In the United States, all 50 states and the District of Columbia have Good Samaritan Laws (GSLs). Designed to encourage bystanders to aid at the scene of an emergency, GSLs generally limit the risk of civil tort liability if the care is rendered in good faith. Nation-wide, a leading cause of preventable death is uncontrolled external hemorrhage. Public bleeding control initiatives aim to train the public to recognize life-threatening external bleeding, perform life-sustaining interventions (including direct pressure, tourniquet application, and wound packing), and to promote access to bleeding control equipment to ensure a rapid response from bystanders.

This study sought to identify the GSLs in each state and the District of Columbia to identify what type of responder is covered by the law (eg, all laypersons, only trained individuals, or only licensed health care providers) and if bleeding control is explicitly included or excluded in their Good Samaritan coverage.

Good Samaritan Laws providing civil liability qualified immunity were identified in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. One state, Oklahoma, specifically includes bleeding control in its GSLs. Six states – Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, and Missouri – have laws that define those covered under Good Samaritan immunity, generally limiting protection to individuals trained in a standard first aid or resuscitation course or health care clinicians. No state explicitly excludes bleeding control from their GSLs, and one state expressly includes it.

Nation-wide across the United States, most states have broad bystander coverage within GSLs for emergency medical conditions of all types, including bleeding emergencies, and no state explicitly excludes bleeding control interventions. Some states restrict coverage to those health care personnel or bystanders who have completed a specific training program. Opportunity exists for additional research into those states whose GSLs may not be inclusive of bleeding control interventions.

The aim of this review was to summarize current evidence from the United States on the effectiveness of practices and interventions for preventing, recognizing, and controlling occupationally acquired infectious diseases in Emergency Medical Service (EMS) clinicians.

PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and SCOPUS were searched from January 1, 2006 through March 15, 2022 for studies in the United States that involved EMS clinicians and firefighters, reported on one or more workplace practices or interventions that prevented or controlled infectious diseases, and included outcome measures. Eleven (11) observational studies reported on infection prevention and control (IPC) practices providing evidence that hand hygiene, standard precautions, mandatory vaccine policies, and on-site vaccine clinics are effective. Less frequent handwashing (survey-weight adjusted odds ratio [OR] 4.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 17.27) and less frequent hand hygiene after glove use (survey-weight adjusted OR 10.51; 95% CI, 2.54 to 43.45) were positively correlated with nasal colonization of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) or PPE breach were correlated with higher severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) seropositivity (unadjusted risk ratio [RR] 4.2; 95% CI, 1.03 to 17.22). Workers were more likely to be vaccinated against influenza if their employer offered the vaccine (unadjusted OR 3.3; 95% CI, 1.3 to 8.3). Active, targeted education modules for H1N1 influenza were effective at increasing vaccination rates and the success of on-site vaccine clinics.

Evidence from the United States exists on the effectiveness of IPC practices in EMS clinicians, including hand hygiene, standard precautions, mandatory vaccine policies, and vaccine clinics. More research is needed on the effectiveness of PPE and vaccine acceptance.

We aimed to demonstrate the role of real-time, on-site, whole-genome sequencing (WGS) of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the management of hospital outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

This retrospective study was undertaken at our institutions in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, between July 2021 and April 2022. We included SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks due to SARS-CoV-2 δ (delta) and ο (omicron) variants. All unexpected SARS-CoV-2–positive cases identified within the hospital were managed by the infection control team. An outbreak was defined as 2 or more cases acquired on a single ward. We included only outbreaks with 2 or more suspected transmission events in which WGS was utilized to assist with outbreak assessment and management.

We studied 8 outbreaks involving 266 patients and 486 staff, of whom 73 (27.4%) and 39 (8.0%), respectively, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the outbreak management. WGS was used to evaluate the source of the outbreak, to establish transmission chains, to highlight deficiencies in infection control practices, and to delineate between community and healthcare acquired infection.

