CitationØster as Ø, Heltne J-K, Tønsager K, Brattebø G. Outcomes after cancelled helicopter emergency medical service missions due to concurrencies: a retrospective cohort study. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 2018 doi: 10.1111/aas.13028Background: Appropriate dispatch criteria and helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) crew decisions are crucial for avoiding over-triage and reducing the number of concurrencies. The aim of the present study was to compare patient outcomes after completed HEMS missions and missions cancelled by the HEMS due to concurrencies. Methods: Missions cancelled due to concurrencies (AMB group) and completed HEMS missions (HEMS group) in Western Norway from 2004 to 2013 were assessed. Outcomes were survival to hospital discharge, physiology score in the emergency department, emergency interventions in the hospital, type of department for patient admittance, and length of hospital stay. Results: Survival to discharge was similar in the two groups. Onethird of the primary missions in the HEMS group and 13% in the AMB group were patients with pre-hospital conditions posing an acute threat to life. In a sub group analysis of these patients, HEMS patients were younger, more often admitted to an intensive care unit, and had an increased survival to discharge. In addition, the HEMS group had a greater proportion of patients with deranged physiology in the emergency department according to an early warning score. Conclusion: Patients in the HEMS group seemed to be critically ill more often and received more emergency interventions, but the two groups had similar in-hospital mortality. Patients with prehospital signs of acute threat to life were younger and presented increased survival in the HEMS group.
Background: Physician-staffed emergency medical services (p-EMS) are resource demanding, and research is needed to evaluate any potential effects of p-EMS. Templates, designed through expert agreement, are valuable and feasible, but they need to be updated on a regular basis due to developments in available equipment and treatment options. In 2011, a consensus-based template documenting and reporting data in p-EMS was published. We aimed to revise and update the template for documenting and reporting in p-EMS. Methods: A Delphi method was applied to achieve a consensus from a panel of selected European experts. The experts were blinded to each other until a consensus was reached, and all responses were anonymized. The experts were asked to propose variables within five predefined sections. There was also an optional sixth section for variables that did not fit into the pre-defined sections. Experts were asked to review and rate all variables from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree) based on relevance, and consensus was defined as variables rated ≥4 by more than 70% of the experts.Results: Eleven experts participated. The experts generated 194 unique variables in the first round. After five rounds, a consensus was reached. The updated dataset was an expanded version of the original dataset and the template was expanded from 45 to 73 main variables. The experts approved the final version of the template.Conclusions: Using a Delphi method, we have updated the template for documenting and reporting in p-EMS. We recommend implementing the dataset for standard reporting in p-EMS.
Background Comparison of services and identification of factors important for favourable patient outcomes in emergency medical services (EMS) is challenging due to different organization and quality of data. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility of physician-staffed EMS (p-EMS) to collect patient and system level data by using a consensus-based template. Methods The study was an international multicentre observational study. Data were collected according to a template for uniform reporting of data from p-EMS using two different data collection methods; a standard and a focused data collection method. For the standard data collection, data were extracted retrospectively for one year from all FinnHEMS bases and for the focused data collection, data were collected prospectively for six weeks from four selected Norwegian p-EMS bases. Completeness rates for the two data collection methods were then compared and factors affecting completeness rates and template feasibility were evaluated. Standard Chi-Square, Fisher’s Exact Test and Mann-Whitney U Test were used for group comparison of categorical and continuous data, respectively, and Kolomogorov-Smirnov test for comparison of distributional properties. Results All missions with patient encounters were included, leaving 4437 Finnish and 128 Norwegian missions eligible for analysis. Variable completeness rates indicated that physiological variables were least documented. Information on pain and respiratory rate were the most frequently missing variables with a standard data collection method and systolic blood pressure was the most missing variable with a focused data collection method. Completeness rates were similar or higher when patients were considered severely ill or injured but were lower for missions with short patient encounter. When a focused data collection method was used, completeness rates were higher compared to a standard data collection method. Conclusions We found that a focused data collection method increased data capture compared to a standard data collection method. The concept of using a template for documentation of p-EMS data is feasible in physician-staffed services in Finland and Norway. The greatest deficiencies in completeness rates were evident for physiological parameters. Short missions were associated with lower completeness rates whereas severe illness or injury did not result in reduced data capture. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-3976-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
BackgroundEmergency physicians on‐scene provide highly specialized care to severely sick or injured patients. High‐quality research relies on the quality of data, but no commonly accepted definition of EMS data quality exits. Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) and Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) are core physiological variables, but little is known about the quality of these data when reported in p‐EMS research. This systematic review aims to describe the quality of pre‐hospital reporting of GCS and SBP data in studies where emergency physicians are present on‐scene.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed using CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Medline, Norart, Scopus, SweMed + and Web of Science, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Reported data on accuracy of reporting, completeness and capture were extracted to describe the quality of documentation of GCS and SBP. External and internal validity assessment was performed by extracting a set of predefined variables.ResultsWe included 137 articles describing data collection for GCS, SBP or both. Most studies (81%) were conducted in Europe and 59% of studies reported trauma cases. Reporting of GCS and SBP data were not uniform and may be improved to enable comparisons. Of the predefined external and internal validity data items, 26%‐45% of data were possible to extract from the included papers.ConclusionsReporting of GCS and SBP is variable in scientific papers. We recommend standardized reporting to enable comparisons of p‐EMS.
