Abstract

Aim

We aimed to achieve consensus among NHS and community stakeholders to identify and prioritise innovations in Community First Responder (CFR) schemes.

Methods

We conducted a mixed-methods study, adopting a modified nominal group technique with participants from ambulance services, CFR schemes and community stakeholders. The 1-day consensus workshop consisted of four sessions: introduction of innovations derived from primary research; round-robin discussions to generate new ideas; discussion and ranking of innovations; feedback of ranking, re-ranking and concluding statements. Innovations were ranked on a 5-point Likert scale and descriptive statistics of median and interquartile range calculated. Discussions were recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically.

Results

The innovations found were classified into two categories: process innovations and technological innovations. The process innovations included six types of innovations: roles, governance, training, policies and protocols, recruitment, and awareness. The technological innovations included three aspects: information and communication; transport; and health technology. The descriptive statistics revealed that innovations such as counselling and support for CFRs (median: 5 IQR 5,5), peer support [5 (4,5)], and enhanced communication with control room [5 (4,5)] were essential priorities. Contrastingly, innovations such as the provision of dual CFR crew [1.5 (1,3)], CFR responsibilities in patient transport to hospital [1 (1,2)], and CFR access to emergency blue light [1 (1,1.5)] were deemed non-priorities.

Conclusions

This article established consensus on innovations in the CFR schemes and their ranking for improving the provision of care delivered by CFRs in communities. The consensus-building process also informed policy- and decision-makers on the potential future change agenda for CFR schemes.

Details

Title
Consensus on innovations and future directions of community first responder schemes in United Kingdom: a national nominal group technique study
Author
Patel, Gupteswar 1 ; Botan, Vanessa 1 ; Phung, Viet-Hai 1 ; Trueman, Ian 1 ; Hosseini, Mehrshad Parvin 1 ; Smith, Murray D. 2 ; Ørner, Roderick 1 ; Pattinson, Julie 1 ; Asghar, Zahid 1 ; Rowan, Elise 1 ; Spaight, Robert 3 ; Mortimer, Craig 4 ; Brewster, Amanda 1 ; Mountain, Pauline 1 ; Miller, Joshua 5 ; Brown, Martina 6 ; Siriwardena, Aloysius Niroshan 1   VIAFID ORCID Logo 

1  University of Lincoln, Community and Health Research Unit, School of Health and Care Sciences, Lincoln, UK (GRID:grid.36511.30) (ISNI:0000 0004 0420 4262) 
2  Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth Business School, Ceredigion, UK (GRID:grid.8186.7) (ISNI:0000 0001 2168 2483) 
3  East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK (GRID:grid.439644.8) (ISNI:0000 0004 0497 673X) 
4  South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, Sussex, UK (GRID:grid.439644.8) (ISNI:0000 0004 0498 7690) 
5  West Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK (GRID:grid.36511.30) 
6  South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, Bicester, UK (GRID:grid.36511.30) (ISNI:0000 0004 0498 7690) 
Pages
99
Publication year
2024
Publication date
Dec 2024
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V.
ISSN
17577241
e-ISSN
15007480
Source type
Scholarly Journal
Language of publication
English
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-024-01254-6
ProQuest document ID
3111376705
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2024. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.