Ultimately, 468 (87.6%) patients were transported by EMS. Of the 33 (6.1%) patients who died on the scene, three received resuscitation attempts. Conclusion: Although EMS providers encounter hospice and comfort care patients infrequently, awareness of hospice services and comprehensive end-of-life care communication skills with patients and family should be an important part of EMS.

Prehospital, post-ROSC blood pressure and associated neurologic outcome.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between hypotension and neurologic outcome in adults with return of spontaneous circulation after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS: Blood pressure and medication data were extracted from adult patients who had ROSC after OHCA in Alameda County and matched with neurologic outcome using the CARES database from January 1, 2018 through July 1, 2019. We used univariate logistic regression with p ≤ 0.2 followed by multivariate logistic regression and reported an odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Among the 781 adult patients who had ROSC after OHCA, 107 (13.7%) were noted to be hypotensive and 61 (57% of the hypotensive group) received vasopressors. Patients with a final prehospital blood pressure recording of <90 mmHg were more likely to have a poor neurologic outcome (adjusted odds ratio 2.13, adj p = 0.048). About twice as many patients who were not hypotensive had a good neurologic outcome compared to hypotensive patients who had a good neurologic outcome (23% to 10.3%). Additionally, patients who were hypotensive and did not receive vasopressors had a similar neurologic outcome compared to patients who did receive vasopressors. CONCLUSION: Prehospital post-ROSC hypotension was associated with worse neurologic outcome and giving hypotensive patients vasopressors may not improve neurologic outcome in the prehospital setting.

Overdose Receiving Centers - An Idea Whose Time Has Come?

Drug overdose deaths have been the leading cause of accidental death in the United States with two thirds involving opioids. Strong evidence supports the efficacy of medications for addiction treatment such as buprenorphine and harm reduction strategies such as naloxone distribution. While emergency medical service (EMS) systems have defined specialty centers for the treatment of many significant life threatening disease (trauma, stroke, myocardial infarction) implementation of opioid use disorder systems of care that integrate EMS are uncommon. As fentanyl drives the third wave of the opioid epidemic, EMS systems are uniquely positioned to direct patients to hospitals that can provide the best care for patients with Opiate Use Disorder (OUD.) Emergency Departments which have established systems for early intervention and treatment for patients with opioid use disorders have shown higher engagement in treatment programs. This, in turn, leads to lower mortality. EMS systems which designate specialty centers for overdose patients may show a public health mortality benefit.

Identification of Generalized Convulsive Status Epilepticus from Emergency Medical Service Records: A Validation Study of Diagnostic Coding.

BACKGROUND: Generalized convulsive status epilepticus (GCSE) is a neurologic emergency demanding prehospital identification and treatment. Evaluating real-world practice requires accurately identifying the target population; however, it is unclear whether emergency medical services (EMS) documentation accurately identifies patients with GCSE. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of EMS diagnostic impressions for GCSE. METHODS: This was an analysis of electronic medical records of a California county EMS system from 2013 to 2018. We identified all cases with a primary diagnostic impression of "seizure-active," "seizure-post," or "seizure-not otherwise specified (NOS)" and within each diagnostic category, we randomly selected 75 adult and 25 pediatric records. Two authors reviewed the provider narrative of these 300 charts to determine a clinical seizure diagnosis according to prespecified definitions. We calculated a kappa for interrater reliability of the clinical diagnosis. We then calculated the positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, and specificity of an EMS diagnosis of "seizure-active" diagnosis for identifying GCSE. Sensitivity and specificity calculations were weighted according to the distribution of seizure cases in the overall population. We performed a descriptive analysis of records with an incorrect EMS diagnosis of GCSE or seizure. RESULTS: Of 38,995 total records for seizure, there were 3401 (8.7%) seizure-active cases, 12,478 (32.0%) seizure-NOS cases, and 23,116 (59.4%) seizure-post cases. An EMS diagnosis of "seizure-active" had a PPV of 65.0% (95% CI 54.8-74.3), sensitivity of 54.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 39.3-69.0), and specificity of 96.6% (95% CI 95.1-97.6) for capturing GCSE. Limiting the case definition to patients who received an EMS diagnosis of "seizure-active" and were treated with a benzodiazepine increased the PPV (80.2%; 95% CI 69.9-88.2) and specificity (99.3%; 95% CI 98.7-99.6) while the sensitivity decreased (25.1%; 95% CI 17.0-35.3). Across the 300 records reviewed, there were 19 (6.3%) patients who had a non-seizure related diagnosis including non-epileptic spells (7 records), altered mental status (8 records), tremors (2 records), anxiety (1 record), and stroke (1 record). CONCLUSIONS: EMS diagnostic impressions have reasonable PPV and specificity but low sensitivity for GCSE. Improved coding algorithms and training will allow for improved benchmarking, quality improvement, and research about this neurologic emergency.

