Explore the vast range of titles available.

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.

Background Out-of-hospital emergency care (OHEC), also known as prehospital care, has been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality from serious illness. We sought to summarize literature for low and low-middle income countries to identify barriers to and key interventions for OHEC delivery. Methods We performed a systematic review of the peer reviewed literature from January 2005 to March 2015 in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. All articles referencing research from low and low-middle income countries addressing OHEC, emergency medical services, or transport/transfer of patients were included. We identified themes in the literature to form six categories of OHEC barriers. Data were collected using an electronic form and results were aggregated to produce a descriptive summary. Results A total 1927 titles were identified, 31 of which met inclusion criteria. Barriers to OHEC were divided into six categories that included: culture/community, infrastructure, communication/coordination, transport, equipment and personnel. Lack of transportation was a common problem, with 55% (17/31) of articles reporting this as a hindrance to OHEC. Ambulances were the most commonly mentioned (71%, 22/31) mode of transporting patients. However, many patients still relied on alternative means of transportation such as hired cars, and animal drawn carts. Sixty-one percent (19/31) of articles identified a lack of skilled personnel as a key barrier, with 32% (10/31) of OHEC being delivered by laypersons without formal training. Forty percent (12/31) of the systems identified in the review described a uniform access phone number for emergency medical service activation. Conclusions Policy makers and researchers seeking to improve OHEC in low and low-middle income countries should focus on increasing the availability of transport and trained providers while improving patient access to the OHEC system. The review yielded articles with a primary focus in Africa, highlighting a need for future research in diverse geographic areas.

IntroductionDeath due to opioid overdose was declared a public health crisis in Canada in 2015. Traditionally, patients who have overdosed on opioids that are managed by emergency medical services (EMS) are treated with the opioid antagonist naloxone, provided ventilatory support and subsequently transported to hospital. However, certain EMS agencies have permitted patients who have been reversed from opioid overdose to refuse transport, if the patient exhibits capacity to do so. Evidence on the safety of this practice is limited. Therefore, our intent was to examine the available literature to determine mortality and serious adverse events within 48 hours of EMS treat and release due to suspected rebound opioid toxicity after naloxone administration.MethodsA systematic search was performed on 11 May 2017 in PubMed, Cochrane Central, Embase and CINHAL. Studies that reported on the outcome of patients treated with prehospital naloxone and released at the scene were included. Analyses for incidence of mortality and adverse events at the scene were conducted. Risk of bias and assessment of publication bias was also done.Results1401 records were screened after duplicate removal. Eighteen full-text studies were reviewed with seven selected for inclusion. None were found to be high risk of bias. In most studies, heroin was the source of the overdose. Mortality within 48 hours was infrequent with only four deaths among 4912 patients ﴾0.081%﴿ in the seven studies. Only one study reported on adverse events and found no incidence of adverse events from their sample of 71 released patients.ConclusionMortality or serious adverse events due to suspected rebound toxicity in patients released on scene post-EMS treatment with naloxone were rare. However, studies involving longer-acting opioids were rare and no study involved fentanyl.

BackgroundSelf-harm is among the top five causes of acute hospital admissions and ambulance clinicians are often the first point of contact. However, the Emergency Department (ED) may not be the most appropriate place of care and little is known about the existence or nature of alternative pathways available to UK ambulance services. This survey describes the current management pathways used by ambulance services for patients who have self-harmed.MethodsA structured questionnaire was sent to all UK ambulance services by email and followed up by telephone in 2018. Three independent researchers (two clinical) coded responses which were analysed thematically.ResultsAll 13 UK ambulance services responded to the survey: nine by email and four by telephone interview. Two services reported a service-wide protocol for managing people presenting with self-harm, with referral to mental health crisis team available as an alternative to conveyance to ED, following on-scene psychosocial assessment. Four services reported local pathways for managing mental health patients which included care of patients who had self-harmed. Four services reported being in the process of developing pathways for managing mental health patients. Six services reported no service-wide nor local pathways for managing self-harm patients. No robust evaluation of new care models was reported.ConclusionPractice in ambulance services in the UK is variable, with a minority having a specific clinical pathway for managing self-harm, with an option to avoid ED. New pathways for patients who have self-harmed must be evaluated in terms of safety, clinical and cost-effectiveness.

