|
Items in cart [4] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 149
s
Being Ready to Deliver Good Care:
Putt.i.ng Essential Wo.is in Place
Training members of the public and providers of health care how to
respond to emergencies in children and how to use the emergency medical
services (EMS) system is not enough in itself. Those providers need to
have system resources available that enable them to use their training and
skills successfully. The committee identified specific areas in which EMS
systems warrant redoubled efforts to meet the needs of pediatric patients:
equipment, protocols, medical control, categorization of facilities, and region-
alization of care. This chapter cites advances that have been made to date,
identifies persistent problems, and presents the committee's conclusions about
appropriate steps to overcome those problems and to strengthen emergency
medical services for children (EMS-C).
DEFINITIONS
Equipment refers to both reusable and disposable items that are used in
providing emergency care. It includes supplies such as intravenous (IV)
catheters, blood pressure cuffs, endotracheal tubes, medication charts, and
field-to-hospital communications devices, as well as medications.
Protocols are standardized sets of procedures or decision algorithms
that are developed to guide patient care. They exist, and are generally
needed, for all phases of emergency care. In some cases, protocols direct
the process of care in the EMS system (e.g., logistics and procedures, such
as determining the hospital to which a patient is taken). In other cases, they
direct the content of care (e.g., specific interventions and medications). The
149
OCR for page 150
150
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
concept of protocols overlaps considerably with that of "clinical practice
guidelines," which the Institute of Medicine defines as "systematically de-
veloped statements to assist practitioner and patient decisions about appro-
priate health care for specific clinical circumstances" (IOM, 1990a, p. 8;
1992~. In this report the committee retains the term protocol, which is
widely understood in the EMS community.
Medical control-refers to physician oversight of care provided by prehospital
personnel. That ove~ight is given in two ways: on-line, that is, directly by
a physician (or a designated alternate) to emergency medical technicians
(EMTs) and paramedics during their care of individual patients; and off-
line, by physicians who participate in developing standardized procedures
and planning for and ensuring the quality of prehospital services.
Categorization offacilities and regionalization of care are usually closely
linked. Categorization refers here to a variety of methods for evaluating
and identifying the capabilities of hospitals and other facilities to provide
adequate and appropriate care to patients. Because it is impossible for
every facility to render the most sophisticated care for all types of patients,
the few that can provide those services often become regional referral cen-
ters. In this report, regionalization of care refers to deliberate efforts in
predetermined geographic areas to identify facilities with special capabili-
ties and to develop relationships between those facilities and the communi-
ties and facilities that would look to them as a source of specialized care.
EQUIPMENT
The Right Kind and the Right Size
Emergency care for children, especially very young ones, often requires
equipment and medications specifically suited to children. Because of the
traditional emphasis in EMS systems on adult trauma and cardiac care,
standard equipment and supplies often do not include materials appropriate
for treating children. Some adult equipment can be adapted for pediatric
patients, but many items are too large or otherwise unsuitable. Other items
that are unique in caring for children (such as papoose boards, bulb sy-
ringes, pediatric IV equipment, or even cuddly toys) are likely to be missing
altogether. The issue of equipment, medications, and supplies is not, how-
ever, a simple dichotomy of "adult" and "pediatric." Because children,
themselves, vary in size and development, pediatric equipment and supplies
need to be available in a range of sizes so that proper care can be provided
to all children, from infants to adolescents.
The lesson that "children are not little adults" has been an important
one to learn in many aspects of EMS, especially in defining essential equip-
ment. For example, many ambulance units and hospital emergency depart
OCR for page 151
BEING READY TO DELIVER GOOD CARE
151
meets (EDs) do not have pediatric-sized cervical collars. This leads to
children being placed in collars that are too large, often obscuring their
faces and even impairing ventilation. Only recently have significant design
changes been made by manufacturers, such as producing stiff collars suit-
able for small children or babies. Lack of appropriate-sized IV needles may
preclude obtaining vascular access and thus prevent the administration of a
life-saving medication; lack of other pediatric IV equipment to control the
rate of fluid administration exposes the child to inadvertent administration
of potentially dangerous volumes of fluid; and use of adult bag-valve-mask
devices can allow excessive ventilatory volumes and pressures to force air
into the chest cavity causing pneumothorax.
Some differences between children and adults are particularly sign~-
cant (Mellick and Dierking, l991a,b). The proportions of children's bodies
.
are not the same as adults'. For instance, a young child's head is much
larger relative to the rest of his or her body; this increases the risk of head
injury and also means that techniques and equipment for achieving proper
alignment and immobilization of the head and spine must accommodate these
anatomic differences. Important anatomic structures, particularly in the upper
airway, are not just smaller in children but are also located differently.
Many medications used in the emergency care of adults are suitable for
children, but the doses must be different. Pediatric drug carts are desirable,
and when prefilled syringes are used, they should be available in pediatric
dosages. Because the appropriate dosage varies across the pediatric age
range, having prefilled syringes for all needed medications in all dosages is
impractical. Therefore, personnel need to know how to determine appropri-
ate doses and concentrations of solutions for their pediatric patients. De-
vices such as the Broselow Tape (used to measure a child's length, from
which it provides an estimate of weight and appropriate drug dosage) can
help in making those determinations (Lubitz et al., 1988~.
Finally, children also differ from adults in the nature of the emergencies
they experience. For example, children rarely experience primary cardiac
emergencies, but they are very likely to experience severe respiratory dis-
tress or hypovolemia, which can lead to cardiopulmonary arrest if an adequate
airway, ventilation, and oxygenation cannot be achieved. Thus, it is especially
important for emergency care providers to have available equipment and
supplies suitable for airway and respiratory management of children.
Lack of Pediatric Equipment
Deficiencies in equipment for treating pediatric patients exist through-
out EMS systems and have been documented in various surveys over the
past 10 to 15 years. Prehospital providers received some of the earliest
attention. In 1978, the pediatric community in Los Angeles began working
OCR for page 152
52
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
with the county EMS authority to develop pediatric equipment standards for
county ambulances (Seidel, 1989~. In the early 1980s, a survey of 82 EMS
agencies across the country demonstrated a widespread need to increase the
availability of many kinds of basic equipment (Seidel, 1986a). For ex-
ample, 79 percent of the responding agencies did not carry complete sets of
masks for bag~valve~mask resuscitators. The survey also showed that, even
when appropriate equipment guidelines were in place, ambulances did not
always carry the recommended items.
