ArticleBMC emergency medicine2026
"We need to accept our limited resources": a qualitative study exploring ambulance clinicians' experiences of working conditions when caring for patients with breathlessness.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreathlessness is a common and potentially life-threatening symptom among patients and constitutes a frequent reason for ambulance dispatches. Within ambulance care, ambulance clinicians (ACs) are often required to make rapid clinical assessments and decisions under complex and unpredictable conditions. Despite this, there is limited knowledge of how ACs experience their working conditions in ambulance care when caring for patients with breathlessness. Little is known about how these working conditions influence their ability to balance clinical responsibility, patient needs, and environmental constraints in the ambulance care setting. This study aimed to explore how ACs experience their working conditions in connection with the care of patients with breathlessness.
methodsThis qualitative exploratory sub-study included a sample of 16 ACs from southwestern Sweden, all with at least one year of clinical experience. Data were collected through semi-structured dyadic interviews following a simulation exercise and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsThe ACs experiences of their working conditions in connection with the care of patients with breathlessness is captured in three main higher-order themes: navigating constraints of the care environment, navigating professional judgment within institutional boundaries, and navigating responsibility in uncertain and distant care situations. ACs highlighted situations in which high-acuity care is delivered in environments that do not consistently ensure clinician safety. Clinical guidelines support decision-making in high-stress situations but may become restrictive when patients' conditions fall outside standard recommendations or when interventions are contraindicated. To address these constraints, ACs develop adaptive strategies. Non-conveyance decisions involving patients with breathlessness are described as particularly complex and burdensome, a challenge intensified by a shift toward selective transport and increased reliance on individual clinical judgment under uncertainty.
conclusionThe findings show that working conditions in ambulance services influence how care for patients with breathlessness is provided and experienced. Care is delivered in contexts marked by urgency, uncertainty, and constrained resources, requiring ACs to navigate patient needs, safety considerations, and organizational expectations. While acceptance of limitations functions as a professional strategy, it carries ethical implications for patients' safety, dignity, and care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.