Introduction:Emergency medical services have invested substantial resources to establish advanced life support (ALS) programs. However, it is unclear whether ALS care provides better outcomes to patients compared to basic life support (BLS) care.Objective:To evaluate the current evidence regarding the benefits of ALS.Methods:Electronic medical databases were searched to identify articles that directly compared ALS versus BLS care. A total of 455 articles were found. Articles were excluded for the following reasons: (1) the article was not written in English; (2) BLS response was not compared to an ALS response; (3) a physician or nurse was included as part of the ALS response; (4) it was an aeromedical response; or (5) defibrillation was included in the ALS, but not the BLS, scope of care. Twenty-one articles met the inclusion criteria for this literature review.Results:Results were divided into four categories: (1) trauma; (2) cardiac arrest; (3) myocardial infarction; and (4) altered mental status.Trauma:The majority of articles showed that ALS provided no benefits over BLS in urban trauma patients. In fact, most studies showed higher mortality rates for trauma patients receiving ALS care. Further research is needed to evaluate the benefits of ALS for rural trauma patients, and whether ALS care improves outcomes in subgroups of urban trauma patients.Cardiac Arrest:Cardiac arrest studies show that early CPR plus early defibrillation provide the greatest improvement in survival. However, most cardiac arrest research includes defibrillation as an ALS skill which has now moved into the BLS scope of care. The 2004 multi-center OPALS study provided good evidence that ALS does not improve cardiac arrest survival over early defibrillation. Further research is needed to address whether any ALS interventions improve cardiac arrest outcome.Myocardial Infarction:Only one study directly compared the outcome of BLS and ALS care on myocardial infarction. The study found no difference in outcomes between BLS and ALS care in an urban setting.Advanced Life Support:Only one study directly compared the outcome of BLS and ALS care on patients with altered mental status. The study found that the same number of patients had improved to “alert” on arrival at the emergency department, but there was a decreased length of emergency department stay for patients treated by ALS for hypoglycemia.Limitations:This review article does not take into account the benefits of ALS interventions, such as thrombolytics, dextrose, or nitroglycerin, since no studies directly compared these interventions to BLS care. Furthermore, only one study in this literature review was a large, multi-center trial.Conclusions:ALS shows little, if any, benefits for urban trauma patients. Cardiac arrest studies show that ALS does not provide additional benefits over BLS-defibrillation care, but more research is needed in this area. In two small studies, ALS care did not provide benefits over BLS care for patients with myocardial infarctions or altered mental status. Larger-scale studies are needed to evaluate which specific ALS interventions improve patient outcomes.
Midazolam and haloperidol administered intramuscularly appear equally effective for sedating an agitated patient in the prehospital setting. Midazolam appears to have a faster onset of action, as evidenced by the shorter time required to achieve a RASS score of less than +1 in the patients who received midazolam. Haloperidol offers an alternative option for the sedation of an agitated patient. Further studies should focus on continued investigation into appropriate sedation of agitated patients in the prehospital setting.
BackgroundTimely management of non-convulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) is critical to improving patient outcomes. However, NCSE can only be confirmed using electroencephalography (EEG), which is either significantly delayed or entirely unavailable in emergency departments (EDs). We piloted the use of a new bedside EEG device, Rapid Response EEG (Rapid-EEG, Ceribell), in the ED and evaluated its impact on seizure management when used by emergency physicians.MethodsPatients who underwent Rapid-EEG to rule out NCSE were prospectively enrolled in a pilot project conducted at two ED sites (an academic hospital and a community hospital). Physicians were surveyed on the perceived impact of the device on seizure treatment and patient disposition, and we calculated physicians’ sensitivity and specificity (with 95% CI) for diagnosing NCSE using Rapid-EEG’s Brain Stethoscope function.ResultsOf the 38 patients enrolled, the one patient with NCSE was successfully diagnosed and treated within minutes of evaluation. Physicians reported that Rapid-EEG changed clinical management for 20 patients (53%, 95% CI 37% to 68%), primarily by ruling out seizures and avoiding antiseizure treatment escalation, and expedited disposition for 8 patients (21%, 95% CI 11% to 36%). At the community site, physicians diagnosed seizures by their sound using Brain Stethoscope with 100% sensitivity (95% CI 5% to 100%) and 92% specificity (95% CI 62% to 100%).ConclusionRapid-EEG was successfully deployed by emergency physicians at academic and community hospitals, and the device changed management in a majority of cases. Widespread adoption of Rapid-EEG may lead to earlier diagnosis of NCSE, reduced unnecessary treatment and expedited disposition of seizure mimics.
A simple three-step dispatch rule for MVCs can safely reduce L&S responses by one-third, as judged by need for transport to a trauma centre or use of trauma centre resources. Prospective validation is needed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.