Various ED and critical care categorization programs tend to reveal the
deficiencies in those settings. A survey by the Maine EMS-C project showed
"considerable variation" among EDs in the airway management equipment
available (Maine EMS-C Project, 1991, p. 23), and the project's physician
advisory board expressed concern over the impact this might have on pa-
tient care. A group of hospital EDs in Arkansas proved to be less well
prepared for emergency care of newborns and infants than for older children
(Scotter et al., 19901. Items not available in some hospitals included infra-
red warming lights, infant oxygen masks, and tracheostomy tubes (sizes O
to 5~. Some problems with lack of equipment can extend even to the
pediatric wards and intensive care units (ICUs).
Emergencies also arise in the office setting, but studies have found
deficiencies among adult and pediatric providers in equipment and supplies
needed to manage a variety of emergency conditions (Kobernick, 1986;
Barth et al., 1989; Fuchs et al., 1989; Altieri et al., 1990; Schweich et al.,
1991; Seidel et al., 1991a). A study focused specifically on the prepared-
ness of pediatricians found that those in solo practice had the most limited
equipment available, whereas health maintenance organizations (HMOs) were
generally the most completely equipped (Schweich et al., 1991~. For spe-
cific emergencies, the investigators found that all types of practices were
best prepared to treat severe dehydration and least prepared to treat cardio-
pulmonary arrest. Even so, among the solo practice group only 35 percent
had all of the equipment deemed necessary to treat severe dehydration, and
of the HMO practices only 58 percent were equipped to treat cardiopulmo-
nary arrest. Pediatricians who had basic equipment available were more
confident about managing emergencies, regardless of the practice setting,
than those who had no such equipment on hand. Some ambulatory (or
urgent) care centers also lack appropriate equipment for pediatric emergen-
cies, even though they sometimes treat children for serious conditions such
as seizures and anaphylaxis (Seidel et al., 1991 a).
What Should Be There?
The supplies needed to care appropriately for children range very widely.
They can include standard medications needed for resuscitation that are
OCR for page 153
BEING READY TO DELIVER GOOD CARE
153
packaged in small amounts; infant stethoscopes that are not so large as to
cover the entire torso; defibrillation paddles that fit on a child's chest;
swaddling devices to keep children still when painful procedures are needed;
and toys that can comfort children during transport or emergency room
care.
Many lists of pediatric equipment and supplies needed to provide emer-
gency medical care for children exist. Several groups with EMS-C grants
from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) developed such lists for
a mix of prehospital providers, hospital EDs, and ICUs; a catalog summa-
rizes products produced by the early EMS-C demonstration projects (Shaperman
and Backer, 1991~. In California, Maine, Washington, Wisconsin, and New
York City, those lists have been incorporated into official state or local
requirements (California Code of Regulations, Title 13, § 1103.2; Wiscon-
sin EMS-C Project, 1990; Maine EMS-C Project, 1991; Washington EMS-C
Project, 1991~.
Several professional societies have developed lists of equipment, sup-
plies, and medications for different settings. For example, equipment lists
for the ED and the ICU appear in the American Medical Association (AMA,
1990) categorization guidelines. The emergency care guidelines adopted in
1991 by the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP, 1990a,
1991) also include a list of suggested equipment for EDs for both adult and
pediatric patients, and ACEP (1992a) has also approved guidelines for prehospital
pediatric equipment. The Committee on Pediatric Emergency Medicine of
the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) provides up-to-date suggestions
for equipment, supplies, and medications for basic and advanced life sup-
port for the pediatric age group and for newborns; the target settings are
primary care physician offices, ambulances, and EDs (AAP, 1992e). Equip-
ment lists for pediatric ICUs (PICUs) were published jointly by the AAP
and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) some years ago (AAP/
SCCM, 1983; SCCM, 1983~; development of revised standards, which may
be available in 1993, is again a joint AAP and SCCM effort.
Mellick and Dierking (1991a,b) review the kinds of pediatric equip-
ment available and factors to consider in selecting specific items for prehospital
care; they advocate taking into account significant characteristics of pediat-
ric patients (particularly children under age 10), such as developmental
level, basic temperament, health status and underlying conditions, environ-
mental issues, anatomic considerations, and physiologic considerations. The
authors argue for identifying "a standard core" (p. 35) of pediatric equip-
ment needed to control airways; support breathing; maintain circulation;
accomplish vascular access; monitor cardiac status; and immobilize patients,
extremities, and head and cervical spine. They also suggest considering
equipment protecting against exposure to infectious diseases as well as other
OCR for page 154
54
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
items, such as obstetric packs, car seats, and a reference card for scoring
severity of pediatric trauma.
The lists cited above vary in their details, and many tend to be quite
long. Generally, they represent simply opinions of the authors or a body of
experts; data to demonstrate the importance of many pieces of equipment
are scarce. Readers who wish to have more definitive and comprehensive
information might best track the periodic updates of recommendations is-
sued by the major professional societies, such as AAP, ACEP, and SC:CM.
Some of this variation in recommendations for equipment and supplies
reflects still-reasonable differences of opinion as to what interventions pro-
viders with varying levels of training should be allowed to perform as well
as unavoidable state and local differences in capabilities of and expectations
for providers. For example, controversy still exists as to whether paramed-
ics should be allowed to intubate children or perform needle thoracentesis
and whether EMTs can start IV lines. The pediatric equipment available to
providers should allow them to perform all authorized procedures. Differ-
ences among the lists may also reflect uncertainty among experts about the
effectiveness of certain kinds of equipment. Tsai (1990), for instance, points
out conflicting views on the safety and effectiveness of prehospital use of
four kinds of equipment: endotracheal tubes and supplies, pneumatic antishock
garments, intraosseous needles, and pediatric backboards.
