4.5 Review

The Use of Prehospital Intensive Care Units in Emergencies-A Scoping Review

期刊

HEALTHCARE
卷 11, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11212892

关键词

ambulances; intensive care unit; prehospital; treatment; trauma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The deployment and practice of prehospital intensive care units for trauma care present complexities and challenges globally. Countries need to achieve specific milestones in education, competency, resource availability, and performance to effectively harness the potential of this advanced care modality.
Background: Amidst a rising tide of trauma-related emergencies, emergency departments worldwide grapple with the challenges of overcrowding and prolonged patient wait times. Addressing these challenges, the integration of prehospital intensive care units has appeared as a promising solution, streamlining trauma care and enhancing patient safety. Nevertheless, the feasibility of such an initiative becomes murky when considered globally. This review delves into the intricacies of prehospital intensive care units' deployment for trauma care, scrutinizing their configurations, operational practices, and the inherent challenges and research priorities. Methods: A scoping review was performed for eligible studies. The result was uploaded to the RAYYAN research platform, facilitating simultaneous evaluation of the studies by all researchers. Results: A total of 42 studies were initially selected. Four studies were duplicates, and 25 studies were unanimously removed as irrelevant. The remaining studies (n = 13) were included in the review, and the outcomes were categorized into diverse subgroups. Conclusions: A country's emergency medical services must achieve specific milestones in education, competency, resource availability, and performance to effectively harness the potential of a prehospital intensive care unit. While certain nations are equipped, others lag, highlighting a global disparity in readiness for such advanced care modalities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据