Use of Body Armor by EMS Clinicians, Workplace Violence, and Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Care

Abstract

Importance: There is a clear benefit to body armor against firearms; however, it remains unclear how these vests may influence day-to-day patient encounters when worn by emergency medical services (EMS). Objective: To determine the association of ballistic vests worn by EMS clinicians with workplace violence (WPV) and disparities in care among racial and/or ethnic minority patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective cohort study of a volunteer-based sample of EMS clinicians at a large, multistate EMS agency encompassing 15 ground sites across the Midwest from April 1, 2023, to March 31, 2024. Data were analyzed from May to June 2024. Exposure: External ballistic armor being used by a group of self-selected clinicians on every run. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prevalence and characteristics associated with WPV and with declines of treatment and/or transport compared between crews with 1 or more vested vs no vested members. Results: A total of 156 of 415 staff (37.6%) opted in to wear the vests, including 77 male participants (49.4%). Prevalence of WPV was higher for vested crews (1.11 vs 0.85 cases per 100 runs; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.50; P =.001) and was due to higher rates of verbal abuse. The presence of 1 or more vested crew members increased the likelihood of all patients declining EMS treatment and/or transport; however, effect size was highest among patients with an unknown race and/or ethnicity (2234 [21.1%] vs 2134 [16.5%] patients; aRR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.27; P