Providing Performance Feedback and Patient Outcome Follow-Up to Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is Associated with Subsequent Improved Clinical Performance

ABSTRACT

Objective: Emergency Medical Services (EMS) clinicians desire performance feedback (PF) and patient outcome follow-up (POF). Within our agency, both a peer-review and feedback/outcome (PF/POF) process exist. Our objective was to determine whether receiving feedback and outcome data improved future clinical care amongst EMS, based upon peer-review scores.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study took place between 1/1/2020 and 6/7/2023 within an EMS agency site with 22,000 average annual 9-1-1 calls. Requests for PF/POF were submitted on an individual basis beginning June 2020 and completed by a dedicated EMS nurse, EMS physician, or emergency medicine (EM) resident. Peer review of select high-acuity cases were scored by two Quality Assurance (QA) specialists within the categories of assessment, treatment, disposition/outcome and process/administrative guidelines. Association between overall peer-review score and number of PF/POF requests at time of assessment was evaluated by linear regression.

Results: A total of 378 PF/POF requests were received, with the most common patient complaints being cardiac (n= 105; 27.8%, including 49 (13.0%) out of hospital cardiac arrests), altered mental status/neurologic (n= 103; 27.2%), trauma (n= 61; 16.1%, including 2 (0.5%) traumatic arrests); and respiratory distress (n = 47; 12.4%). A total of 378 runs meeting QA criteria were peer-reviewed post-PF/POF process implementation, including 337 (89.2%) cardiac/respiratory arrests, 27 (7.1%) with difficult airway management, and 14 (3.7%) major trauma/traumatic arrests. The number of prior PF/POF requests made by the team leader was associated with higher overall peer-review scores. Team leaders with >5 prior PF/POF requests had a peer-review score 0.39 points greater (95% CI: 0.16 – 0.62, p= 0.001) than those with <5 prior requests. The number of prior PF/POF requests amongst the entire crew was also associated with higher peer-review scores. Crews that collectively had >5 prior PF/POF requests had an increase in peer-review score 0.32 points greater (95% CI: 0.14 – 0.50, p < 0.001) than those with <5 prior requests.

Conclusion: Providing performance feedback and patient outcome follow-up to EMS is associated with improved peer-review scores of clinical performance. Future studies should assess if those that are submitting cases for feedback/outcome are higher performers at baseline or if the process of receiving feedback/outcome improves their performance.

Keywords:

• performance feedback
• patient outcome
• clinical performance
• patient follow-up
• emergency medical services
• EMS
• run reviews

Disclaimer

As a service to authors and researchers we are providing this version of an accepted manuscript (AM). Copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proofs will be undertaken on this manuscript before final publication of the Version of Record (VoR). During production and pre-press, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal relate to these versions also.