Descriptive survey examines volunteer motivations in EMS professionals, indicating the need for targeted recruitment strategies.
Background: Volunteering in Emergency Medical Services (EMS) supports healthcare systems and community resilience. Understanding volunteer motivations is critical to effective recruitment and retention. Objectives: This study examines the motivational drivers of EMS employees and students in Saudi Arabia and their variation across demographics. Materials and Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted among 370 EMS professionals (employees and students) in Saudi Arabia. Participants completed an anonymous online survey between November 2024 and February 2025, including demographic questions and the 30-item Volunteer Functions Inventory (VFI) questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Cronbach’s alpha, Chi-square tests, and factor analysis to examine reliability, associations, and motivational patterns. Results: Participants were predominantly male (75.7%) and aged 18–25 years (52.2%). Altruistic and values-based motives were strongest, followed by career and learning motivations, whereas protective motives were least influential. Younger participants prioritized career-related motivations, while older participants were more influenced by enhancement and protective motives. Reliability of the VFI dimensions was strong (α = 0.725–0.861), and factor analysis confirmed sampling adequacy (Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin = 0.957, Bartlett’s P < 0.001). The findings aligned with cultural, religious, and civic values emphasized in Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030, which promotes volunteerism and civic engagement. Conclusions: EMS professionals in Saudi Arabia are primarily motivated by altruism, professional development, and learning opportunities. Motivational patterns vary by age, highlighting the need for tailored volunteer management strategies. Integrating cultural, career, and civic values can enhance engagement and retention, supporting Vision 2030 health goals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alyousif et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: