TY - JOUR
T1 - Developing Research Criteria to Define Medical Necessity in Emergency Medical Services
AU - Cone, David C.
AU - Schmidt, Terri A.
AU - Mann, N. Clay
AU - Brown, Lawrence
N1 - Funding Information:
Financial support for the Neely Conference project was received from the National Association of EMS Physicians, the Neely EMS Research Fund, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation.
Funding Information:
“The Neely Conference: Developing Research Criteria to Define Medical Necessity in EMS” was a working conference held January 15, 2003, as a preconference to the National Association of EMS Physicians Annual Meeting in Panama City Beach, Florida. The conference was named in honor of Keith Neely, PhD, MPA, EMT-P, who proposed such a conference and worked on its early development before his death in 2001. The conference convened approximately 30 emergency medical services (EMS) physicians, researchers, administrators, providers, and representatives of interested federal agencies. Financial support for this conference was received from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation; the Neely EMS Research Fund; and the National Association of EMS Physicians.
Copyright:
Copyright 2017 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2004
Y1 - 2004
N2 - "The Neely Conference: Developing Research Criteria to Define Medical Necessity in EMS" convened emergency medical services (EMS) physicians, researchers, administrators, providers, and federal agency representatives to begin the development of a set of uniform triage criteria and outcome measures that could be used to study and evaluate medical necessity among EMS patients. These standardized criteria might be used in research studies examining EMS dispatch and response (e.g., dispatch triage protocols, alternative response configurations), and EMS treatment and transport (e.g., field triage protocols, alternative care destinations). The conference process included review and analysis of the literature, expert judgment, and consensus building. There was general agreement on the following: 1. Any dispatch triage or field triage system that is developed must be designed to offer patients alternatives to EMS, not to refuse care to patients. 2. It is theoretically possible to develop a set of clinical criteria for need. Some groups of patients will clearly need a traditional EMS response and other groups will not, but this has yet to be defined. 3. In addition to clinical criteria, certain social and other non-clinical criteria such as pain or potential abuse may be used to justify a response. 4. Communication barriers, patient age, special needs, and other conditions complicate patient assessment but should not exclude patients from consideration for alternate triage or transport. 5. These research questions are important, and standard sets of outcome measures are needed so that different studies and innovative programs can be compared.
AB - "The Neely Conference: Developing Research Criteria to Define Medical Necessity in EMS" convened emergency medical services (EMS) physicians, researchers, administrators, providers, and federal agency representatives to begin the development of a set of uniform triage criteria and outcome measures that could be used to study and evaluate medical necessity among EMS patients. These standardized criteria might be used in research studies examining EMS dispatch and response (e.g., dispatch triage protocols, alternative response configurations), and EMS treatment and transport (e.g., field triage protocols, alternative care destinations). The conference process included review and analysis of the literature, expert judgment, and consensus building. There was general agreement on the following: 1. Any dispatch triage or field triage system that is developed must be designed to offer patients alternatives to EMS, not to refuse care to patients. 2. It is theoretically possible to develop a set of clinical criteria for need. Some groups of patients will clearly need a traditional EMS response and other groups will not, but this has yet to be defined. 3. In addition to clinical criteria, certain social and other non-clinical criteria such as pain or potential abuse may be used to justify a response. 4. Communication barriers, patient age, special needs, and other conditions complicate patient assessment but should not exclude patients from consideration for alternate triage or transport. 5. These research questions are important, and standard sets of outcome measures are needed so that different studies and innovative programs can be compared.
KW - Consensus
KW - Medical necessity
KW - Neely Conference
KW - Research criteria
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=16544369352&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=16544369352&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.prehos.2003.12.002
DO - 10.1016/j.prehos.2003.12.002
M3 - Article
C2 - 15060844
AN - SCOPUS:16544369352
SN - 1090-3127
VL - 8
SP - 116
EP - 125
JO - Prehospital Emergency Care
JF - Prehospital Emergency Care
IS - 2
ER -