The 9 th London Trauma Conference (#LTC2015) and London Cardiac Arrest Symposium (#LCAS2015) built on the previous meetings with an emphasis on innovation, research, and enthusiasm for the medical care of major trauma, cardiac and critically ill patients. From the 8-11th December 2015 delegates from over 20 countries attended The Royal Geographical Society for the four days of the conference. The opening two days of the conference focussed on current issues in major trauma, with air ambulance and pre-hospital critical care on day three, and the London cardiac arrest symposium returning as the fourth and final day. Concurrent breakaway sessions ran alongside the main conference including; trauma haemorrhage research, paediatric trauma, and masterclasses on cardiac ultrasound and resuscitation, thoracotomy, REBOA, and an introduction to ECLS and ECMO. The major trauma programme consisted of two days of lectures, keynote lectures and short 'quickfire' sessions. Professor Tim Coats opened the conference by talking about the role of the highly performing trauma unit in trauma networks -outlining the problems of maintaining high levels of care in systems which increasingly bypass to major trauma centres but bring severely injured irregularly to trauma units. Professor Kjetil Søreide then addressed the topic of iatrogenesis in trauma, giving examples from different points in the patient pathway. The prevention of iatrogenesis is based on acceptance of it's presence and then promoting prevention with a culture of safety, training and focus on the team approach. Dr Matt Thomas finished up by summarising the landscape of research in trauma over the previous year, as well as outlining what can be expected in the year ahead. The following sessions approached key issues in neurotrauma, opened by a seasoned London Trauma Conference speaker Mr Mark Wilson. He spoke on current early neurological imaging, with mobile CT scanning already a reality in mainland Europe and the trialling of near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) as a potential pre-hospital imaging modality. Professor Geoffrey Raisman followed with a fascinating talk on spinal cord regeneration, outlining how nerve regeneration to replace damaged portions has already been trialled with some success. He related a moving case where olfactory nerve fibres were used to repair spinal cord injury with one of the ultimate medical triumphs -making a paraplegic patient walk again. Professor Andrew Maas then lectured expertly on why he sees head injury as a silent epidemic with potentially life-changing consequences. Dr Markus Skrifvars closed the session with a sobering presentation on the link between alcohol consumption and the vast number of traumatic brain-injured patients that are intoxicated when they present. Lunch was followed by Professor Karim Brohi, who delivered a talk on the early immune response to trauma and novel potential approaches to ameliorate this genomic storm. Other speakers in the afternoon included Professor Marc Turner delivering his vision for the trauma ...
Background: Individualized treatment is a common principle in hospitals. Treatment decisions are made based on the patient's condition, including comorbidities. This principle is equally relevant out-of-hospital. Furthermore, comorbidity is an important risk-adjustment factor when evaluating pre-hospital interventions and may aid therapeutic decisions and triage. The American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) classification system is included in templates for reporting data in physician-staffed pre-hospital emergency medical services (p-EMS) but whether an adequate full pre-event ASA-PS can be assessed by pre-hospital physicians remains unknown. We aimed to explore whether pre-hospital physicians can score an adequate pre-event ASA-PS with the information available on-scene. Methods: The study was an inter-rater reliability study consisting of two steps. Pre-event ASA-PS scores made by pre-and in-hospital physicians were compared. Pre-hospital physicians did not have access to patient records and scores were based on information obtainable on-scene. In-hospital physicians used the complete patient record (Step 1). To assess inter-rater reliability between pre-and in-hospital physicians when given equal amounts of information, pre-hospital physicians also assigned pre-event ASA-PS for 20 of the included patients by using the complete patient records (Step 2). Inter-rater reliability was analyzed using quadratic weighted Cohen's kappa (κ w). Results: For most scores (82%) inter-rater reliability between pre-and in-hospital physicians were moderate to substantial (κ w 0,47-0,89). Inter-rater reliability was higher among the in-hospital physicians (κ w 0,77 to 0.85). When all physicians had access to the same information, κ w increased (κ w 0,65 to 0,93). Conclusions: Pre-hospital physicians can score an adequate pre-event ASA-PS on-scene for most patients. To further increase inter-rater reliability, we recommend access to the full patient journal on-scene. We recommend application of the full ASA-PS classification system for reporting of comorbidity in p-EMS.
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.