Search

Health and social needs exist along a dynamic continuum. Recognising that health status is inextricably impacted by social determinants of health, community paramedicine has opportunities and a responsibility to reduce inequities. The objective of this scoping review was to investigate the peer‐reviewed and grey literature to explore how community paramedicine supports community needs along a health and social continuum. We conducted a scoping review of the English language literature using the JBI Scoping Review methodology. We searched CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and organisational websites. 30 peer‐reviewed and 13 grey literature articles met the inclusion criteria. The findings describe the ways community paramedicine models evolved from minimising system pressures on emergency health services to addressing health and social needs. A key recommendation across the literature was the need to meaningfully engage communities early in the program development to understand how best to implement and codesign integrated service models addressing specific community needs although there was a lack of evidence to guide this approach. There is a notable lack of evidence pertaining to optimising technologies in the program design and implementation. The results highlight opportunities to determine the best practices for conducting holistic community needs assessments that include equitable stakeholder engagement and enhancing education to prepare paramedics for expanded roles. Community paramedicine provides opportunities to better meet the needs of structurally marginalised communities. There is a social responsibility and opportunity to engage communities to codesign service delivery, advance paramedic education, and enhance interprofessional collaboration to better support community needs and generate upstream solutions for individuals and communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Competency frameworks serve various roles including outlining characteristics of a competent workforce, facilitating mobility, and analysing or assessing expertise. Given these roles and their relevance in the health professions, we sought to understand the methods and strategies used in the development of existing competency frameworks. We applied the Arksey and O'Malley framework to undertake this scoping review. We searched six electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Scopus, and ERIC) and three grey literature sources (greylit.org, Trove and Google Scholar) using keywords related to competency frameworks. We screened studies for inclusion by title and abstract, and we included studies of any type that described the development of a competency framework in a healthcare profession. Two reviewers independently extracted data including study characteristics. Data synthesis was both quantitative and qualitative. Among 5710 citations, we selected 190 for analysis. The majority of studies were conducted in medicine and nursing professions. Literature reviews and group techniques were conducted in 116 studies each (61%), and 85 (45%) outlined some form of stakeholder deliberation. We observed a significant degree of diversity in methodological strategies, inconsistent adherence to existing guidance on the selection of methods, who was involved, and based on the variation we observed in timeframes, combination, function, application and reporting of methods and strategies, there is no apparent gold standard or standardised approach to competency framework development. We observed significant variation within the conduct and reporting of the competency framework development process. While some variation can be expected given the differences across and within professions, our results suggest there is some difficulty in determining whether methods were fit-for-purpose, and therefore in making determinations regarding the appropriateness of the development process. This uncertainty may unwillingly create and legitimise uncertain or artificial outcomes. There is a need for improved guidance in the process for developing and reporting competency frameworks.

Introduction: Paramedic practice is highly variable, occurs in diverse contexts, and involves the assessment and management of a range of presentations of varying acuity across the lifespan. As a result, attempts to define paramedic practice have been challenging and incomplete. This has led to inaccurate or under-representations of practice that can ultimately affect education, assessment, and the delivery of care. In this study, we outline our efforts to better identify, explore, and represent professional practice when developing a national competency framework for paramedics in Canada. Methods: We used a systems-thinking approach to identify the settings, contexts, features, and influences on paramedic practice in Canada. This approach makes use of the role and influence of system features at the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, supra-macrosystem, and chronosystem levels in ways that can provide new insights. We used methods such as rich pictures, diagramming, and systems mapping to explore relationships between these contexts and features. Findings: When we examine the system of practice in paramedicine, multiple layers become evident and within them we start to see details of features that ought to be considered in any future competency development work. Our exploration of the system highlights that paramedic practice considers the person receiving care, caregivers, and paramedics. It involves collaboration within co-located and dispersed teams that are composed of other health and social care professionals, public safety personnel, and others. Practice is enacted across varying geographical, cultural, social, and technical contexts and is subject to multiple levels of policy, regulatory, and legislative influence. Conclusion: Using a systems-thinking approach, we developed a detailed systems map of paramedic practice in Canada. This map can be used to inform the initial stages of a more representative, comprehensive, and contemporary national competency framework for paramedics in Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Paramedics are increasingly being subjected to violence, creating the potential for significant physical and psychological harm. Where a patient has a history of violent behavior, hazard flags—applied either to the individual, their residential address, or phone number—can alert paramedics to the possibility of violence, potentially reducing the risk of injury. Leveraging a novel violence reporting process embedded in the electronic patient care record, we reviewed violence reports filed over a thirteen-month period since its inception in February 2021 to assess the effectiveness of hazard flagging as a potential risk mitigation strategy. Upon reviewing a report, paramedic supervisors can generate a hazard flag if recurrent violent behavior from the patient is anticipated. In all, 502 violence reports were filed, for which paramedic supervisors generated hazard flags in 20% of cases (n = 99). In general, cases were not flagged either because the incident occurred at a location not amenable to flagging or because the supervisors felt that a hazard flag was not warranted based on the details in the report. Hazard flagging was associated with an increased risk of violence during subsequent paramedic attendance (Odds Ratio [OR] 6.21, p < 0.001). Nevertheless, the process appears to reliably identify persons who may be violent towards paramedics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Competency frameworks outline the perceived knowledge, skills, attitudes, and other attributes required for professional practice. These frameworks have gained in popularity, in part for their ability to inform health professions education, assessment, professional mobility, and other activities. Previous research has highlighted inadequate reporting related to their development which may then jeopardize their defensibility and utility. Methods: This study aimed to develop a set of minimum reporting criteria for developers and authors of competency frameworks in an effort to improve transparency, clarity, interpretability and appraisal of the developmental process, and its outputs. Following guidance from the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network, an expert panel was assembled, and a knowledge synthesis, a Delphi study, and workshops were conducted using individuals with experience developing competency frameworks, to identify and achieve consensus on the essential items for a competency framework development reporting guideline. Results: An initial checklist was developed by the 35-member expert panel and the research team. Following the steps listed above, a final reporting guideline including 20 essential items across five sections (title and abstract; framework development; development process; testing; and funding/conflicts of interest) was developed. Conclusion: The COmpeteNcy FramEwoRk Development in Health Professions (CONFERD-HP) reporting guideline permits a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for competency framework development in the health professions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]