Survey of shift and work tolerance of City of Houston emergency medical service personnel

This study of ambulance workers for the emergency medical services of the City of Houston studied the factors related to shiftwork tolerance and intolerance. The EMS personnel work a 24-hour shift with rotating days of the week. Workers are assigned to A, B, C, D shift, each of which rotate 24-hours on, 24-hours off, 24-hours on and 4 days off. One-hundred and seventy-six male EMTs, paramedics and chauffeurs from stations of varying levels of activity were surveyed. The sample group ranged in age from 20 to 45. The average tenure on the job was 8.2 years. Over 68% of the workers held a second job, the majority of which worked over 20 hours a week at the second position.^ The survey instrument was a 20-page questionnaire modeled after the Folkard Standardized Shiftwork Index. In addition to demographic data, the survey tool provided measurements of general job satisfaction, sleep quality, general health complaints, morningness/eveningness, cognitive and somatic anxiety, depression, and circadian types. The survey questionnaire included an EMS-specific scaler of stress.^ A conceptual model of Shiftwork Tolerance was presented to identify the key factors examined in the study. An extensive list of 265 variables was reduced to 36 key variables that related to: (1) shift schedule and demographic/lifestyle factors, (2) individual differences related to traits and characteristics, and (3) tolerance/intolerance effects. Using the general job satisfaction scaler as the key measurement of shift tolerance/intolerance, it was shown that a significant relationship existed between this dependent variable and stress, number of years working a 24-hour shift, sleep quality, languidness/vigorousness. The usual amount of sleep received during the shift, general health complaints and flexibility/rigidity (R$\sp2$ =.5073).^ The sample consisted of a majority of morningness-types or extreme-morningness types, few evening-types and no extreme-evening types, duplicating the findings of Motohashi's previous study of ambulance workers. The level of activity by station was not significant on any of the dependent variables examined. However, the shift worked had a relationship with sleep quality, despite the fact that all shifts work the same hours and participate in the same rotation schedule. ^

Use of universal precautions in the workplace: A comparison of two fire /EMS services

The Health Belief Model (HBM) provided the theoretical framework for examining Universal Precautions (UP) compliance factors by Firefighter, EMTs and Paramedics (prehospital care providers). A convenient sample of prehospital care providers (n = 4000) from two cities (Houston and Washington DC), were surveyed to explore the factors related to their decision to comply with Universal Precautions. Eight hundred and sixty-five useable questionnaires were analyzed. The responders were primarily male (95.7%) eight hundred and twenty-eight and thirty-seven were female, prehospital based (100%), EMTs (60.0%) and paramedics (12.8%) who had a mean 13 years of prehospital care experience. ^ Linear regression was used to evaluate the four hypotheses. The first hypothesis evaluating perceived susceptibility and seriousness with reported UP use was statistically significant (p = < .05). Perceived susceptibility, when considered independently, did not make a significant contribution (t = −4.2852; p = 0.0000) to the stated use of Universal precautions. The hypothesis is not supported as stated. The data indicates the opposite effect. Supported is the premise that as perceived susceptibility and perceived seriousness increase the use of Universal Precautions decreases. Hypothesis two tested perceived benefits with internal and external barriers. Both perceived benefits and internal and external barriers as well as the overall regression were significant (F = 112.6, p = 0.0000). The contribution of internal and external barriers was statistically significant (t = 0.0175; p = 0.0000) and (t = 0.0128; p = 0.0000). Hypothesis three which tested modifying factors, cues to action, select demographic variables, and the main effects of the HBM with self reported UP compliance overall was significant. The variables gender, birth, education, job type, EMS certification, years of service, years of experience providing patient care, Universal Precautions training hours, type of apparatus assigned to and the number of EMS related incidents responded to in a month were found to have a significant contribution to the stated use of Universal Precautions. ^ The additive effects were tested by use of a stepwise regression that assessed the contribution of each of the significant variables. Three variables in the equation were statistically significant. Internal barriers (t = −8.5507; p = 0.0000), external barriers (t = −6.2862; p = 0.000) and job type 2 & 3. Job type two (t = −2.8464; p = 0.0045 is titled Engineer/Operator. Job type three (t = −2.5730; p = 0.0103) is titled captain. The overall regression was significant (F = 24.06; p = 0.000). The Hypothesis is supported in the certain demographic variables do influence the stated use of Universal precautions and that as internal and external barriers are decreased, there is an increase in the stated use of Universal Precautions. ^ In summary, this study demonstrated that internal and external barriers have a significant impact on the stated use of Universal Precautions. Internal barriers are those factors within the individual that require an internal change (i.e., forgetfulness, freedom, perception of the urgency of the patient's needs etc.) and external barriers are things in the environment that can be altered (i.e., equipment design, availability of equipment, ease of use). These two model variables explained 23%–30% of the variance. ^