The origins and evolution of emergency medical services across the United States are explored in this episode summary. It traces the history of mobile ambulances and pre-hospital care from the Crusades to the groundbreaking 1973 Emergency Medical Services Act, which established national guidelines for a coordinated EMS system.
The summary outlines the roles and training of EMTs and paramedics, as well as challenges such as funding gaps, fragmentation of services, and misaligned incentives between ambulance providers and efficient patient care. The complexities surrounding coordinated emergency medical response are examined through this overview of the system's development and current state.
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
The origins of emergency medical services can be traced to the Knights Hospitaller from the Crusades, who created the stretcher for transporting injured soldiers on the battlefield. In 15th-century Spain, "ambulancias" or field hospitals emerged to meet medical needs. According to the summary, the modern concept of mobile ambulances equipped for en-route care was developed by Napoleon's forces in the 19th century.
Prior to the 1970s, the US lacked a standardized emergency medical system, leading to preventable deaths. A National Academy of Sciences study in the 1960s highlighted the need for nationwide EMS reform. Dr. J. Frank Pantridge introduced the idea of ambulances staffed with medical personnel in 1967.
The pivotal Emergency Medical Services Act of 1973 established federal guidelines for a coordinated EMS system across the US, with trained personnel providing pre-hospital care. This act was instrumental in advancing today's systematic emergency medical response.
As outlined in the 1977 national curriculum, EMTs receive around 120-150 hours of training for basic life-saving procedures like CPR, while paramedics undergo 1,200-1,800 hours for advanced care like IVs and defibrillation. Paramedics often face demanding schedules and low pay relative to their high-stakes responsibilities.
Since federal EMS funding ended in 1981, the system fragmented into state/local programs with disparities in service quality. Competition among private ambulance providers aimed to improve services, but has complicated matters in some areas.
The reliance on Medicaid/Medicare reimbursements, which only cover transports to hospitals, has created problematic financial incentives. EMS providers may unnecessarily transport patients just to get paid, contributing to ER overcrowding. The summary highlights the need to align incentives with efficient, quality patient care.
1-Page Summary
The modern emergency medical services that we rely on today have their origins in wartime efforts to transport and care for the injured. These services have evolved significantly over the centuries, from the Crusades to 15th-century Spain, and were later refined during the Napoleonic wars.
During the Crusades, the Knights Hospitaller of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem were the first to practice emergency medicine on the battlefield. This organization invented what we now recognize as the stretcher, historically referred to as a "litter," which was significant in the evacuation and care of wounded soldiers.
In 15th century Spain, amidst the period of the Inquisition, there emerged a great need for medical services. This need led to the establishment of field hospitals, known as "ambulancias." These facilities provided critical medical assistance and can be seen as the precursors to the mobile emergency care units we are familiar with today.
Historical development of emergency medical care and ambulances
The modern Emergency Medical Service (EMS) system in the United States has gone through a significant evolution from the 1960s to the establishment of federal guidelines for a standardized system. This transformation was primarily in response to a pressing need for improved outcomes in medical emergencies.
Prior to the 1970s, the United States did not have a standardized emergency medical system, which often resulted in preventable deaths from accidents and injuries. In the late 1960s, medical emergencies were frequently managed with house calls by doctors. However, in urgent cases, emergencies were handled by local morticians or police who would perform "scoop and run" operations to transport injured individuals to hospitals with no trained medical professionals in attendance.
It was recognized that outcomes for medical emergencies could be significantly improved if ambulances were staffed with trained medical personnel who could begin treatment immediately. Before the mid-1970s, even hospital treatment for emergencies was not specialized as emergency rooms were yet to be developed.
The need for improvement in emergency medical care was further highlighted by a study conducted by the National Academy of Sciences in the 1960s. The study underscored the urgency for a nationwide emergency medical services system. Following this notion, Dr. J. Frank Pantridge of Belfast introduced a groundbreaking concept in 1967. He posited that the success rate of saving lives increased when a physician or nurse was included in mobile units, such as ambulances, allowing immediate, on-the-scene medical care to patients during the transport to a hospital.
Emergence and evolution of the modern EMS system in the US
Josh Clark and Chuck Bryant delve into the essential yet taxing world of emergency medical services, discussing the differences in roles, training, and challenges faced by EMTs and paramedics.
The first national standard curriculum for EMTs and paramedics was established in 1977, setting the stage for the systems in place today. EMTs have between about 120 and 150 hours of coursework. They’re trained to handle life-saving procedures such as CPR, oxygen administration, and severe allergic reactions. However, EMTs are not cleared to perform invasive treatments like administering injections, which leaves them limited in their medical capabilities compared to paramedics.
Paramedics, on the other hand, face about 10 times the coursework of EMTs, with 1,200 to 1,800 hours depending on jurisdiction, which includes the ability to provide advanced emergency care. Some of their responsibilities include giving IVs, dealing with heart attacks, and operating defibrillators. The cost of paramedic training can be steep, approximately $10,000 just for tuition, not including additional expenses for books, equipment, and uniforms.
Employment for these professionals is in demand, but the job doesn't always pay well. The mean annual wage for EMTs and paramedics was about $31,000 a few years ago, whereas the top earners made around $54,000, and in certain areas like Washington state, the income can reach up to $71,000. Clark and Bryant suggest that paramedics, much like school teachers, are driven more by passion for their work than the fina ...
Roles, training, and challenges of EMTs and paramedics
The EMS industry is facing systemic issues related to funding and logistics, challenging the current emergency medical services delivery model since federal funding was pulled in the 1980s.
Since the omnibus budget of 1981 removed federal funding for emergency services, the EMS system developed up to that point fragmented into a mixture of state, local, and county programs. This decentralized and underfunded system has led to disparities, with some regions having multiple competing private ambulance providers, while others contend with long response times and limited access to advanced care.
It's mentioned that there can be ambulance competition among local EMS services, and sometimes multiple ambulances may arrive at a scene, causing complications. The idea that competition would improve services led to the privatization of EMS, but this has not consistently resulted in better outcomes. New York is one place that’s scaling back on the privatization of ambulance services due to these issues, and Las Vegas has resisted total privatization after finding private companies often had less efficient response times than the fire department or local EMS.
The reliance on Medicaid and Medicare reimbursements has created financial incentives that may not always align with patient needs or the efficacy of the system.
Josh Clark points out that Medicaid and Medicare only reimburse for transports to the hospital, which can influence EMS providers to perform unnecessary hospital transports to ensure they get paid. This reimbursement policy pressures paramedics to transport all patients, including performing continued chest compressions on an individual who is patently deceased, just to enable billing for tra ...
Systemic issues with the funding and logistics of the EMS industry
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser