↓ Skip to main content

Situational awareness and information flow in prehospital emergency medical care from the perspective of paramedic field supervisors: a scenario-based study

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Situational awareness and information flow in prehospital emergency medical care from the perspective of paramedic field supervisors: a scenario-based study
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13049-014-0083-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Teija Norri-Sederholm, Heikki Paakkonen, Jouni Kurola, Kaija Saranto

Abstract

BackgroundIn prehospital emergency medical services, one of the key factors in the successful delivery of appropriate care is the efficient management and supervision of the area¿s emergency medical services units. Paramedic field supervisors have an important role in this task. One of the key factors in the daily work of paramedic field supervisors is ensuring that they have enough of the right type of information when co-operating with other authorities and making decisions. However, a gap in information sharing still exists especially due to information overload. The aim of this study was to find out what type of critical information paramedic field supervisors need during multi-authority missions in order to manage their emergency medical services area successfully. The study also investigated both the flow of information, and interactions with the paramedic field supervisors and the differences that occur depending on the incident type.MethodsTen paramedic field supervisors from four Finnish rescue departments participated in the study in January¿March 2012. The data were collected using semi-structured interviews based on three progressive real-life scenarios and a questionnaire. Data were analysed using deductive content analysis. Data management and analysis were performed using Atlas.ti 7 software.ResultsFive critical information categories were formulated: Incident data, Mission status, Area status, Safety at work, and Tactics. Each category¿s importance varied depending on the incident and on whether it was about information needed or information delivered by the paramedic field supervisors. The main communication equipment used to receive information was the authority radio network (TETRA). However, when delivering information, mobile phones and TETRA were of equal importance. Paramedic field supervisors needed more information relating to area status.ConclusionsParamedic field supervisors communicate actively with EMS units and other authorities such as Emergency Medical Dispatch, police, and rescue services during the multi-authority incidents. This study provides knowledge about the critical information categories when receiving and sharing the information to obtain and maintain situational awareness. However, further research is needed to examine more the information flow in prehospital emergency care to enable a better understanding of required communication in situational awareness formation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 1%
Unknown 78 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 14%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Other 5 6%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Other 20 25%
Unknown 25 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 20%
Psychology 5 6%
Engineering 4 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 26 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 February 2015.
All research outputs
#13,421,679
of 22,780,967 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#814
of 1,255 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,163
of 352,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#15
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,967 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,255 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,381 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.