Acquiring and maintaining equipment must be an ongoing process. Because
many providers will encounter pediatric emergencies relatively infrequently,
their equipment, medications, and supplies may deteriorate or become out-
moded. Unless such products are monitored on a regular basis, they may be
inadequate in the event of a true emergency or induce an inappropriate
sense of security among practitioners and institutional providers.
In sum, the committee did not attempt to create a definitive list of
equipment and supplies necessary for treating pediatric emergencies in any
particular practice setting. Instead, it states the following imperative: Each
health care provider or agency must define the emergencies that occur in the
patient populations that they serve, define the emergency care appropriately
provided in that setting, and ensure that the equipment and supplies needed
to provide such care for those emergencies are available and ready to treat
critically ill or injured neonates, infants, children, and adolescents.
To make this more concrete in the context of the recommendations in
Chapter 8 about state EMS-C agencies, the committee recommends that
all state regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over hospitals and emer-
gency medical services systems require that hospital emergency depart-
ments and emergency response and transport vehicles have available
and maintain equipment and supplies appropriate for the emergency
care of children. The objective is to repose responsibility and authority for
OCR for page 155
BEING READY TO DELIVER GOOD CARE
155
attention to EMS-C equipment and supplies in at least the prehospital and
ED settings in a specific place, to two ends: first, that at least a minimal
level of essential equipment is maintained in all hospital EDs and by all
EMS systems; and, second, that a desirable level of consistency in require-
ments is achieved while still permitting appropriate variation and flexibility
needed ~n special (e.g.- geographic or financial) circumstances.
Costs
Financial considerations are, of course, a factor in determining what
equipment for EMS-C is essential, but in general the cost of basic pediatric
equipment and supplies is low. As a rule, the cost of individual items will
not be higher for pediatric materials than for adult supplies; it is, however,
necessary to maintain a wider variety of sizes owing to the substantial
variability of the pediatric patient population. For example, an adult ambu-
lance unit might need to carry only one size of central venous line catheter;
a properly equipped unit taking care of children might need to carry four or
five different sizes. A similar point can be made about a host of items (e.g.,
suction catheters, nasogastric tubes, laryngoscope blades) for most of the
settings in which emergency care might be rendered to children. Monitor-
ing equipment also needs to have a pediatric capability. For instance, sev-
eral different sizes of pulse oximetry electrodes may be needed to cover the
full pediatric age range, whereas only one size is needed for adults; simi-
larly, monitors used to track the heart rates of infants require special pediat-
ric algorithms in their software.
Nevertheless, even these factors may not raise an insurmountable cost
barrier for most systems. An estimate from Memphis, Tennessee, puts the
additional cost of pediatric equipment for an ambulance at about $385 (Larry
Youngman, City of Memphis Division of Fire Services, personal communi-
cation, October 1992~. The San Diego Division of Emergency Medical
Services estimated that additional equipment for a basic life support (BLS)
ambulance would cost about $480; the equipment needed beyond that for an
advanced life support (ALS) ambulance would cost about $295. Costs of
stocking and replacing appropriate pediatric equipment and supplies also
are low in comparison with the costs of similar goods for adults. For
instance, Foltin and Cooper (forthcoming) point out that complete pediatric
equipment and supplies for an ambulance are much less costly than a single
semi-automatic defibrillator, which would be used for adult cardiac pa-
tients. Altieri and colleagues (1990) estimated that basic equipment to
contend with pediatric emergencies in office settings amounted to $1,200.
Certainly, the cost of equipment and materials need not be high for EMS
systems that already have a solid base from which to work.
OCR for page 156
156
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
Not surprisingly, advanced pediatric emergency care does require more
costly equipment than basic emergency services. As with the above discus-
sion, however, these costs (or those for PICUs) need not exceed those for
equivalent services to adults. To the extent that outlays for PICUs exceed
what can be managed by many different hospitals, the argument for regionali-
zation of that level of service is strengthened.
This committee recognizes that along with costs for equipment and
supplies come costs for personnel, special training (as discussed in Chapter
4), and similar "nonhardware" elements of EMS-C. Further, these aspects
of financing EMS-C can be significant, especially in situations in which not
much progress has been made in building a solid EMS-C element into the
existing EMS system.
The argument here, however, is focused on costs of specific equipment
and material needed for pediatric care. Because this committee regards the
aim of integrating EMS-C into the existing frameworks of EMS and child
health care as crucial, it also believes that these costs should be seen as
relatively small marginal investments on top of those already being incurred
for the basic system. One argument for that view is that the much greater
costs of staffing and capital equipment for overall system operation have
already been incurred. A second argument is that having the proper equip-
ment reduces the significant cost in morbidity and mortality that children
might experience if they cannot receive needed care because only adult
equipment is available or if they are treated with inappropriate equipment
and supplies. In sum, the committee believes that the cost of essential
pediatric equipment is minimal; thus, costs cannot and should not be ad-
vanced as a justification for depriving children of necessary, basic emer-
gency care.
PROTOCOLS
Value of Protocols
Knowing what to do for each and every patient whom a provider sees is
not an easy task. When that patient may be experiencing a life-threatening
emergency, the need to make correct decisions quickly places even greater
demands on providers. When that emergency patient is a child, much anec-
dotal evidence suggests that anxiety levels are especially high. Moreover,
except for those who specialize in pediatric emergency medicine, providers
are likely to see seriously ill or injured children only infrequently, making it
difficult for them to remain familiar with the special needs of children.
Even more demanding are those emergencies that involve children with
chronic illnesses or other special health care needs. Finally, as with equip-
ment~ care appropriate for adults is often inappropriate for children.
OCR for page 157
BEING READY TO DELIVER GOOD CARE
157
To address these complexities for EMS-C, the value of reliable and
valid protocols cannot be overstated. (The potential value of sound, defini-
tive practice guidelines generally is discussed in two recent reports tIOM
1990a; 1992], and many of the points made there apply equally well to
protocols in the EMS context.) The availability of protocols to guide
decisionm~ing whether computerized algorithms' flow charts on wall posters'
simple narrative guides, pocket-sized reminder or reference cards, or other
types of guidelines allows the provider to benefit from a carefully consid-
ered analysis of a broad range of experience. Protocols help ensure that
providers examine all important information and perform the appropriate
sequence of procedures.
