• Kristy G Morganti, Abby Alpert, Gregg Margolis, Jeffrey Wasserman, and Arthur L Kellermann.
• RAND Corporation, RAND Health, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: kristy.morganti@gmail.com.
• Ann Emerg Med. 2014 May 1;63(5):615-626.e5.

AbstractThe Institute of Medicine and other national organizations have asserted that current payment policies strongly discourage emergency medical services (EMS) providers from transporting selected patients who call 911 to non-ED settings (eg, primary care clinics, mental health centers, dialysis centers) or from treating patients on scene. The limited literature available is consistent with the view that current payment policies incentivize transport of all 911 callers to a hospital ED, even those who might be better managed elsewhere. However, the potential benefits and risks of altering existing policy have not been adequately explored. There are theoretical benefits to encouraging EMS personnel to transport selected patients to alternate settings or even to provide definitive treatment on scene; however, existing evidence is insufficient to confirm the feasibility or safety of such a policy. In light of growing concerns about the high cost of emergency care and heavy use of EDs, assessing EMS transport options should be a high-priority topic for outcomes research.Copyright © 2013 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

35 keywords...

hide…