Format

Send to

Choose Destination
CJEM. 2015 Sep;17(5):484-90. doi: 10.1017/cem.2015.29. Epub 2015 Jun 11.

The Canadian National EMS Research Agenda: Impact and Feasibility of Implementation of Previously Generated Recommendations.

Author information

1
*Emergency Health Services,Dartmouth,NS.
2
‡Alberta Health Services Emergency Medical Services,Edmonton,AB.
3
¶Faculty of Medicine,McMaster University,Hamilton,ON.
4
**Hastings-Quinte Paramedic Services,Belleville,ON.
5
††James Cook University,Townsville,Australia.
6
‡‡Toronto Emergency Medical Services,Toronto,ON.
7
¶¶Rescu,Keenan Research Centre,Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute,St. Michael's Hospital,University of Toronto,Toronto,ON.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

A recent mixed-methods study on the state of emergency medical services (EMS) research in Canada led to the generation of nineteen actionable recommendations. As part of the dissemination plan, a survey was distributed to EMS stakeholders to determine the anticipated impact and feasibility of implementing these recommendations in Canadian systems.

METHODS:

An online survey explored both the implementation impact and feasibility for each recommendation using a five-point scale. The sample consisted of participants from the Canadian National EMS Research Agenda study (published in 2013) and additional EMS research stakeholders identified through snowball sampling. Responses were analysed descriptively using median and plotted on a matrix. Participants reported any planned or ongoing initiatives related to the recommendations, and required or anticipated resources. Free text responses were analysed with simple content analysis, collated by recommendation.

RESULTS:

The survey was sent to 131 people, 94 (71.8%) of whom responded: 30 EMS managers/regulators (31.9%), 22 researchers (23.4%), 15 physicians (16.0%), 13 educators (13.8%), and 5 EMS providers (5.3%). Two recommendations (11%) had a median impact score of 4 (of 5) and feasibility score of 4 (of 5). Eight recommendations (42%) had an impact score of 5, with a feasibility score of 3. Nine recommendations (47%) had an impact score of 4 and a feasibility score of 3.

CONCLUSIONS:

For most recommendations, participants scored the anticipated impact higher than the feasibility to implement. Ongoing or planned initiatives exist pertaining to all recommendations except one. All of the recommendations will require additional resources to implement.

KEYWORDS:

agenda; emergency medical services; implementation; research; stakeholders

PMID:
26062819
DOI:
10.1017/cem.2015.29
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Cambridge University Press
Loading ...
Support Center