Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:10:41.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Wake-Effect—Emergency Vehicle-Related Collisions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Jeff J. Clawson ,
Robert L. Martin ,
Geoff A. Cady  and
Ronald F. Maio
Jeff J. Clawson*
Affiliation:
Medical Director, Gold Cross Ambulance and Medical Priority Consultants, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Robert L. Martin
Affiliation:
Executive Director, National Academy of Emergency Medical Dispatch, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Geoff A. Cady
Affiliation:
EMS Consultant, Medical Priority Consultants, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Ronald F. Maio
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
*
Medical Director, Gold Cross Ambulance and Medical, Priority Consultants, 139 East South Temple, Suite #500, Salt Lake City, UT 84111USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

Emergency medical vehicle collisions (EMVCs) occurring during initia response and with patient transport have been a long-standing problem for emergency medical services (EMS) systems. Experience suggests “wake-effect” collision occur as a result of an EMS vehicle's transit, but do not involve the emergency medical vehicle (EMV). Substantiating the existence and magnitude of wake-effect collisions may have major implications regarding the manner of EMV response.

Hypothesis:

Paramedics will report that wake-effect collisions do occur and that the occur more frequently than do EMVCs.

Methods:

Design: Survey analysis. Participants: Thirty paramedics employed by the Salt Lake City (Utah) Fire Department and 45 paramedics employed by Salt Lake County Fire Department. Geographic Area: Service area has population of 650,000 and is urban, suburban, and rural. Measurements: The survey consisted of three openended questions concerning years on the job, EMVCs, and wake-effect collisions. Analysis: The mean value for the number of EMVCs and wake-effect EMVCs, along with the 0.95 confidence intervals (0.95 CI) were determined.

Results:

Seventy-three surveys were analyzed. Sixty EMVCs and 255 wake-effect collisions were reported. Overall, the mea value for the number EMVCs per respondent was 0.82 (0.60–1.05) and for wake-effect collisions 3.49 (2.42–4.55). The mean values for EMVC's for each service were 0.86 (0.50–1.38); 0.80 (0.50–11.0). For wake-effect collisions the mean values were 4.59 (2.83–6.35); and 2.76 (1.46–4.06) respectively.

Conclusion:

This study suggests that the wake-effect collision is real and may occur with greater frequency than do EMVCs. Significant limitations of this study are recall bias and misclassiftcation bias. Future studies are needed to define more precisely wake-effect collision prevalence and the resulting “cost” in regards to injury and vehicle/property damage.

Keywords

ambulance accidentscollisionscrashesemergency medical vehicle collisions (EMVCs)fatal accident reporting system (FARS)lights and siren (L&S)wake-effect
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , December 1997 , pp. 41 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Safety & Risk Management Information Update. Management Focus 1993;9:4.Google Scholar
2. Chicago-fewer “follow that car” orders expected. USA Today 1984;May 7.Google Scholar
3. Clawson, JJ: Running hot and thecaseof Sharron Rose. Journal of Emergency Medical Service 1991;16:11–13.Google ScholarPubMed
4. Caldwell, LH: Hard lessons. Fire Command 1990;84:20–21.Google Scholar
5. Nelson, Wallace, as guardian ad lietem for Amanda Nelson, v. USA, Case.Google Scholar
6. George, JE, Quattrone, MS: Above all-do no harm. EMT Legal Bulletin 1991;15:2–6.Google Scholar
7. Leonard, WH: What a waste when the system fails. Ambulance Industry Journal 1991;12:38–40.Google Scholar
8. Wolfberg, D: Lights and siren and liability. Journal of Emergency Medical Services 1996;12:38–40.Google Scholar
9. Page, JO: Waking primal instinct. Journal of Emergency Medical Services 1993;9:18:7.Google Scholar
10. Meijer, JE: About speed. Journal of Emergency Medical Services 1981;6:9.Google Scholar
11. National Association of Emergency Medical Physicians (NAEMSP): Position Paper: Use of warning lights and siren in emergency medical vehicle response and patient transport. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1994;9:133–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. De Lorenzo, RA, Eilers, MA: Lights and siren: A review of emergency vehicle warning systems. Ann of Emerg Med 1991;20:13310–13314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Page, JO: EMS legal primer. JEMS Publishing Co. Inc., 1985.p 2.Google Scholar
14. Blades, K: EMVAs-A tragic but preventable paradox. Canadian Emergency News 1990;13:14–16.Google Scholar
15. Saunders, CE: Ambulance collisions in an urban environment. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1994;9:133–135.Google Scholar
16. Pirrallo, RG, Swor, RA: Characteristics of fatal ambulance crashes during emergency and non-emergency operation. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1994;9:125–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17. Kupas, D, Julla, D, Pino, B :Patient outcome using medical protocol to limit “red lights and siren” transport. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1994;9:226–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Hunt, RC, Brown, LH, Cabinum, ES, Whitley, TW, Prasad, NH, Owens, CF Jr., Mayo, CE Jr.,: Is ambulance transport time with lights and siren faster than without? Ann Emerg Med 1995;25:507–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Auerbach, PS, Morris, JA, Phillips, JB Jr. et al. : An analysis of ambulance accidents in Tennessee. JAMA 1987;258:1487–1490.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Elling, R: Dispelling myths on ambulance accidents. Journal of Emergency Medical Services 1898;11:60–64.Google Scholar
21. Sharp, D: Ambulance fatality accidents. Research Paper Presentation—Canadian Interphase 1990 (Research Award Recipient).Google Scholar
22. National Safety Council: Emergency vehicles involved in accidents. Accident Facts, 1990:79.Google Scholar
23. Forry, S: written communication, September 3, 1996Google Scholar
24. Leonard, B: written communication, September 10, 1996Google Scholar
25. Clawson, JJ: Hit or myth. Journal of Emergency Medical Services 1989;14:8Google Scholar
26. Joel, Billy: Don't Ask Me Why. Impulsive Music and April Music (ASCAP), 1980.Google Scholar