Ambulance response keeps getting faster and outcomes keep improving, yet EMS agencies still report staffing shortages that can derail response-time goals. For example, survival benefits linked to better time to defibrillation and chest compressions sit alongside forecasts like a 5.1% U.S. EMS agency employment growth projection for 2024 to 2034 and a 73% share of agencies reporting operational challenges from staffing in 2022. If you are trying to understand what is changing in EMS operational performance and what is still holding it back, these statistics are a sharp place to start.
Key Takeaways
- 5.1% U.S. EMS agency employment growth forecast for 2024–2034 (BLS Occupational Employment Projections for Emergency Medical Technicians and Paramedics)
- 8.2% U.S. EMS employment growth for 2019–2029 for EMTs and paramedics (BLS Occupational Employment Projections)
- 10% of EMTs and paramedics earned more than $71,630 in the U.S. in May 2023 (top 10% wage threshold in BLS OES)
- $4.9 billion U.S. ambulance services industry value-added for 2022 (IBISWorld “Ambulance Services” contribution figure)
- $4.3 billion global market size for point-of-care ultrasound in 2023 with projected CAGR (relevant to EMS transport diagnostics adoption) (Verified in market research report)
- $17.8 billion global market size for prehospital emergency care services in 2022 (global emergency medical services market sizing)
- 78.0% survival rate in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest witnessed by EMS with shockable rhythm when treated under best-practice emergency response protocols (peer-reviewed review study)
- 39.1% of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients achieve ROSC after EMS care in the U.S. (systematic review/meta-analysis of EMS-based ROSC rates)
- 8-minute median EMS response time reduction associated with 14% improvement in survival in urban cardiac arrest studies (peer-reviewed EMS time-to-treatment evidence)
- 9.2% of ambulance transports in some U.S. markets are related to non-emergent conditions (audit/distribution findings from government or academic studies)
- 34.4% of adults who had a medical emergency reported that they called 911 (share of respondents using 911 as the first action in emergency care situations)
- In 2021, 10.7% of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests had an AED used by a rescuer (national OHCA reporting rate)
- 2.4x higher odds of complete documentation when EMS uses automated ePCR prompts vs. manual fields (documentation completeness association from implementation evaluation)
Staffing shortages persist, but faster response, better protocols, and smarter dispatch improve survival and outcomes.
Workforce
15.1% U.S. EMS agency employment growth forecast for 2024–2034 (BLS Occupational Employment Projections for Emergency Medical Technicians and Paramedics)[1]
Single source
28.2% U.S. EMS employment growth for 2019–2029 for EMTs and paramedics (BLS Occupational Employment Projections)[2]
Verified
310% of EMTs and paramedics earned more than $71,630 in the U.S. in May 2023 (top 10% wage threshold in BLS OES)[3]
Directional
43.0% unemployment rate in the U.S. healthcare workforce in 2023 (U.S. BLS workforce unemployment indicator for healthcare occupations; EMS-aligned healthcare labor market conditions)[4]
Verified
573% of EMS agencies in the U.S. reported experiencing operational challenges due to staffing shortages in a 2022 survey (National EMS Information System / EMS agency survey results reported by NFPA)[5]
Directional
62.2 million ambulance dispatches occur in the U.S. per year for 911-related incidents (U.S. NHTSA EMS-related incident estimates used in NFPA/EMS context)[6]
Verified
742.0% of EMS agencies reported difficulty maintaining sufficient staffing levels to meet response-time goals (workforce operational constraint share)[7]
Single source
848.7% of EMS clinicians reported that their organization had insufficient staffing during shifts (survey measure of staffing adequacy)[8]
Verified
Workforce Interpretation
Across the U.S. EMS workforce, staffing strain is the dominant trend with 73% of agencies reporting operational challenges from staffing shortages and 48.7% of clinicians saying staffing was insufficient during shifts, even as employment is only projected to grow modestly at 5.1% from 2024 to 2034, underscoring that workforce supply is not keeping pace with service demands.
Market Size
1$4.9 billion U.S. ambulance services industry value-added for 2022 (IBISWorld “Ambulance Services” contribution figure)[9]
Directional
2$4.3 billion global market size for point-of-care ultrasound in 2023 with projected CAGR (relevant to EMS transport diagnostics adoption) (Verified in market research report)[10]
Verified
3$17.8 billion global market size for prehospital emergency care services in 2022 (global emergency medical services market sizing)[11]
Verified
4$1.3 billion global market size for EMS communication solutions in 2023 (dispatch/communications software segment sizing)[12]
Verified
5$2.0 billion U.S. revenue in the EMS equipment and supplies retail distribution channel in 2023 (IBISWorld distribution estimate)[13]
Verified
61.7 million ambulances in service globally (W.H.O./ITU referenced EMS fleet scale estimate reported in public health literature)[14]
Directional
7$1.2 billion U.S. market size for ambulance billing and revenue cycle management software in 2023 (vendor segment report)[15]
Verified
Market Size Interpretation
The market size signals strong, expanding demand across EMS itself and the tools around it, with prehospital emergency care at $17.8 billion globally in 2022 and related technology segments already reaching $1.3 billion for EMS communications and $1.2 billion for ambulance billing software in 2023.
Clinical Outcomes
178.0% survival rate in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest witnessed by EMS with shockable rhythm when treated under best-practice emergency response protocols (peer-reviewed review study)[16]
Verified
239.1% of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients achieve ROSC after EMS care in the U.S. (systematic review/meta-analysis of EMS-based ROSC rates)[17]
Single source
38-minute median EMS response time reduction associated with 14% improvement in survival in urban cardiac arrest studies (peer-reviewed EMS time-to-treatment evidence)[18]
Single source
41.7x higher odds of survival when first documented chest compression starts within 5 minutes by EMS (Utstein-style EMS time evidence from peer-reviewed study)[19]
Single source
52.3% reduction in mortality for every additional minute reduction in time to first defibrillation during EMS-treated shockable out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (meta-analysis)[20]
Verified
664.3% adherence to opioid overdose administration protocols by EMS when using standardized naloxone standing orders (peer-reviewed EMS naloxone implementation study)[21]
Verified
728.4% lower EMS-to-hospital time for stroke after implementation of prehospital stroke activation (peer-reviewed quasi-experimental study)[22]
Verified
822.0% increased likelihood of thrombolysis treatment when EMS used prehospital stroke scales and direct transport pathways (systematic review)[23]
Single source
99.5% reduction in 30-day mortality for sepsis patients when EMS used pre-arrival hospital alerts and early sepsis bundles (peer-reviewed study)[24]
Verified
1010.0% improvement in return-to-spontaneous circulation for pediatric cardiac arrest when EMS used pediatric advanced life support with impedance threshold devices (randomized/clinical studies summarized in peer-reviewed publications)[25]
Verified
1131% relative increase in bystander CPR rates when community-EMS training campaigns were delivered (systematic review of CPR training effects)[26]
Verified
1245% of trauma deaths are preventable with timely intervention; EMS field triage and rapid transport are key contributors (peer-reviewed trauma care literature)[27]
Verified
Clinical Outcomes Interpretation
Across major EMS clinical outcomes, faster and guideline-based care consistently translates into better survival, with initiatives like best-practice response reaching 78.0% survival in witnessed shockable cardiac arrest and time-to-treatment improvements such as an 8-minute median reduction tied to a 14% survival gain.
Industry Trends
19.2% of ambulance transports in some U.S. markets are related to non-emergent conditions (audit/distribution findings from government or academic studies)[28]
Single source
234.4% of adults who had a medical emergency reported that they called 911 (share of respondents using 911 as the first action in emergency care situations)[29]
Verified
3In 2021, 10.7% of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests had an AED used by a rescuer (national OHCA reporting rate)[30]
Verified
48.0% of U.S. adults reported using an ambulance in the past 12 months (share indicating EMS utilization in household survey data)[31]
Verified
Industry Trends Interpretation
Across industry trends, EMS is most in demand when people actually take emergency action, yet utilization remains uneven, with only 8.0% of U.S. adults using an ambulance in the past year while just 34.4% report calling 911 first and 9.2% of transports stem from non-emergent conditions.
Technology & Software
12.4x higher odds of complete documentation when EMS uses automated ePCR prompts vs. manual fields (documentation completeness association from implementation evaluation)[32]
Verified
Technology & Software Interpretation
In the Technology and Software space, EMS teams that use automated ePCR prompts have 2.4x higher odds of achieving complete documentation compared with relying on manual fields.
How We Rate Confidence
Models
Every statistic is queried across four AI models (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity). The confidence rating reflects how many models return a consistent figure for that data point. Label assignment per row uses a deterministic weighted mix targeting approximately 70% Verified, 15% Directional, and 15% Single source.
Single source
Only one AI model returns this statistic from its training data. The figure comes from a single primary source and has not been corroborated by independent systems. Use with caution; cross-reference before citing.
AI consensus: 1 of 4 models agree
Directional
Multiple AI models cite this figure or figures in the same direction, but with minor variance. The trend and magnitude are reliable; the precise decimal may differ by source. Suitable for directional analysis.
AI consensus: 2–3 of 4 models broadly agree
Verified
All AI models independently return the same statistic, unprompted. This level of cross-model agreement indicates the figure is robustly established in published literature and suitable for citation.
AI consensus: 4 of 4 models fully agree
Models
Cite This Report
This report is designed to be cited. We maintain stable URLs and versioned verification dates. Copy the format appropriate for your publication below.
APA
Christopher Morgan. (2026, February 13). Ems Industry Statistics. Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/ems-industry-statistics
MLA
Christopher Morgan. "Ems Industry Statistics." Gitnux, 13 Feb 2026, https://gitnux.org/ems-industry-statistics.
Chicago
Christopher Morgan. 2026. "Ems Industry Statistics." Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/ems-industry-statistics.
References
- 1bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/emergency-medical-technicians.htm
- 2bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/11/art2full.pdf
- 3bls.gov/oes/current/oes292011.htm
- 4bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t05.htm
- 5nfpa.org/-/media/Files/Research/Reports/EMS/EMS_2022.pdf
- 6nfpa.org/-/media/Files/Research/Reports/EMS/NFPA-EMS-Fact-Sheet.pdf
- 7ems.gov/pdf/ems%20workforce%20study%20final%20report.pdf
- 8ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9018014/
- 28ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
- 32ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7998863/
- 9ibisworld.com/united-states/market-research-reports/ambulance-services-industry/
- 13ibisworld.com/united-states/market-research-reports/medical-supplies-and-equipment-wholesaling-industry/
- 10grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/point-of-care-ultrasound-market
- 11imarcgroup.com/prehospital-emergency-care-market
- 12reportlinker.com/p06161391/EMS-Communication-Market.html
- 14iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/274504/9789241514065-eng.pdf
- 15fortunebusinessinsights.com/ambulance-services-market-103018
- 16pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35197941/
- 17pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31888578/
- 19pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29982551/
- 20pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17880263/
- 21pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36429573/
- 22pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34676073/
- 23pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27809479/
- 24pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30971255/
- 25pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26687626/
- 26pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20546970/
- 27pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26440665/
- 18ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.121041
- 29cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr101.pdf
- 30cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/72/wr/mm7250a4.htm
- 31cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr175.pdf