Prehospital midazolam use and outcomes among patients with out-of-hospital status epilepticus.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the use of benzodiazepines and the association between low benzodiazepine dose, breakthrough seizures, and respiratory support in patients with status epilepticus. METHODS: In this cross-sectional analysis of adult patients with status epilepticus treated by an emergency medical services agency from 2013 to 2018, the primary outcome was treatment with a second benzodiazepine dose, an indicator for breakthrough seizure. The secondary outcome was receiving respiratory support. Midazolam was the only benzodiazepine administered. RESULTS: Among 2,494 patients with status epilepticus, mean age was 54.0 years and 1,146 (46%) were female. There were 1,537 patients given midazolam at any dose, yielding an administration rate of 62%. No patients received a dose and route consistent with national guidelines. Rescue therapy with a second midazolam dose was required in 282 (18%) patients. Higher midazolam doses were associated with lower odds of rescue therapy (odds ratio [OR], 0.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-0.9) and were not associated with increased respiratory support. If anything, higher doses of midazolam were associated with decreased need for respiratory support after adjustment (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.8-1.0). CONCLUSIONS: An overwhelming majority of patients with status epilepticus did not receive evidence-based benzodiazepine treatment. Higher midazolam doses were associated with reduced use of rescue therapy and there was no evidence of respiratory harm, suggesting that benzodiazepines are withheld without clinical benefit. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with status epilepticus, higher doses of midazolam led to a reduced use of rescue therapy without an increased need for ventilatory support.

Adult Patients with Respiratory Distress: Current Evidence-based Recommendations for Prehospital Care.

INTRODUCTION: We developed evidence-based recommendations for prehospital evaluation and treatment of adult patients with respiratory distress. These recommendations are compared with current protocols used by the 33 local emergency medical services agencies (LEMSA) in California. METHODS: We performed a review of the evidence in the prehospital treatment of adult patients with respiratory distress. The quality of evidence was rated and used to form guidelines. We then compared the respiratory distress protocols of each of the 33 LEMSAs for consistency with these recommendations. RESULTS: PICO (population/problem, intervention, control group, outcome) questions investigated were treatment with oxygen, albuterol, ipratropium, steroids, nitroglycerin, furosemide, and non-invasive ventilation. Literature review revealed that oxygen titration to no more than 94-96% for most acutely ill medical patients and to 88-92% in patients with acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation is associated with decreased mortality. In patients with bronchospastic disease, the data shows improved symptoms and peak flow rates after the administration of albuterol. There is limited data regarding prehospital use of ipratropium, and the benefit is less clear. The literature supports the use of systemic steroids in those with asthma and COPD to improve symptoms and decrease hospital admissions. There is weak evidence to support the use of nitrates in critically ill, hypertensive patients with acute pulmonary edema (APE) and moderate evidence that furosemide may be harmful if administered prehospital to patients with suspected APE. Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is shown in the literature to be safe and effective in the treatment of respiratory distress due to acute pulmonary edema, bronchospasm, and other conditions. It decreases both mortality and the need for intubation. Albuterol, nitroglycerin, and NIPPV were found in the protocols of every LEMSA. Ipratropium, furosemide, and oxygen titration were found in a proportion of the protocols, and steroids were not prescribed in any LEMSA protocol. CONCLUSION: Prehospital treatment of adult patients with respiratory distress varies widely across California. We present evidence-based recommendations for the prehospital treatment of undifferentiated adult patients with respiratory distress that will assist with standardizing management and may be useful for EMS medical directors when creating and revising protocols.