Protocols adopted by an EMS system help to standardize the care given
by all of the system's providers around a mutually agreed-on set of steps
and interventions. A goal might be to have the capability of dealing with 95
percent of the cases seen in typical EMS settings, since no planner or guide-
line developer could possibly anticipate every emergency or develop defen-
sible guidelines for them. The crucial grounds for developing and applying
protocols lie in the area of improving the quality of EMS-C care throughout
EMS systems, although ready access to and general compliance with high
quality, authoritative guidelines and protocols may also offer some protec-
tion from malpractice liability claims as well.
The EMS-C demonstration projects sponsored by HRSA developed various
kinds of protocols, including ones concerned with transport, triage, resusci-
tation, and management of various pediatric conditions (e.g., trauma, car-
diac rhythm disturbances or arrest, and suspected child abuse) in the prehospital
and hospital settings (Shaperman and Backer, 1991~. Some of these guide-
lines are lengthy and detailed, but they need not be so; protocols (as the
term is understood in this field) may, in fact, be simple reminder cards or
poster charts. The Washington State EMS-C project (1991), for example,
produced laminated information cards for both BLS and ALS personnel to
carry in their uniform pockets or in equipment boxes. These provide a rapid
reference source for pediatric equipment size, drug dosages, and vital signs,
and they are considered to be of special importance for providers and re-
sponders whose contact with pediatric patients may be infrequent.
Needs Throughout EMS Systems
Protocols have a role to play in every phase of the EMS system. They
help direct decisions about when and where care needs to be given as well
as guide what care is given and how it is given. Each phase of care needs
specific kinds of guidance, as discussed briefly in this section in terms of
dispatch, prehospital services, EDs, and inpatient care.
OCR for page 158
158
Dispatchers
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
Children who enter the EMS system through a call to an emergency
response system (often using 9-1-1) receive their first emergency services
from the operator or other dispatch personnel answering such calls.2 The
organization of dispatch systems and the training and skills of dispatchers
vary widely (see Chapter 43. Many systems and personnel have little or no
medical oversight even though they play a critical role in facilitating the
delivery of urgent medical care; others may have had training in delivering
emergency medical telephone instructions or long-time experience in dis-
patching ambulances. Regardless of formal training or experience levels,
however, dispatchers must be able to evaluate the nature of the problem and
determine what sort of response is needed. These triage decisions may
determine whether ambulances with ALS or BLS intervention skills are
sent, whether air or ground units are used, or sometimes whether any EMS
. .
unit IS sent.
Protocols exist in some systems to assist dispatchers in making these
determinations in a systematic way. Those protocols must incorporate tools
to evaluate pediatric cases. In a recent study, Foltin and colleagues (1992)
determined from a retrospective evaluation of the appropriateness of ambu-
lance dispatch in New York City that of nearly 100 children triaged by
dispatchers as requiring ALS units, 45 percent warranted only BLS response
and another 27 percent did not even require an ambulance; conversely, of
about 145 children triaged as needing only BLS services, some 60 percent
in fact needed ALS response. An assessment has not yet been made of the
consequences for the child of these misassignments.
These data do suggest that ALS resources are not being used efficiently.
When an ALS unit is used for less serious cases, it will not be available for
those who truly require that level of care; if an alternate ALS unit is avail-
able, it may have a longer response time to the site of the emergency. The
investigators suggest that protocol revisions and more training in the use of
triage and dispatch protocols might enable the system to improve allocation
of these prehospital resources. Their "Pediatric Ambulance Need Evalua-
tion" (PANE) instrument may be one means of evaluating and identifying
problems of both overtriage and undertriage (Foltin et al., 1992~. Appendix
7A reviews a variety of scoring instruments that have been devised to aid in
triage decisions (in prehospital and other stages of emergency care) and to
make retrospective assessments of the appropriateness of those decisions.
Dispatchers also contribute to emergency care through "prearrival in-
structions" to callers. Such instructions need to be appropriate to the condi-
tion of the patient, and they need to be provided in a way that makes them
useful to the caller. When the patient is a child, dispatchers often must deal
with any special anxieties of their own and with the distress of the parent or
other caller. Clawson and Hauert (1990) emphasize the need for guidelines
OCR for page 159
BEING READY TO DELIVER GOOD CARE
159
designed specifically for dispatchers, describing the unique conditions un-
der which dispatchers provide BLS services: "Thrust in the role of 'instruc-
tor,' the dispatcher must teach the caller (an unwilling student) a physical
procedure in a matter of seconds, without visual aids of any kind or even
any opportunity to practice" (p. 84~. Kellermann et al. (1989) have demon-
strated the efficacy of d~spatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).
at least for adults.3
Prehosp~tal Personnel
Assessment and Initial Treatment Until the emergence of courses such
as Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS), Advanced Pediatric Life Sup-
port (APLS), and those developed by HRSA's EMS-C grantees, most EMTs
and paramedics had little access to training in the care of children. Most
also have little opportunity to gain hands-on experience because of the
relatively small number of children cared for by the prehospital system.
Protocols that guide EMTs and paramedics through the assessment and care
of children can, to some extent, lessen the effect of these limitations.
Protocols for prehospital care of children need to reflect sound medical
judgment regarding the best forms of care, the levels of training among
providers, and the setting in which the EMS system operates. They should
be jointly developed by physicians and others with expertise in both emer-
gency medicine and pediatrics. They should guide care given under an
EMS system's standing orders (a product of off-line medical control) and
specify when on-line direction from a base hospital or other medical control
point is required. Medical control is discussed further in the next major
section of this chapter and in Chapter 6.
Protocols may be relatively easy to devise for "extreme" situations. As
a case in point: In an urban area where rapid access to sophisticated hospi-
tal care is possible, a system can emphasize quick transport to specific EDs
and BLS-level care en route rather than extensive ALS care at the scene.