IntroductionDelayed handover of emergency medical services (EMS) patients to EDs is a major issue with hospital crowding considered a primary cause. We explore the impact of the 4-hour rule (the Policy) in Australia, focusing on ambulance and ED delays.MethodsEMS (ambulance), ED and hospital data of adult patients presenting to 14 EDs from 2002 to 2013 in three jurisdictions were linked. Interrupted time series ‘Before-and-After’ trend analysis was used for assessing the Policy’s impact. Random effects meta-regression analysis was examined for associations between ambulance delays and Policy-associated ED intake, throughput and output changes.ResultsBefore the Policy, the proportion of ED ambulances delayed increased between 1.1% and 1.7% per quarter across jurisdictions. After Policy introduction, Western Australia’s increasing trend continued but Queensland decreased by 5.1% per quarter. In New South Wales, ambulance delay decreased 7.1% in the first quarter after Policy introduction. ED intake (triage delay) improved only in New South Wales and Queensland. Each 1% ambulance delay reduction was significantly associated with a 0.91% reduction in triage delay (p=0.014) but not ED length of stay ≤4 hours (p=0.307) or access-block/boarding (p=0.605) suggesting only partial improvement in ambulance delay overall.ConclusionThe Policy was associated with reduced ambulance delays over time in Queensland and only the immediate period in New South Wales. Associations may be due to local jurisdictional initiatives to improve ambulance performance. Strategies to alleviate ambulance delay may need to focus on the ED intake component. These should be re-examined with longer periods of post-Policy data.

BackgroundHelicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) are a useful means of reducing inequity of access to specialist emergency care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the variations in HEMS provision across Europe, in order to inform the further development of emergency care systems.MethodsThis is a survey of primary HEMS in the 32 countries of the European Economic Area and Switzerland. Information was gathered through internet searches (May to September 2016), and by emailing service providers, requesting verification and completion of data (September 2016 to July 2017). HEMS provision was calculated as helicopters per million population and per 1000 km2 land area, by day and by night, and per US$10 billion of gross domestic product (GDP), for each country.ResultsIn 2016, the smallest and least prosperous countries had no dedicated HEMS provision. Luxembourg had the highest number of helicopters by area and population, day and night. Alpine countries had high daytime HEMS coverage and Scandinavia had good night-time coverage. Most helicopters carried a doctor. Funding of services varied from public to charitable and private. Most services performed both primary (from the scene) and secondary (interfacility) missions.ConclusionsWithin Europe, there is a large variation in the number of helicopters available for emergency care, regardless of whether assessed with reference to population, land area or GDP. Funding of services varied, and did not seem to be clearly related to the availability of HEMS.

ObjectiveTo compare the mortality and morbidity of traumatically injured patients who received additional prehospital care by a doctor and critical care paramedic enhanced care team (ECT), with those solely treated by a paramedic non-ECT.MethodsA retrospective analysis of Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) data and case note review of all severe trauma cases (Injury Severity Score ≥9) in North East England from 1 January 2014 to 1 December 2017 who were treated by the North East Ambulance Service, the Great North Air Ambulance Service or both. TARN methods were used to calculate the number of unexpected survivors or deaths in each group (W score (Ws)). The Glasgow Outcome Scores were contrasted to evaluate morbidity.ResultsThe ECT group treated 531 patients: there were 17 unexpected survivors and no unexpected deaths. The non-ECT group treated 1202 patients independently: there were no unexpected survivors and 31 unexpected deaths. The proportion of patients requiring critical care interventions differed between the two groups 49% versus 33% (CI for difference 12% to 20%). In the ECT group, the Ws was 3.22 (95% CI 0.79 to 5.64). In the non-ECT group, the Ws was −2.97 (95% CI −1.22 to −4.71). The difference between the Ws was 6.18 (95% CI 3.19 to 9.17). There was no evidence of worse morbidity in the ECT group.ConclusionThis is the first UK ECT service to demonstrate a risk-adjusted mortality benefit in trauma patients with no detriment in morbidity: our results demonstrate an additional 3.22 survivors per 100 severe trauma casualties when treated by an ECT. The authors encourage other ECT services to conduct similar research.

