Caring science research in the ambulance services: an integrative systematic review.
Birgitta Wireklint Sundström, Anders Bremer, Veronica Lindström and 1 others
PMID 30252151WHAT IT FOUND
Ambulance care research mostly describes patients' suffering and staff challenges rather than testing treatments.
Only five of 78 studies involved caring interventions, so this maps what is known but offers no evidence that specific prehospital caring methods improve patient outcomes.
Key findings
01The review mapped 78 studies, but only five included caring interventions, leaving most findings descriptive rather than evidence of treatment effects.
02Patients and families consistently described vulnerability, anxiety and a need for compassionate communication, while professionals reported unpredictability and stress as central to care.
03The authors state the findings indicate fields for future research rather than explicit best evidence for clinical practice.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only five of 78 studies tested caring interventions, so the review cannot tell you which prehospital caring methods work. Most included studies were qualitative and conducted in Sweden, limiting generalisability to other ambulance systems. The review was registered in PROSPERO in 2016 but searched literature only to April 2015, so newer evidence is missing. The authors acknowledged that their broad aim and search strategy may have missed relevant studies, and that their own clinical context could have influenced interpretation.
Declared interests
The authors declared no competing interests. No funding was needed.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this review as evidence that any specific prehospital caring intervention improves patient outcomes. Only five of the 78 included studies involved caring interventions, and the authors state the findings indicate research directions rather than best evidence for clinical practice.