Telemedical emergency services: central or decentral coordination?
Tóm tắt
Teleemergency doctors support ambulance cars at the emergency site by means of telemedicine. Currently, each district has its own teleemergency doctor office (decentralized solution). This paper analyses the advantages and disadvantages of a centralized solution where several teleemergency doctors work in parallel in one office to support the ambulances in more districts. The service of incoming calls from ambulances to the teleemergency doctor office can be modelled as a queuing system. Based on the data of the district of Vorpommern-Greifswald in the Northeast of Germany, we assume that arrivals and services are Markov chains. The model has parallel channels proportionate to the number of teleemergency doctors working simultaneously and the number of calls which one doctor can handle in parallel. We develop a cost function with variable, fixed and step-fixed costs. For the district of Greifswald, the likelihood that an incoming call has to be put on hold because the teleemergency doctor is already fully occupied is negligible. Centralization of several districts with a higher number of ambulances in one teleemergency doctor office will increase the likelihood of overburdening and require more doctors working simultaneously. The cost of the teleemergency doctor office per ambulance serviced strongly declines with the number of districts cooperating. The calculations indicate that centralization is feasible and cost-effective. Other advantages (e.g. improved quality, higher flexibility) and disadvantages (lack of knowledge of the location and infrastructure) of centralization are discussed. We recommend centralization of telemedical emergency services. However, the number of districts cooperating in one teleemergency doctor office should not be too high and the distance between the ambulance station and the telemedical station should not be too large.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Pfütsch P. Das Notfallsanitätergesetz. In: Notfallsanitäter als neuer Beruf im Rettungsdienst. Wiesbaden: Springer; 2020. p. 19–24.
Lischke V, et al. Verbessert das Rendezvoussystem die rettungsdienstliche Versorgungsqualität? Intensivmed Notfallmed. 2002;39(5):448–56.
Sefrin P, Händlmeyer A, Kast W. Leistungen des Notfall-Rettungsdienstes. Der Notarzt. 2015;31(04):S34–48.
Neupert M. Medikamentengabe durch Rettungsassistenten? Medizinrecht. 2009;27(11):649.
Bergrath S, et al. Implementation phase of a multicentre prehospital telemedicine system to support paramedics: feasibility and possible limitations. Scand J trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013;21(1):54.
Bergrath S, et al. Technical and organisational feasibility of a multifunctional telemedicine system in an emergency medical service–an observational study. J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(7):371–7.
Brokmann J, et al. Potenzial und Wirksamkeit eines telemedizinischen Rettungsassistenzsystems. Anaesthesist. 2015;64(6):438–45.
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin. Telemedizin in der prähospitalen Notfallmedizin: Strukturempfehlung der DGAI. Anästh Intensivmed. 2016;57:2–8.
Metelmann B, Metelmann C. Mobile Health Applications in Prehospital Emergency Medicine, in Mobile Health Applications for Quality HealthcareDelivery. Hershey: IGI Global; 2019. p. 117–35.
Prasser C, et al. Der Telenotarzt als Innovation des Rettungsdienstes im ländlichen Raum–Kosten der Implementierung. Gesundheitsökonomie Qualitätsmanagement. 2020;25(03):150–6.
Plum R, et al. Patientenzufriedenheit im Rettungsdienst - Ein Vergleich nach Versorgung mit und ohne Telenotarzt. Anästhesiol Intensivmed. 2020;03/2020:40.
Süss R, et al. Das Telenotarztsystem–Potentiale für die präklinische Notfallversorgung im ländlichen Raum. Gesundheitsökonomie Qualitätsmanagement. 2020;25(03):163–8.
Fomundam S, Herrmann JW. A survey of queuing theory applications in healthcare; 2007.
Brandeau ML, Sainfort F, Pierskalla WP. Operations research and health care: a handbook of methods and applications, vol. 70. New York: Springer Science & Business Media; 2004.
Fehrle M, et al. Zeitmessstudien im Krankenhaus. Gesundheitsökonomie Qualitätsmanagement. 2013;18(1):23–30.
Mazzoni T. A First Course in Quantitative Finance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2018.
Meyer M, Hansen K. Planungsverfahren des Operations Research. München: Vahlen; 1985.
Suess R, Fleßa S. In: Hahnenkamp K, et al., editors. Kosten des Telenotarztsystems, in Notfallversorgung auf dem Land, Ergebnisse des Pilotprojektes “Land|Rettung”. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Verlag; 2020.
Kaduszkiewicz H, Teichert U, van den Bussche H. Ärztemangel in der hausärztlichen Versorgung auf dem Lande und im Öffentlichen Gesundheitsdienst. Bundesgesundheitsblatt-Gesundheitsforschung-Gesundheitsschutz. 2018;61(2):187–94.
Rogers H, et al. A systematic review of the implementation challenges of telemedicine systems in ambulances. Telemed E Health. 2017;23(9):707–17.
Covey SM. The speed of trust: the one thing that changes everything. Chicago: Simon and Schuster; 2006.
Raaber N, et al. Telemedicine-based physician consultation results in more patients treated and released by ambulance personnel. Eur J Emerg Med. 2018;25(2):120–7.
Felzen M, et al. Utilization, safety, and technical performance of a telemedicine system for Prehospital emergency care: observational study. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(10):e14907.
Gnirke A, et al. Analgesia in the emergency medical service: comparison between tele-emergency physician and call back procedure with respect to application safety, effectiveness and tolerance. Anaesthesist. 2019;68(10):665.
Espinoza AV, et al. Time gain needed for in-ambulance telemedicine: cost-utility model. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2017;5(11):e175.
Fleßa S, et al. Der Telenotarzt als Innovation des Rettungswesens im ländlichen Raum–eine gesundheitsökonomische Analyse für den Kreis Vorpommern-Greifswald. Die Unternehmung. 2016;70(3):248–62.