New York City, for example, follows such an approach with provisions for
ALS procedures in the event of delays in reaching the hospital (Foltin et al.,
1990~. By contrast, protocols for EMS systems serving rural areas need to
accommodate longer transport times and distances, various forms of trans-
port (including helicopters, airplanes, intensive-care vans, or other means),
and the problems posed by the relative scarcity of hospitals and the more
limited resources of hospitals that are available. Thus, more ingenious
solutions may be needed (e.g., a predesignated rendezvous-hospital ED)
(Johnston, 1989~.
These locale-specific policies may be easy to understand, but a large
gray area exists in determining the appropriate choice between providing
more extensive treatment at the scene and rapidly transporting a child to an
OCR for page 176
176
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
make clear the rights and responsibilities of both institutions, including
costs and liability, and, as noted elsewhere, comply with federal regula-
tions. A model transfer agreement for PICUs in northern and central Cali-
fornia, covering PCCCs and pediatric trauma centers (PTCs), illustrates the
elements that need to be taken into account (Seidel and Henderson, 1991,
pp. 42-48~. Models such as this can be adapted by other hospitals (Q meet
their specific requirements.
Referral centers also should contribute to education and training for
emergency care providers in community hospitals and EMS agencies. Pro-
grams, such as courses on pediatric resuscitation, can be offered at the
referral center or even in local communities. In addition, referral centers
can serve as sites for more specialized training either through medical resi-
dency and fellowship programs or other special clinical training programs
for EMTs, nurses, and physicians. Referral centers also have an important
role to play in education and training for the general public, including
promoting an understanding of the emergency care capabilities of commu-
nity and regional hospitals.
Intensive Care Services
In the 1970s, many states successfully developed regionalized perinatal
services (Meyer, 1980; Stiles et al., 1991; AAP/ACOG, 1992), but PICU
services have not received similar attention. According to the American
Hospital Association (1991), about 2,900 dedicated PICU beds are available
across the country. Data on the demand for these beds are limited, how-
ever; the experience of the Pediatric Intensive Care Network of Northern
and Central California suggests that annually 240 children per 100,000 will
require intensive care (Pettigrew et al., 19861. According to Cuerdon and
colleagues (1991), PICU beds are not evenly distributed across the coun-
try the number of beds per 100,000 children in each state ranges from 0 to
13.2, and half of the states have no more than 2.6 beds per 100,000 chil-
dren. These authors argue that, unlike adult ICU or neonatal ICU beds, the
availability of PICU beds does not appear to be related to the health status
of the state's population. With intensive care a major component of EMS-C
systems, these extreme regional variations in availability of PICU beds may
not be desirable. Research is needed to determine whether the numbers of
existing PICU beds and their distribution are adequate to meet the intensive
care needs of children in communities across the country.
Pediatric Trauma Systems
Efforts over the past 20 years to develop regionalized systems for trauma
care have had mixed results. As of the late 1980s, only Maryland and
OCR for page 177
BEING READY TO DELIVER GOOD CARE
177
Virginia were recognized as having effective statewide or near-statewide
systems (Mendeloff and Cayten, 1991), although in other states, city- or
county-based systems are succeeding. Strong public controls over trauma
center designation and prehospital services appear to contribute to trauma
system success. Working toward trauma center designation (here meaning
state selection of facilities hospital request' or a combination of both) is a
complex matter [or the hospital and its stab. Meeting state and professional
requirements can pose considerable challenges especially for community
hospitals, which generally lack the organization, staffing, and other resources
that university hospitals are likely to have (Clancy et al., 1992~.
Trauma centers have proved effective in reducing mortality among adult
patients. About 370 of some 6,600 hospitals in the United States function
as trauma centers; they are concentrated in urban areas and serve only about
one-quarter of the population (Champion and Mabee, 1990~. In recent years,
however, individual trauma centers, and therefore systems of which they are
a part, have faced serious problems from factors such as growing financial
losses from unreimbursed costs and disruption of other hospital care by the
unpredictable and immediate demands of trauma cases (see Champion and
Mabee, 1990; GAO, 1991b). For some hospitals, these problems have led
to a decision to withdraw from the trauma system.
Experience with PTCs is more limited, chiefly because they are newer
and far fewer in number. The earliest PTCs were established in the 1970s
(Harris, 19891. Specific principles of pediatric trauma care advanced by the
American Pediatric Surgical Association call for designation of PTCs by
appropriate government authorities (Harris et al., 19921. Vane (1993) em-
phasizes the value of a regional perspective in establishing PTCs; natural
referral patterns can be identified and appropriate roles can be determined
for all facilities in the area.
Harris (1989) stresses that a regional pediatric trauma system must be
"carefully tailored to respond to regional needs, be medically sound, well-
organized, and have a solid fiscal base" (p. 149) all steps that require
appreciable public education and involvement, financial support, and sus-
tained commitment. Clearly, all the challenges facing, and pressures on,
trauma centers and trauma systems in general afflict pediatric services as
well; to the extent that EMS-C is Reemphasized relative to EMS generally,
development of PTCs is likely to be impeded.
Specialized Transport Resources
Successful regionalization will depend heavily on the availability of
high quality transport to referral centers. Because the patients who need to
be transported are generally the most severely ill and injured, they require
highly skilled care during the transfer to ensure that their condition does not
OCR for page 178
178
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
deteriorate. Well-equipped vehicles (air or ground) with specially trained
staff can make it possible to provide some advanced care even before reach-
ing the destination hospital. Pediatric transport teams have generally in-
cluded physicians, but it may prove possible to provide essential care with
teams relying on other personnel (McCloskey et al., 1989~. Not all trans-
fers to referral centers can be made by highly skilled and well-eqa~ipped
transport teams, however, this fact makes it essential that local hospitals
and ambulance services be able to provide tile minimum level of care neces-
sary to maintain a patient's condition until more advanced care can be
brought into play.
Under the auspices of the AAP (AAP, 1986; Day et al., 1991), guide-
lines are evolving to address training needs, transport team composition,
and medico-legal issues. No one transport system will be appropriate for
every setting or every case. Factors such as weather, geography, patient
condition, and costs will affect the choice of vehicle (e.g., ground ambu-
lance, helicopter, fixed-wing aircraft). Even more complex are decisions
about aeromedical EMS programs, staffing, costs, and relationships to hos-
pitals and trauma centers (Freilich and Spiegel, 19901. McCloskey and Orr
(1991) and Orr and Kennedy (1991) both provide definitive overviews of
pediatric transport issues. As in much of emergency medicine, research
studies are needed to answer many questions about the effectiveness of
transport practices, such as whether physicians are needed as members of
transport teams and the relative value of rapid transport and arrival versus
allowing greater time for on-scene stabilization.
Improving Outcomes of Care
A leading argument for regionalization of pediatric emergency services
is the belief that children receiving care in a PICU or PTC will have better
outcomes than those cared for in adult trauma or intensive care units, but
few studies have been done to demonstrate differences in outcome. In one
of the first such studies, Pollack and colleagues (1991) did find higher-than-
expected mortality at nontertiary hospitals than at tertiary hospitals among
children less than 18 years old who were "receiving care for head trauma,
or who required intubation for respiratory support (for >12 thours] if post-
operative)" (p. 151~. Another recent study compared children treated in
PTCs, urban nonpediatric (general) trauma centers, and rural nonpediatric
trauma centers (Nakayama et al., 19921. The investigators found higher
mortality rates in the rural trauma centers, but no significant differences
remained when comparisons were based on the probability of survival. They
surmised that these data reflect an informal system that tends to direct
younger children and children with head and neck injuries who are at great-
est risk to the specialized care available at the PTC. Cooper and colleagues
OCR for page 179
BEING READY TO DELIVER GOOD CARE
179
(1993) concluded from analyses of New York data that patients with either
brain or internal injuries and moderately severe skeletal injuries had better
survival rates when they were treated in PTCs than when they were not; the
investigators believe that triage of moderately to severely injured children
to trauma centers with appropriate pediatric capabilities is not only practical
and effective but also likely to increase survival of children with significant
i. ~ . . .
skeletal, brain, and ~nte-rnal Injuries.
Additional studies are needed to verify these results and to identify
factors that appear to make PICU or pediatric trauma care critical to better
patient outcomes. In the meantime, this committee takes the position that
when specialized pediatric centers are available, the most seriously ill and
injured children should receive care in those centers.
Special Concerns in Regionalization
Implementing a system of regionalized services for pediatric care raises
a number of concerns. Transferring children to regional centers removes
them from relationships with the network of providers (e.g., pediatricians or
family practitioners) from whom they and their families usually receive
care (which should constitute a medical home). Thus, continuity and coor-
dination of care for these children must be given special attention. Such
transfers and shifts in the site of care, particularly to distant locations, can
also cause substantial disruptions in the lives of children and their families.
Efficiencies and costs in the system as a whole must also be considered. In
particular, the likely volume of patients, especially transfers, must be con-
sidered in the development of regional centers.
Other, more political, issues must also be addressed, particularly resis-
tance from hospitals to categorization and regionalization efforts. Resis-
tance can occur for several reasons: if such programs are nonparticipatory
(i.e., nonvoluntary), if they are heavily oriented to designation, if they might
harm hospital reputations (by categorizing one hospital at a lower level than
a competing hospital), if they might cost hospitals their patients (by hurting
the hospital's reputation or by directing patients to other hospitals), or if
they might impose an unacceptable financial burden (by increasing the number
of uninsured patients requiring costly but unreimbursed care). No single
response to these concerns is possible; specific local circumstances must be
considered.
Triage protocols that call for bypassing one hospital for another may be
very difficult to develop and implement because of the need to coordinate
plans with both the EMS agencies providing prehospital services and the
hospitals in the area. Even when hospitals agree to bypass plans, EMTs
may still take patients to the closest hospital. In some cases that decision
may reflect parents' desires to have a child taken to a familiar local hospital
OCR for page 180
180
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
rather than a more distant regional center. Thus, successful regionalization
(or categorization-plus-regionalization) requires cooperation and collabora-
tion across a wide set of professional, public, and policymaking entities-
more so, perhaps, than for action involving equipment, guidelines and pro-
tocols, or medical control. It calls also for mobilizing the political will to
create a system based on a reasoned assessment of needs and capabilities.
not one that ~s [based excIusT~ely ore `6sell-nam~ng.~'
Finally, the scarcity of pediatric resources and experience make region-
alization more critical in pediatrics than in many other areas of medicine.
Even pediatricians well trained in taking care of many acute and critical
situations can experience, with time and lack of exposure, erosion in critical
care skills; this problem may be compounded by lack of resources and
experience among other physicians, nurses, or support personnel at the hos-
pital level. Although good undergraduate and graduate training and con-
tinuing education efforts for all emergency care providers may ameliorate
some of these problems (as discussed in Chapter 4), the solution to provid-
ing definitive care for pediatric emergency patients may always lie more
. . . ~ . .
with reg~onal~zat~on.
Interstate Issues
Because some geographic areas do not have reasonable access to children's
hospitals or PICU resources within their own state, natural referral patterns
may cross state lines; this situation makes it necessary to consider issues of
interstate coordination and cooperation if emergency medical care for chil-
dren is to be successfully regionalized.7 Interstate issues also arise for
metropolitan areas that serve more than one state. In some cases, interested
parties may be able to develop official agreements under the auspices of
state or local government agencies. In other cases, contractual or informal
relationships develop between referral centers and community hospitals and
EMS systems. The stability of both official and informal arrangements
depends on meeting the needs of all groups involved and on addressing
several key issues.
Coordination of Professional, Legal, and Regulatory Requirements
Neighboring states often differ in such matters as certification and licensing
requirements for institutions or practitioners, procedures that providers are
authorized to perform, and guidelines for triage. In working out interstate
transfer or other arrangements, states must address these differences to en-
sure that consistent and acceptable levels of care are rendered and that
providers do not face liability risks from differences in practice standards.
The liability risks for interstate transport services must also be addressed.
At some level of complexity in working out interstate arrangements, a
OCR for page 181
BEING READY TO DELIVER GOOD CARE
181
threshold may be reached that argues for generalization beyond individual
states to national standards. The immense variation in Medicaid services
and regulations, and the resulting extreme unevenness in even basic care
available to mothers and children, is poignant evidence of this point.