Real-time, on-site WGS combined with epidemiologic assessment is a useful tool to guide management of hospital SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks. WGS allowed us (1) to establish likely transmission events due to personal protective equipment (PPE) breaches; (2) to detect inadequacies in infection control infrastructure including ventilation; and (3) to confirm multiple viral introductions during periods of high community SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Insights gained from WGS-guides outbreak management directly influenced policy including modifying PPE requirements, instituting routine inpatient SARS-CoV-2 surveillance, and confirmatory SARS-CoV-2 testing prior to placing patients in a cohort setting.

In the early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, United States Emergency Medical Services (EMS) experienced a decrease in calls, and at the same time, an increase in out-of-hospital deaths. This finding led to a concern for the implications of potential delays in care for the obstetric population.

This study examines the impact of the pandemic on prehospital care amongst pregnant women.

A retrospective observational study was conducted comparing obstetric-related EMS activations in Maryland (USA) during the pandemic (March 10-July 20, 2020) to a pre-pandemic period (March 10-July 20, 2019). Comparative analysis was used to analyze the difference in frequency and acuity of calls between the two periods.

There were fewer obstetric-related EMS encounters during the pandemic compared to the year prior (daily average during the pandemic 12.5 [SD = 3.8] versus 14.6 [SD = 4.1] pre-pandemic; P <.001), although the percent of total female encounters remained unchanged (1.6% in 2020 versus 1.5% in 2019; P = .091). Key indicators of maternal status were not significantly different between the two periods. African-American women represented a disproportionately high percentage of obstetric-related activations (36.2% in 2019 and 34.8% in 2020).

In this state-wide analysis of EMS calls in Maryland early in the pandemic, no significant differences existed in the utilization of EMS by pregnant women. Prehospital EMS activations amongst pregnant women in Maryland only decreased slightly without an increase in acuity. Of note, over-representation by African-American women compared to population statistics raises concern for broader systemic differences in access to obstetric care.

Frequent calls to 911 and requests for emergency services by individuals place a costly burden on emergency response systems and emergency departments (EDs) in the United States. Many of the calls by these individuals are non-emergent exacerbations of chronic conditions and could be treated more effectively and cost efficiently through another health care service. Mobile integrated community health (MICH) programs present a possible partial solution to the over-utilization of emergency services by addressing factors which contribute to a patient’s likelihood of frequent Emergency Medical Services (EMS) use. To provide effective care to eligible individuals, MICH providers must have a working understanding of the common conditions they will encounter.

The purpose of this descriptive study was to evaluate the diagnosis prevalence and comorbidity among participants in the Queen Anne’s County (Maryland USA) MICH Program. This fundamental knowledge of the most common medical conditions within the MICH Program will inform future mobile integrated health programs and providers.

This study examined preliminary data from the MICH Program, as well as 2017 Maryland census data. It involved secondary analysis of de-identified patient records and descriptive statistical analysis of the disease prevalence, degree of comorbidity, insurance coverage, and demographic characteristics among 97 program participants. Diagnoses were grouped by their ICD-9 classification codes to determine the most common categories of medical conditions. Multiple linear regression models and chi-squared tests were used to assess the association between age, sex, race, ICD-9 diagnosis groups, and comorbidity among program enrollees.

Results indicated the most prevalent diagnoses included hypertension, high cholesterol, esophageal reflux, and diabetes mellitus. Additionally, 94.85% of MICH patients were comorbid; the number of comorbidities per patient ranged from one to 13 conditions, with a mean of 5.88 diagnoses per patient (SD=2.74).

Overall, patients in the MICH Program are decidedly medically complex and may be well-suited to additional community intervention to better manage their many conditions. The potential for MICH programs to simultaneously improve patient outcomes and reduce health care costs by expanding into larger public health and addressing the needs of the most vulnerable citizens warrants further study.

ScharfBM, BissellRA, TrevittJL, JenkinsJL.Diagnosis Prevalence and Comorbidity in a Population of Mobile Integrated Community Health Care PatientsPrehosp Disaster Med. 2019;34(1):46–55.