Einflussfaktoren auf die präklinische Anlage einer Zervikalstütze

Kreinest, Michael; Goller, S.; Rauch, Geraldine; Gliwitzky, B.; Frank, Catherine; Matschke, Stefan; Wölfl, Christoph; Münzberg, Matthias

doi:10.1007/s00113-016-0207-z

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…So it seems to be superfluous. But it should be noted, however, that some paramedics—especially emergency physicians—lack proper immobilization skills [ 54 ]. Regular skills training, as well as risk assessment skills, are required to achieve improvements [ 55 , 56 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemiology and predictors of traumatic spine injury in severely injured patients: implications for emergency procedures

Häske

Lefering

Stock

et al. 2020

Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aimed to identify the prevalence and predictors of spinal injuries that are suitable for immobilization. Methods Retrospective cohort study drawing from the multi-center database of the TraumaRegister DGU®, spinal injury patients ≥ 16 years of age who scored ≥ 3 on the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) between 2009 and 2016 were enrolled. Results The mean age of the 145,833 patients enrolled was 52.7 ± 21.1 years. The hospital mortality rate was 13.9%, and the mean injury severity score (ISS) was 21.8 ± 11.8. Seventy percent of patients had no spine injury, 25.9% scored 2–3 on the AIS, and 4.1% scored 4–6 on the AIS. Among patients with isolated traumatic brain injury (TBI), 26.8% had spinal injuries with an AIS score of 4–6. Among patients with multi-system trauma and TBI, 44.7% had spinal injuries that scored 4–6 on the AIS. Regression analysis predicted a serious spine injury (SI; AIS 3–6) with a prevalence of 10.6% and cervical spine injury (CSI; AIS 3–6) with a prevalence of 5.1%. Blunt trauma was a predictor for SI and CSI (OR 4.066 and OR 3.640, respectively; both p < 0.001) and fall > 3 m for SI (OR 2.243; p < 0.001) but not CSI (OR 0.636; p < 0.001). Pre-hospital shock was predictive for SI and CSI (OR 1.87 and OR 2.342, respectively; both p < 0.001), and diminished or absent motor response was also predictive for SI (OR 3.171) and CSI (OR 7.462; both p < 0.001). Patients over 65 years of age were more frequently affected by CSI. Conclusions In addition to the clinical symptoms of pain, we identify ‘4S’ [spill (fall) > 3 m, seniority (age > 65 years), seriously injured, skull/traumatic brain injury] as an indication for increased attention for CSIs or indication for spinal motion restriction.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemiology and predictors of traumatic spine injury in severely injured patients: implications for emergency procedures

Häske

Lefering

Stock

et al. 2020

Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aktuelle Studien kommen zu dem Schluss, dass die korrekte Anlage einer Zervikalstütze, selbst für professionelles Rettungsdienstpersonal, eine fehlerträchtige Aufgabe darstellen kann. Trotz subjektiv hoher empfundener Erfahrung im Umgang mit Zervikalstützen, bestehen markante Defizite bei Rettungsfachpersonal und Notärzten in der korrekten Maßnahmendurchführung [5]. Der daraus abgeleitete Anspruch an den Rettungsdienst muss folglich sein, sich repetitiv mit der Maßnahme vertraut zu machen und ein Fortbildungsbewusstsein für die HWS-Immobilisation zu schaffen.…”

Section: Hws-immobilisation Bedeutet Ganzkörperimmobilisationunclassified

“…Daher ist eine Umstrukturierung der derzeit bestehenden Aus-und Weiterbildung des notfallmedizinischen Personals bis hin zum fokussierten praktischen Training von Basismaßnahmen der Wirbelsäulenimmobilisation zu fordern [5].…”

Section: Hws-immobilisation Bedeutet Ganzkörperimmobilisationunclassified