Emergency Medical Services Use Among Patients Receiving Involuntary Psychiatric Holds and the Safety of an Out-of-Hospital Screening Protocol to "Medically Clear" Psychiatric Emergencies in the Field, 2011 to 2016.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Patients with acute psychiatric emergencies who receive an involuntary hold often spend hours in the emergency department (ED) because of a deficit in inpatient psychiatric beds. One solution to address the lack of prompt psychiatric evaluation in the ED has been to establish regional stand-alone psychiatric emergency services. However, patients receiving involuntary holds still need to be screened and evaluated to ensure that their behavior is not caused by an underlying and life-threatening nonpsychiatric illness. Although traditional regional emergency medical services (EMS) systems depend on the medical ED for this function, a field-screening protocol can allow EMS to directly transport a substantial portion of patients to a stand-alone psychiatric emergency service. The purpose of this investigation is to describe overall EMS use for patients receiving involuntary holds, compare patients receiving involuntary holds with all EMS patients, and evaluate the safety of field medical clearance of an established field-screening protocol in Alameda County, CA. METHODS: We obtained data for all EMS encounters between November 1, 2011, and November 1, 2016, using Alameda County's standardized data set. After unique patient identification, we describe the data at the patient level and at the encounter level. At the patient level, we compare "involuntary hold patients" (≥1 involuntary hold during the study period) with those who were "never held." Additionally, we assess the safety of out-of-hospital medical clearance by calculating the rate of failed diversion, defined as retransport of a patient to a medical ED within 12 hours of transport to the psychiatric emergency services by EMS. RESULTS: Of the 541,731 total EMS encounters in Alameda County during the study period, 10% (N=53,887) were identified as involuntary hold encounters. Of these involuntary hold patient encounters, 41% (N=22,074) resulted in direct transport of the patient to the stand-alone psychiatric emergency service for evaluation; 0.3% (N=60) failed diversion and required retransport within 12 hours. At the patient level, Alameda County EMS encountered 257,625 unique patients, and 10% (N=26,283) had at least one encounter for an involuntary hold during the study period. These "involuntary hold patients" were substantially younger, more likely to be men, and less likely to be insured. Additionally, they had higher overall EMS use: "involuntary hold patients" accounted for 24% of all encounters (N=128,003); 53,887 of these encounters were for involuntary holds, whereas an additional 74,116 were for other reasons. Similarly, 4% of "involuntary hold patients" had 20 or more encounters, whereas only 0.4% of "never held" patients were in this category. Last, the 7% of "involuntary hold patients" (N=1,907) who received greater than or equal to 5 involuntary holds during the study period accounted for 39% of all involuntary holds and 9% of all EMS encounters. CONCLUSION: Ten percent of all EMS encounters were for involuntary psychiatric holds. With an EMS-directed screening protocol, 41% of all such patient encounters resulted in direct transport of the patient to the psychiatric emergency service, bypassing medical clearance in the ED. Overall, only 0.3% of these patients required retransport to a medical ED within 12 hours of arrival to psychiatric emergency services. We found that 24% of all EMS encounters in Alameda County were attributable to "involuntary hold patients," reinforcing the importance of the effects of mental illness on EMS use.

Statewide Method of Measuring Ambulance Patient Offload Times.

OBJECTIVE: Ambulance patient offload time (APOT) also known colloquially as "Wall time" has been described in various jurisdictions but seems to be highly variable. Any attempt to improve APOT requires the use of common definitions and standard methodology to measure the extent of the problem. METHODS: An Ambulance Offload Delay Task Force in California developed a set of standard definitions and methodology to measure APOT for transported 9-1-1 patients. It is defined as the time "interval between the arrival of an ambulance at an emergency department and the time that the patient is transferred to an ED gurney, bed, chair or other acceptable location and the ED assumes responsibility for care of the patient." Local EMS agencies voluntarily reported data according to the standard methodology to the California EMS Authority (State agency). RESULTS: Data were reported for 9-1-1 transports during 2017 from 9 of 33 local EMS Agencies in California that comprise 37 percent of the state population. These represent 830,637 ambulance transports to 126 hospitals. APOT shows significant variation by EMS agency with half of the agencies demonstrating significant delays. Offload times vary markedly by hospital as well as by region. Three-fourths of hospitals detained EMS crews more than one hour, 40% more than two hours, and one-third delayed EMS return to service by more than three hours. CONCLUSION: This first step to address offload delays in California consists of standardized definitions for data collection to address the significant variability inherent in obtaining data from 33 local agencies, hundreds of EMS provider agencies, and 320 acute care hospital Emergency Departments that receive 9-1-1 ambulance transports. The first year of standardized data collection of ambulance patient offload times revealed significant ambulance patient offload time delays that are not distributed uniformly, resulting in a substantial financial burden for some EMS providers in California.