Emergency medical services (EMS) are offered to patients with life-threatening conditions, such as cardiac arrest, respiratory failure, and major trauma. The EMS has led to an increase in the number of procedures performed in the field. This cross-sectional analytical study included all patients from the National Institute of Emergency Medicine dataset between 2017 and 2021. We analyzed the EMS response procedures, the patient symptom rates, and patient outcomes by number and percentage of procedures. In total, 1,788,669 EMS responses were eligible for analysis of EMS procedures. The most frequent symptoms of the procedure were “unconsciousness or stupor” (21.63%), “dyspnea” (15.06%), and “seizure” (9.14%). Head injuries were the most frequent type of injury (49.69%). The most common EMS responses included intravenous fluid (IVF) (40%), such as 0.9% NSS (38.94%); airway and breathing (16%), such as O₂ canular or mask bag (49%); immobilization (16%), such as collar with long spinal board (46%); stop bleeding (14%), such as pressure dressing (28.23%); medication administration (8%), such as 50% glucose (42.45%), adrenaline (27.9%), and diazepam (12.1%); and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (5%), such as chest compression (38.94%) and automated external defibrillator or defibrillators (5.98%). As a result, patient outcomes of the EMS procedure response showed that 54% of symptoms improved, and 21% of admissions occurred over 30 days. The most common EMS procedures among emergency patients in Thailand were IVF, airway, breathing, immobilization, and cessation of bleeding. These data highlight good improvement in patient symptoms in all prehospital and in-hospital phases. Training for EMS providers regarding the need for EMS interventions should increase in the future.

1. [1] H. E. Wang, J. R. Lave, C. A. Sirio, and D. M. Yealy, “Paramedic intubation errors: isolated events or symptoms of larger problems?,” Health Affairs, Vol.25, Np.2, pp. 501-509, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.25.2.501
2. [2] M. J. Seamon et al., “Prehospital interventions for penetrating trauma victims: a prospective comparison between advanced life support and basic life support,” Injury, Vol.44, No.5, pp. 634-638, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2012.12.020
3. [3] P. E. Jacobs and A. Grabinsky, “Advances in prehospital airway management,” Int. J. of Critical Illness and Injury Science, Vol.4, No.1, pp. 57-64, 2014. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-5151.128014
4. [4] H. E. Wang et al., “Effect of a strategy of initial laryngeal tube insertion vs endotracheal intubation on 72-hour survival in adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomized clinical trial,” JAMA, Vol.320, No.8, pp. 769-778, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.7044
5. [5] M. El Sayed, H. Tamim, and N. C. Mann, “Description of procedures performed on patients by emergency medical services during mass casualty incidents in the United States,” American J. of Emergency Medicine, Vol.33, pp. 1030-1036, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2015.04.035
6. [6] J. H. Burton, N. R. Harmon, M. G. Dunn Do, and J. R. Bradshaw, “EMS provider findings and interventions with a statewide EMS spine-assessment protocol,” Prehospital Emergency Care, Vol.9, No.3, pp. 303-309, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/10903120590962003
7. [7] J. H. Burton, M. R. Baumann, T. Maoz, and J. R. Bradshaw, “Endotracheal intubation in a rural EMS state: procedure utilization and impact of skills maintenance guidelines,” Prehospital Emergency Care, Vol.7, No.3, pp. 352-356, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1080/10903120390936554
8. [8] D. Thepmanee, H. Tanaka, and H. Takyu, “Trend in pre-hospital emergency calls and transportation data for emergency medical services in Thailand,” J. of EMS Medicine, Vol.2, No.2, pp. 45-54, 2023. https://doi.org/10.35616/jemsm.2022.00017
9. [9] P. Nongchang, W. L. Wong, S. Pitaksanurat, and P. B. Amchai, “Intravenous fluid administration and the survival of pre hospital resuscitated out of hospital cardiac arrest patients in Thailand,” J. of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, Vol.11, No.9, pp. OC29-OC32, 2017. https://doi.org/10.7860/jcdr/2017/29603.10656
10. [10] L. Nguyen et al., “Effect of intravenous versus intraosseous access in prehospital cardiac arrest,” Air Medical J., Vol.38, No.3, pp. 147-149, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amj.2019.02.005
11. [11] S. A. Bores et al., “The association of prehospital intravenous fluids and mortality in patients with penetrating trauma,” The J. of emergency medicine, Vol.54, No.4, pp. 487-499, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2017.12.046
12. [12] R. A. Pollack et al., “Impact of bystander automated external defibrillator use on survival and functional out-comes in shockable observed public cardiac arrests,” Circulation, Vol.137, No.20, pp. 2104-2113, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.117.030700
13. [13] J. Mendelson and M. D. Berg, “Getting the right bystander to the right place at the right time,” Resuscitation, Vol.107, Article No.A11-2, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.07.002
14. [14] N. Liu et al., “Validation of the ROSC after cardiac arrest (RACA) score in Pan-Asian out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients,” Resuscitation, Vol.149, pp. 53-59, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.01.029
15. [15] M. E. H. Ong et al., “Outcomes for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests across 7 countries in Asia: the Pan Asian resuscitation outcomes study (PAROS),” Resuscitation, Vol.96, pp. 100-108, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.07.026