BackgroundScotland has three prehospital critical care teams (PHCCTs) providing enhanced care support to a usually paramedic-delivered ambulance service. The effect of the PHCCTs on patient survival following trauma in Scotland is not currently known nationally.MethodsNational registry-based retrospective cohort study using 2011–2016 data from the Scottish Trauma Audit Group. 30-day mortality was compared between groups after multivariate analysis to account for confounding variables.ResultsOur data set comprised 17 157 patients, with a mean age of 54.7 years and 8206 (57.5%) of male gender. 2877 patients in the registry were excluded due to incomplete data on their level of prehospital care, leaving an eligible group of 14 280. 13 504 injured adults who received care from ambulance clinicians (paramedics or technicians) were compared with 776 whose care included input from a PHCCT. The median Injury Severity Score (ISS) across all eligible patients was 9; 3076 patients (21.5%) met the ISS>15 criterion for major trauma. Patients in the PHCCT cohort were statistically significantly (all p<0.01) more likely to be male; be transported to a prospective Major Trauma Centre; have suffered major trauma; have suffered a severe head injury; be transported by air and be intubated prior to arrival in hospital. Following multivariate analysis, the OR for 30-day mortality for patients seen by a PHCCT was 0.56 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.86, p=0.01).ConclusionPrehospital care provided by a physician-led critical care team was associated with an increased chance of survival at 30 days when compared with care provided by ambulance clinicians.
BackgroundWe examined the effect of advanced preparation and organisation of equipment and drugs for Pre-hospital Emergency Anaesthesia (PHEA) and tracheal intubation on procedural time, error rates, and cognitive load.MethodsThis study was a randomised, controlled experiment with a crossover design. Clinical teams (physician and paramedic) from the Emergency Medical Retrieval Service and the Scottish Air Ambulance Division were randomised to perform a standardised pre-hospital clinical simulation using either unprepared (standard practice) or pre-prepared (experimental method) PHEA equipment and drugs. Following a two-week washout period, each team performed the corresponding simulation. The primary outcome was intervention time. Secondary outcomes were safety-related incidents and errors, and degree of cognitive load.ResultsIn total 23 experiments were completed, 12 using experimental method and 11 using standard practice. Time required to perform PHEA using the experimental method was significantly shorter than with standard practice (11,45 versus 20:59) minutes: seconds; p = < 0.001). The experimental method also significantly reduced procedural errors (0 versus 9, p = 0.007) and the cognitive load experienced by the intubator assistant (41.9 versus 68.7 mm, p = 0.006).ConclusionsPre-preparation of PHEA equipment and drugs resulted in safer performance of PHEA and has the potential to reduce on-scene time by up to a third.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13049-018-0549-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a leading cause of prehospital mortality and serious neurological morbidity. Survival from OHCA almost entirely depends on prehospital intervention by ambulance personnel. Recent evidence has shown the importance of good quality cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in improving outcome from OHCA. Recent studies have suggested that intubation, intravenous cannulation and drug administration may distract from basic CPR and be associated with poor outcomes following OHCA. This article reviews the latest evidence on prehospital OHCA management and presents the case for a ‘back to basics’ approach.
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.