Background: Prehospital care provided by emergency medical services (EMS) plays an important role in improving patient outcomes. Globally, prehospital care varies across countries and even within the same country by the geographic location and access to medical services. We aimed to explore the prehospital trauma care and in-hospital outcomes within the urban and rural areas in the state of Qatar. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted utilizing data from the Qatar National Trauma Registry for trauma patients who were transported by EMS to a level 1 trauma center between 2017 and 2018. Data were analyzed and compared between urban and rural areas and among the different municipalities in which the incidents occurred. Results: Across the study duration, 1761 patients were transported by EMS. Of that, 59% were transported from an urban area and 41% from rural areas. There were significant differences in the on-scene time and total prehospital time as a function of urban and rural areas and municipalities; however, the response time across the study groups was comparable. There were no significant differences in blood transfusion, intubation, hospital length of stay, and mortality. Conclusion: Within different areas in Qatar, the EMS response time and in-hospital outcomes were comparable. This indicates that the provision of prehospital care across the country is similar. The prehospital and acute in-hospital care are accessible for everyone in the country at no cost. Understanding the differences in EMS utilization and prehospital times contributes to the policy development in terms of equitable distribution of healthcare resources.
Adverse drug events encompass a wide range of potential unintended and harmful events, from adverse drug reactions to medication errors, many of which in retrospect, are considered preventable. However, the primary challenge towards reducing their burden lies in consistently identifying and monitoring these occurrences, a challenge faced across the spectrum of healthcare, including the emergency medical services. The aim of this study was to identify and describe medication related adverse events (AEs) in the out-of-hospital setting. The medication components of a dedicated patient safety register were analysed and described for the period Jan 2017–Sept 2020. Univariate descriptive analysis was used to summarize and report on basic case and patient demographics, intervention related AEs, medication related AEs, and AE severity. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the odds of AE severity, by AE type. A total of 3475 patient records were assessed where 161 individual medication AEs were found in 150 (4.32%), 12 of which were categorised as harmful. Failure to provide a required medication was found to be the most common error (1.67%), followed by the administration of medications outside of prescribed practice guidelines (1.18%). There was evidence to suggest a 63% increase in crude odds of any AE severity [OR 1.63 (95% CI 1.03–2.6), p = 0.035] with the medication only AEs when compared to the intervention only AEs. Prehospital medication related adverse events remain a significant threat to patient safety in this setting and warrant greater widespread attention and future identification of strategies aimed at their reduction.
Introduction: A retrospective audit of electronic patient care records (ePCRs) highlighted the infrequent use of the traction splint for the management of femur fractures. The aim of this study was to improve the use of the traction splint for patients presenting with a mid-shaft femur fracture in the absence of contraindications, by means of introducing a purpose-designed trauma CPD training course. Methods: An intervention consisting of a simulation-based mandatory trauma CPD training session for all operational prehospital care providers was implemented over a 3-month period, supported by a pre- and post-implementation staff survey regarding staff perceptions of using a traction splint. Following the intervention period, a repeat retrospective audit of the ePCR database was conducted to identify any improvement in the use of the traction splint. Results: The use of the traction splint for a femur fracture in the pre-intervention stage was found to be underutilised (Median 16%). Following the intervention period, however, traction splint use increased significantly (Median 50%). An improvement was also noted in staff perception and understanding of the management of femur fractures. Conclusion: This study found that focused trauma training is an effective means to improve patient care. Training should be ongoing in order to maintain skills and knowledge needed for management of femur fractures.
Background: Management of pain in the prehospital setting is an important priority for prehospital clinicians, yet is often underestimated, either due to poor pain assessment, under dosing and inadequate provision of analgesia1,2. A femur fracture is considered a painful injury and as such, should be managed with effective analgesia. Pain is associated with multiple negative physiological effects which may potentially worsen a patient's clinical condition1, further highlighting the importance of providing effective analgesia. Vassiliadis et al., highlighted that patients with a femur fracture receive only moderate analgesia in the prehospital setting and this requires a focused strategy to improve the care received by these patients3. A retrospective audit of the Hamad Medical Corporation Ambulance Service (HMCAS) electronic patient care records (ePCR) highlighted the low frequency of prehospital analgesia for the management of femur fractures (October 2016 – December 2016). The provision of three pharmacological agents (Methoxyflurane, Fentanyl and Ketamine) which are the primary analgesics used by the HMCAS for the management of pain associated with femur fractures was reviewed. These drugs are often used together in a multimodal strategy to manage pain effectively. A multimodal approach to managing trauma pain has the benefit of improving efficacy with multiple mechanisms of action, limiting the number of doses required of a single drug, as well as reducing the risk of side effects4. The aim of this study was to improve prehospital analgesia for femur fractures, by means of introducing a purpose-designed trauma CPD training course. Focused training through the means of high fidelity simulations and simple skills training leads to improved performance and an increase in knowledge gained by the practitioner5, resulting in improved and safer care delivered to patients. Methods: An intervention consisting of a theoretical, individual skills and simulation-based mandatory trauma CPD training session for all operational prehospital care providers was implemented over a three-month period (January 2017 – March 2017). The eight-hour trauma CPD training session focused on managing major trauma with specific focus on femur fracture identification and optimization of analgesia (Figure 1). Following the intervention period, a repeat retrospective audit of the ePCR database was conducted to identify any improvement in the frequency of prehospital analgesia for patients with femur fractures (April 2017 – June 2017). Results: The mean provision of prehospital analgesia for a femur fracture in the pre-intervention stage was found to be suboptimal (Methoxyflurane 61%; Fentanyl 21%; Ketamine 12%). Whereas, following the intervention period, the mean provision of prehospital analgesia for femur fractures increased significantly (Methoxyflurane 100%; Fentanyl 30%; Ketamine 52%). See Figure 2. Conclusion: This study found that focused trauma training is an effective means to improve prehospital analgesia for femur fractures as wel...
The use of adrenaline during a cardiac arrest is well-established and supported by international guidelines. However, recent studies1–2 have questioned the appropriateness of adrenaline administration whereas other papers indicate that any benefit from adrenaline maybe time-sensitive.3–4 Two recently published studies have both challenged the use of adrenaline during resuscitation and whilst both papers used different methodologies they demonstrated similar results. The Paramedic 2 study1 was a placebo-based randomised control trial whereas the paper by Loomba et al.,2 used a meta-analysis of 14 peer-reviewed publications recruiting 655,853 patients, 7.4% of whom received adrenaline. Neither study was able to demonstrate any meaningful survival benefit associated with adrenaline administration (Table 1 and 2). However, both studies noted poor neurological outcome in post-cardiac survivors. It is noteworthy that both of these studies used different, but validated,5 neurological scoring systems (either the Modified Rankin Scale or the Cerebral Performance Category).Whilst there is an acceptable correlation between the Modified Rankin Scale or the Cerebral Performance Category (Table 3) there is a degree of variation.5 This variation is partly due to what the two scales accept as being a good neurological outcome as well as an inbuilt degree of subjectiveness of any assessment of neurological status.5 Whilst The Paramedic 2 study1 and Loomba et al.,2 meta-analysis demonstrated no benefit of adrenaline, studies by Goto et al.,3 and Donnino et al., (adults)4 have published contradictory findings. Importantly Donnino et al.,4 reported improved neurological status in non-shockable cardiac arrest when adrenaline was administered.2 However, to date no study has demonstrated a benefit of adrenaline when used to treat shockable cardiac arrest.Interestingly both Goto et al.,3 and Donnino et al.,4 indicated that any benefit from adrenaline administration was time-sensitive. Goto et al.,3 noted that the optimal time for adrenaline administration was < 9 minutes. Whereas, Donnino et al.,4 reported on the impact of increasing time delay to the first dose noting that when adrenaline was administered < 1 minute of confirmation of cardiac arrest, 12% of patients survived, but that this dropped to 9% after the fourth minute and was down to 7% after seven minutes (p < 0.001). The findings of Goto et al.,3 and Donnino et al.,4 represent a clinical challenge. Notably, during the Paramedic 2 study the average time of administration of adrenaline was approaching 20 minutes (6.6 minutes response time and 13.8 minutes) raising the question would the results of Paramedic 2 have been different if adrenaline was administered faster and whether adrenaline should only be administrated in witnessed cardiac arrest?The routine use of adrenaline as the mainstay of resuscitation is being challenged, especially with regards to long-term patient survival and its role in the management of shockable cardiac arrest. However, in specific patients, when giv...
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.