Medicaid Reimbursement Medicaid policies and reimbursement levels
are ~ concern for all providers; in the EMS context. hospitals may face the
biggest problems. When care is provided to Medicaid patients from other
states, hospitals must contend with several factors: the inadequacy of exist-
ing Medicaid reimbursement levels per se, the unevenness of reimburse-
ment levels across state lines, the willingness (or lack of it) of Medicaid
agencies to pay for out-of-state care, and the possibility that a hospital may
not be an approved Medicaid provider for other states or may be unaware of
other states' Medicaid policies, such as prior authorization requirements,
that affect eligibility for reimbursement.
Where hospitals often serve a multistate population, considerable anec-
dotal evidence of Medicaid payment problems exists. Those problems may
be sufficient to discourage some hospitals from accepting out-of-state pa-
tients or may, at least, lead them to consider how they might want to pro-
ceed with such a step, as some District of Columbia hospitals have done for
patients from Maryland. Problems similar to those that arise between states
can also be found between cities and counties within states (e.g., New York
City and Westchester County).
Other complexities can arise when managed care programs for Medic-
aid patients exclude nearby, but out-of-state, facilities that otherwise would
provide considerable amounts of care, as happened when the Illinois I-Care
program excluded children's hospitals in St. Louis, Missouri (Ron Morefeld,
St. Louis Children's Hospital, personal communication, December 1992~.
Long-standing subspecialty referral patterns for southern Illinois residents
were disrupted, diverting them to other institutions as far away as Chicago.
After termination of the program in 1991, a coalition of five children's
hospitals in Chicago and St. Louis began working together with state gov-
ernments on pediatric and Medicaid issues.8
These financial barriers to care make it difficult, if not impossible, to
ensure that all children will have access to the care that they need. As part
of their efforts to further the development of EMS-C programs, states and
the federal government need to consider how to overcome reimbursement
problems, especially for children who are uninsured or are covered by Med-
icaid. This committee acknowledges the major shortfalls in insurance cov-
erage for children that are now part of a significant debate about health care
reform at the state and national levels. Broad questions of Medicaid or
insurance reform are a significant backdrop to the EMS-C discussion; al-
though extensive examination of these issues was clearly beyond its pur
OCR for page 182
82
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
view, the committee briefly returns to them again in Chapter 9. Generally,
however, the committee confined its discussion to interstate reimbursement
issues that directly relate to EMS-C.
Rural Issues
Issues of categorization and regio-nal~ation are cruc~l for many rural
providers particularly in the hospital sector. Many providers fear that they
will be bypassed in the process of providing emergency care to patients.
The key element in the entire system is the appropriate and adequate educa-
tion that is provided to emergency personnel both on the emergency trans-
port team and in the initial emergency room setting. If these individuals
have been trained to handle pediatric (and adult) emergencies and have
demonstrated this capability, the issue of categorization becomes less threatening
and somewhat less of a concern in the process. Categorization and regionalization
must continue to be pursued vigorously, but in the rural setting these factors
need to be considered with appropriate sensitivity for the concerns of the
parties involved.
Encouraging Categorization and Regionalization
As noted at the outset, categorization and regionalization are linked
activities that, when pursued collaboratively, can make EMS-C, as part of
larger EMS systems, more efficient as well as more effective. This commit-
tee believes that they are critical elements in the development of EMS-C
systems. It also believes that strong leadership from the federal and state
governments, health departments, and professional societies will be needed
to bring these many interests together successfully.
Providing appropriate care for seriously ill and injured children re-
quires special expertise and special commitment. The committee recog-
nizes that ensuring the availability of expertise and commitment in pediatric
care and access to that care will require a formal mechanism to identify facili-
ties that can provide needed care, to develop protocols and other procedures
to direct children to appropriate facilities, and to verify that those proce-
dures are working successfully. The specific mechanisms may vary across
EMS systems and states (some may emphasize voluntary participation whereas
others may choose to designate specific facilities), but the result should
ensure that appropriate care is available to children who need it.
Therefore, the committee recommends that all state regulatory agencies
with jurisdiction over hospitals and emergency medical services sys-
tems address the issues of categorization and regionalization in oversee-
ing the development of EMS-C and its integration into state and re-
gional EMS systems. Beyond this, the committee explicitly refrains from
OCR for page 183
BEING READY TO DELIVER GOOD CARE
183
proposing specific steps to achieve categorization and regionalization be-
cause of the diversity of approaches that states might want to use.
Because of the range of interested parties professional groups, indi-
vidual practitioners and institutional providers, public and patient advocacy
groups, local and state governments, to name a few the special complexi-
t~es of these efforts need to be appreciated. This commit~;~-e believes that
steady, cooperative steps must be taken to establish a firm base for im-
proved EMS-C programs.
SUMMARY
Despite impressive progress in recent years, EMS systems have particu-
lar weaknesses in their ability to meet the needs of pediatric patients in five
major areas: equipment, protocols and guidelines, medical control, catego-
rization of facilities, and regionalization of care. This chapter argues, first
of all, that more investment in supplies and equipment appropriate for chil-
dren (across the entire pediatric age range) would significantly improve the
capacity of EMS systems to discharge their responsibilities to children; the
marginal cost (to the system) of having durable and disposable materials
and supplies suitable for pediatric cases is quite low and should not be
accepted as a reason for not providing those materials. The committee did
not create definitive lists of equipment and supplies necessary for treating
pediatric emergencies for various settings; rather it called for each health
care provider and agency to define the emergencies that occur in the patient
populations that they serve and to ensure that the necessary and proper
equipment is available to treat critically ill and injured neonates, infants,
children, and adolescents.
To this end (and in line with later recommendations about the responsi-
bilities of state agencies), the committee formally calls for all state regula-
tory agencies with jurisdiction over hospitals and EMS systems to require
that hospital EDs and emergency response and transport vehicles have available
and maintain equipment and supplies appropriate for the emergency care of
children (see Box 5-1~. The objectives are to ensure that (1) at least a
minimal level of essential equipment is maintained in all hospital EDs and
by all EMS systems and (2) consistency in these requirements be appropri-
ately balanced with the flexibility needed in special circumstances (e.g.,
geographic or financial).
