TeleEMS: An EMS Telemedicine Pilot Program Barriers to Implementation.

INTRODUCTION: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, emergency medical services (EMS) and hospitals recognized the need for innovative programs addressing 9-1-1 utilization and ambulance transport to provide patient-centered, safe, cost-effective care. The ET3 (Emergency Triage, Treatment, and Transport) model provides flexibility and new payments to ambulance care teams for Medicare beneficiaries for alternate strategies of care. This includes providing treatment in place through telehealth after a 9-1-1 call and ambulance response. Our objective is to evaluate the implementation barriers of a telemedicine service to 9-1-1 responding ambulances providing treatment in place for low-acuity conditions.

METHODS: The TeleEMS program was piloted in a large, urban fire-based EMS system with eight ambulances geographically surrounding one hospital. Paramedics received training on the telemedicine software and screening criteria, which were age 1-70 and vital sign parameters. Pregnant, combative, and patients with no clear need for emergency department transport were excluded. Three emergency physicians with additional training in EMS provided the TeleEMS service from 8am to 6 pm on Monday - Friday. The telemedicine software was application-based and provided HIPAA-compliant two-way, real-time audio and video communication through the 4G network on a tablet. The TeleEMS physicians had access to a database of clinics and hospitals that coordinate health care. The TeleEMS physician contacted the patient within 24-72 hours after the encounter for follow-up.

RESULTS: The TeleEMS pilot program ran for 12 weeks from April - June 2021. During this time, there were seven completed consults with treatment in place, one completed consult with transport to an emergency department, and five consult attempts that failed due to technological issues with resultant transport. Each of the consults (13/13) met the TeleEMS screening criteria. Post-pilot focus group sessions were held to determine paramedic feedback. Barriers to an EMS telemedicine program include paramedic buy-in, patient expectations for emergency care, technology limitations, and qualified physician resources.

CONCLUSIONS: An EMS telemedicine program can be successfully implemented in urban fire-based EMS systems for 9-1-1 responding ambulances. Barriers to implementation should be addressed at the paramedic, patient, technology, and program levels to improve success.