ObjectivePrehospital emergency amputation is a rare procedure, which may be necessary to free a time-critical patient from entrapment. This study aimed to evaluate four techniques of cadaveric lower limb prehospital emergency amputation.MethodA guillotine amputation of the distal femur was undertaken in fresh frozen self-donated cadavers. A prehospital doctor conducted a surgical amputation with Gigli saw or hacksaw for bone cuts and firefighters carried out the procedure using the reciprocating saw and Holmatro device. The primary outcome measures were time to full amputation and the number of attempts required. The secondary outcomes were observed quality of skin cut, soft tissue cut and CT assessment of the proximal bone. Observers also noted the potential risks to the rescuer or patient during the procedure.ResultsAll techniques completed amputation within 91 s. The reciprocating saw was the quickest technique (22 s) but there was significant blood spattering and continuation of the cut to the surface under the leg. The Holmatro device took less than a minute. The quality of the proximal femur was acceptable with all methods, but 5 cm more proximal soft tissue damage was made by the Holmatro device.ConclusionsEmergency prehospital guillotine amputation of the distal femur can effectively be performed using scalpel and paramedic shears with bone cuts by the Gigli saw or fire service hacksaw. The reciprocating saw could be used to cut bone if no other equipment was available but carried some risks. The Holmatro cutting device is a viable option for a life-threatening entrapment where only firefighters can safely access the patient, but would not be a recommended primary technique for medical staff.

Introduction It is believed that some patients are more likely to use out-of-hours primary care services because of difficulties in accessing in-hours care, but substantial evidence about any such association is missing. Methods We analysed data from 567 049 respondents to the 2011/2012 English General Practice Patient Survey who reported at least one in-hours primary care consultation in the preceding 6 months. Of those respondents, 7% also reported using out-of-hours primary care. We used logistic regression to explore associations between use of out-of-hours primary care and five measures of in-hours access (ease of getting through on the telephone, ability to see a preferred general practitioner, ability to get an urgent or routine appointment and convenience of opening hours). We illustrated the potential for reduction in use of out-of-hours primary care in a model where access to in-hours care was made optimal. Results Worse in-hours access was associated with greater use of out-of-hours primary care for each access factor. In multivariable analysis adjusting for access and patient characteristic variables, worse access was independently associated with increased out-of-hours use for all measures except ease of telephone access. Assuming these associations were causal, we estimated that an 11% relative reduction in use of out-of-hours primary care services in England could be achievable if access to in-hours care were optimal. Conclusions This secondary quantitative analysis provides evidence for an association between difficulty in accessing in-hours care and use of out-of-hours primary care services. The findings can motivate the development of interventions to improve in-hour access.

The number of ventricular assist devices (VADs) being implanted for terminal heart failure is rising at an exponential rate. These implanted patients have a decreased mortality, but still have significant morbidities, as the prevalence of these patients increases in the community. When VAD patients are discharged to home, they will very likely require emergency medical services (EMSs) and emergency medical doctors (EDs) with their future care. The interface of these patients with the community would suggest an increasing prevalence of encounters requiring the need for acute medical care. This will place the initial responsibility of these patients in the hands of EMS first responders and emergency room providers. To date, there is very little literature published on out-of-hospital or ED care for VAD patients. Most EMS personnel and ED feel uncomfortable treating a patient with a VAD because they have not had sufficient exposure. The cardiovascular treatment of VAD patients in the field can pose different challenges typically encountered including difficulties measuring a pulse and sometimes undetectable BP. Despite these unique challenges, official guidelines or even standard operating procedures regarding the emergency treatment of VAD patients are still lacking. We present a basic overview of the most commonly used left VAD systems and propose guidelines that should be followed in the event of an emergency with a VAD patient out of hospital.