Second, protocols have a solid place already in many areas of health
care, including EMS for adults. What is desirable now is the development,
dissemination, application, and evaluation of guidelines and protocols with
tested pediatric elements and components. Such guidelines are needed for
the full range of EMS-C activities dispatch, transport, prehospital care,
OCR for page 184
84
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
ED services, hospital inpatient care, and emergency care in outpatient set-
tings.
Third, medical control (physician oversight, directly or indirectly, of
the care provided by prehospital personnel) warrants attention. On-line
medical control, which implies real-time direction of care for seriously in-
jured or ill children, requires reliable input from personnel (particularly
physicians) with experience and training in caring for infants, children, and
adolescents. Local practices, personnel, and financial resources influence
whether and how on-line medical control is implemented. Off-line medical
control also requires active participation and leadership from health care
professionals with pediatric expertise to ensure that children's needs are
considered in an EMS system. It involves designing and implementing
policies, training programs, quality assurance efforts, and the like. It is
broader in scope and setting than on-line control and relates more to the
long-term development of guidelines and protocols (to be used, often, in on-
line situations).
Categorization of institutions and regionalization of specialized services,
often linked conceptually and practically, are the remaining areas in which
this committee believes stronger involvement and investment are warranted.
Although "local" as contrasted with "national" decisionmaking and solu-
tions are generally preferred in thinking about steps to incorporate EMS-C
into existing EMS systems and thus to categorize facilities accurately and
designate regional referral centers for pediatric cases some guidance may
be needed at the national and state level to foster appropriate identification
and classification of referral centers and to overcome difficult interstate
OCR for page 185
BEING READY TO DELIVER GOOD CARE
185
questions of legal and regulatory matters, transfer policies, and reimburse-
ment. The committee found these issues of sufficient significance to the
successful development of EMS-C in EMS systems that it formally recom-
mended that state EMS-C agencies (proposed in Chapter 8) address catego-
rization and regionalization for EMS-C.
NOTES
1. Information on physician offices in general is no more encouraging. For instance, a study
in Dallas found that 25 percent of offices administering aerosols or epinephrine for asthma or
allergic episodes did not have oxygen available, and nearly 20 percent of offices administering
parenteral anticonvulsants did not have oxygen or bag-valve-mask capability (Barth et al.,
1989). A survey of Michigan physicians (mainly those in family practice and secondarily in
pediatrics) determined that only 11 percent had adequate equipment to manage common office
emergencies such as chest pain and dyspnea, seizures, syncope, anaphylaxis, and behavioral
emergencies (Kobernick, 1986).
2. The discussion about protocols for dispatchers is oriented toward EMS personnel. Brodsky
(1990), however, calls attention to the problem of calls concerning fatal road accidents being
directed first, or simultaneously, to police. Such practices result in delay before EMS services,
such as an ambulance, are dispatched; in perhaps 15 percent of fatal accidents, a communica-
tions officer has made the wrong decision by failing to notify an EMS program immediately.
Some experts thus apparently believe that EMS dispatchers should be notified of all road
accidents and have the responsibility of deciding whether ambulance rescue should be at-
tempted based on the description of the crash. Such a policy might benefit from protocols for
communications personnel and dispatchers that have been developed on the basis of informa-
tion about the characteristics of road accidents and injuries in various geographic locales.
3. Dispatcher-delivered instruction in CPR by telephone has been proposed for at least 20
years as one approach for helping family members or bystanders cope with a victim of cardiac
arrest. Although its utility has been demonstrated for adult patients (Kellermann et al., 1989),
little if anything is known about such approaches when the patients are children. Dispatcher
assistance to callers in situations involving airway emergencies and ingestions also warrants
examination. Issues of telephone assistance, advice, and communication are taken up in Chap-
ter 6.
4. "Emergent" and "most urgent" are not equivalent concepts in ED triage. Emergent re-
quires the highest priority of care, for conditions that are life-threatening or will cause serious
permanent physical impairment if not treated immediately; urgent cases may require rapid
response (e.g., within 30 to 120 minutes) but not the highest priority interventions.
5. As noted elsewhere, this committee did not address questions of perinatal or neonatal
emergencies. Generally, the same points concerning the utility of good guidelines and proto-
cols will be true for those problems and settings.
6. The AMA (1990, p. 880) classifies pediatric emergency care facilities in three levels.
Level I: "An institution capable of providing comprehensive, specialized pediatric care to any
acutely ill or injured child. Usually a children's hospital or a large general hospital with a
pediatric division providing comprehensive subspecialty pediatric medical and surgical ser-
vices." Level II: "A hospital with a pediatric service capable of caring for the majority of
pediatric patients, but with limited pediatric critical care and subspecialty expertise." Level
III: "A hospital with a functioning Emergency Department capable of evaluation, stabilization,
and transfer of seriously ill and injured pediatric patients. Such facilities should have formal-
ized transfer agreements to higher levels of pediatric care. They should provide a vital service
OCR for page 186
86
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
in stabilization and transfer in areas where level I and level II facilities are not readily acces-
sible."
7. The discussion of interstate problems in regionalization focuses on one manifestation of
broader problems of interjurisdictional cooperation and coordination. Intercounty difficulties
can arise, for instance, if various county or other "local" governments cannot agree on funding
responsibilities or other policies. At an even more disaggregated level, concerns on the part of
incorporated cities or intercity rivalries can disrupt EMS programs within a single county.
Committee discussions ~return-~:d Redly to ex~-~s In -which ~ ch~ld~s cam was compro
mised by administrative and bureaucratic complications. McArdle and colleagues (1990) dis-
cuss the strengths and limitations of a county-based EMS and regionalized trauma care system
in San Diego, California, and provide useful lessons for other programs based at the county
level or in a county department of health.
8. The consortium of children's hospitals that was formed after the I-Care program ended
includes three Chicago hospitals (Wyler's, Children's Memorial, and LaRabida) and two hos-
pitals in St. Louis, Missouri (Cardinal Glennon and St. Louis Children's).
Representative terms from entire chapter:
emergency care
