Citation

Weiss SJ, Ernst AA, Phillips J, Hill B. Prehosp. Emerg. Care 2001; 5(1): 19-22.

Affiliation

UC Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California, USA. sjweiss@ucdavis.edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2001, National Association of EMS Physicians, Publisher Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

11194064

Abstract

Understanding out-of-hospital transport demographics would clarify the opportunities for injury surveillance and prevention. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypotheses that there are demographic differences in home vs. non-home emergency medical services (EMS) scene transports and that among age groups there are differences in demographics. METHODS: Data were extracted from the EMS State Ambulance Transport database of all reported during 1995. Transports from patient homes were compared with transports from all non-home scenes. Data extracted included age, gender, race, and type of complaint. Subgroup analysis was performed based on age groups in nonvehicular cases, safety problems, and interpersonal violence. Results were compared using a two-tailed chi-square with significance at p<0.05. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated for significant differences. RESULTS: The study included 118,131 transported patients: 13% were children, 49% were adult between 18 and 64 years, and 38% were elder; 13% were African American, 82% were white, and 5% were other; 47% were male and 53% were female. Fifty-eight percent of the transports were for safety problems, and 17% were for interpersonal violence. Of the 118,131 transports, 56,812 (48%) were from patients' homes and 61,319 were not. Compared with EMS transports from non-home scenes, fewer home EMS transports were for injury (p<0.01, OR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.17-0.19) and more home EMS transports were for illness (p<0.01, OR = 5.64, 95% CI = 5.49-5.79). There was no clinically significant difference in age, race, or gender. For all non-vehicular injury transports, the reason was more likely safety problems than interpersonal violence (58% vs. 17%); however, there was no difference in the percentages of type of call between the home and non-home transports. Home EMS transports were more likely interpersonal violence problems among adult patients less than 65 years old; however, among the old and young, the problems were more likely to be safety-related. CONCLUSION: Forty-eight percent of all EMS transports are from the home. Only 18% of these EMS home transports are for injury-related problems. In general, EMS injury transports are more likely related to safety than to interpersonal violence. Among the home EMS transports, more than 50% of transports for young and old patients are safety-related. A large proportion of the home EMS transports for adults less than 65 years of age, however, are for interpersonal violence.