Vehicle Crash Rescue Skills and Residency Training in Emergency Medicine

1985 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. 103-104
Author(s):  
Robert R. Harrison ◽  
Kimball I. Maull ◽  
C. Paul Boyan

Recent advances in the resuscitation and stabilization skills of prehospital emergency care providers have done much to improve the quality of immediate care provided to suddenly ill or injured patients. Although much of the innovation and leadership in this area has been provided by emergency department physicians, most of them still lack an adequate appreciation of the circumstances under which these skills are executed. While many physicians participate in prehospital care teaching and evaluation of the system, most have not gained personal experience in those aspects of care foreign to hospital environment. They are particularly unacquainted with the intricacies of rescuing patients from automobile accidents and similar entrapments. It is not unusual, however, for an accident victim to spend half of the time required for the prehospital phase of emergency medical care undergoing extrication, and in many cases this must be done before full advanced life support measures may be initiated.

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 88 (4) ◽  
pp. 681-690 ◽  
Author(s):  
James S. Seidel ◽  
Deborah Parkman Henderson ◽  
Patrick Ward ◽  
Barbara Wray Wayland ◽  
Beverly Ness

There are limited data concerning pediatric prehospital care, although pediatric prehospital calls constitute 10% of emergency medical services activity. Data from 10 493 prehospital care reports in 11 counties of California (four emergency medical services systems in rural and urban areas) were collected and analyzed. Comparison of urban and rural data found few significant differences in parameters analyzed. Use of the emergency medical services system by pediatric patients increased with age, but 12.5% of all calls were for children younger than 2 years. Calls for medical problems were most common for patients younger than 5 years of age; trauma was a more common complaint in rural areas (64%, P = .0001). Frequency of vital sign assessment differed by region, as did hospital contact (P < .0001). Complete assessment of young pediatric patients, with a full set of vital signs and neurologic assessment, was rarely performed. Advanced life support providers were often on the scene, but advanced life support treatments and procedures were infrequently used. This study suggests the need for additional data on which to base emergency medical services system design and some directions for education of prehospital care providers.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 575-580 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annet Ngabirano Alenyo ◽  
Wayne P. Smith ◽  
Michael McCaul ◽  
Daniel J. Van Hoving

AbstractIntroductionMajor-incident triage ensures effective emergency care and utilization of resources. Prehospital emergency care providers are often the first medical professionals to arrive at any major incident and should be competent in primary triage. However, various factors (including level of training) influence their triage performance.Hypothesis/ProblemThe aim of this study was to determine the difference in major-incident triage performance between different training levels of prehospital emergency care providers in South Africa utilizing the Triage Sieve algorithm.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study involving differently trained prehospital providers: Advanced Life Support (ALS); Intermediate Life Support (ILS); and Basic Life Support (BLS). Participants wrote a validated 20-question pre-test before completing major-incident training. Two post-tests were also completed: a 20-question written test and a three-question face-to-face evaluation. Outcomes measured were triage accuracy and duration of triage. The effect of level of training, gender, age, previous major-incident training, and duration of service were determined.ResultsA total of 129 prehospital providers participated. The mean age was 33.4 years and 65 (50.4%) were male. Most (n=87; 67.4%) were BLS providers. The overall correct triage score pre-training was 53.9% (95% CI, 51.98 to 55.83), over-triage 31.4% (95% CI, 29.66 to 33.2), and under-triage 13.8% (95% CI, 12.55 to 12.22). Post-training, the overall correct triage score increased to 63.6% (95% CI, 61.72 to 65.44), over-triage decreased to 17.9% (95% CI, 16.47 to 19.43), and under-triage increased to 17.8% (95% CI, 16.40 to 19.36). The ALS providers had both the highest likelihood of a correct triage score post-training (odds ratio 1.21; 95% CI, 0.96-1.53) and the shortest duration of triage (median three seconds, interquartile range two to seven seconds; P=.034). Participants with prior major-incident training performed better (P=.001).ConclusionAccuracy of major-incident triage across all levels of prehospital providers in South Africa is less than optimal with non-significant differences post-major-incident training. Prior major-incident training played a significant role in triage accuracy indicating that training should be an ongoing process. Although ALS providers were the quickest to complete triage, this difference was not clinically significant. The BLS and ILS providers with major-incident training can thus be utilized for primary major-incident triage allowing ALS providers to focus on more clinical roles.AlenyoAN, SmithWP, McCaulM, Van HovingDJ. A comparison between differently skilled prehospital emergency care providers in major-incident triage in South Africa. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(6):575–580.


1990 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Jack Ayres

Prehospital health-care providers regularly are called upon to assist terminally ill patients in residential or institutional, non-hospital settings such as nursing homes or hospices. Among the most crucial issues regarding such patients is whether they should be resuscitated. With alarming frequency, EMS providers are encountering vigorous and sometimes violent refusals of examination, treatment, and/or transportation from the terminally ill patient, members of the patient's family, or third persons ostensibly acting on the patient's behalf. Today, the prehospital emergency health-care provider repeatedly is faced with the legal and ethical questions that surround the issue of resuscitation and advanced life support.


1989 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald D. Stewart

Emergency Medical Services and the care of patients in the field have taken giant steps forward over the past decade. Born of the desire of physicians to influence the mortality rates of sudden cardiac death in the community, systems of advanced life support have taken root in the urban centers in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, and other countries (1-3). Although originally largely designed around the concept of “mobile coronary care,” these systems soon were deluged with calls for help from all sectors of the community, and faced a variety of medical problems. As trauma gradually became recognized for the killer and maimer of young lives that it is, regional programs of trauma care were developed in the United States and led gradually to the expansion of prehospital and interhospital transport systems in which critically injured patients were being moved about, often over long distances. The growth of emergency medicine as a specialty in its own right has encouraged the study and improvement of systems of disaster and mass casualty management.Although the focus of these efforts has been largely the overall reduction of death and disability in critically ill or injured patients, controversy continues around not only the extent of field intervention but also the influence of our efforts on the outcome of these patients (4, 5). The importance of particular interventions such as intravenous line placement, administration of certain medications, the use of the pneumatic anti-shock garment, and other sacred cows of prehospital care, all have been questioned of late (6, 7).


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris O'Connor

<p>Since the turn of the century, significant progressive changes have taken place in the provision of prehospital emergency care in Ireland.  Few would have dared to imagine the scale of advancement both in terms of education and scope of practice that has taken place since the bells tolled to herald the arrival of the new millennium. Academically, paramedics in Ireland who for over 20 years have been qualified at diploma level now have the opportunity to qualify with an honours bachelor of science degree, and the possibility of progression to masters and doctoral degrees should they feel so inclined.  From a clinical perspective, the Advanced Life Support service that is available nationwide today has evolved from an emergency service provided by EMTs just a few short years ago.</p><p>In order to make the step up to the next level in our development as a bona fide recognised profession, it is essential that we embark on the journey of the development of our own body of knowledge in relation to our education, our practice and our profession as a whole. This editorial will explore some issues related to this.</p>


1990 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel J. Stratton

The expansion of hospices and recognition of living wills have made it necessary for emergency care providers to re-evaluate the appropriateness of universal application of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the field. The prehospital care community is coming to realize that CPR is beneficial only in certain specific situations. Some believe that when CPR is not likely to be beneficial, it should be withheld. Withholding CPR seems to be a simple matter of law and science, but a number of factors complicate the issue, especially in the prehospital setting: What are the definitive signs of irreversible, sudden death? When is the application of CPR futile? What are the responsibilities of the prehospital emergency care provider who announce someone dead? What is the lay public's perception of stopping or withholding CPR? Withholding CPR in this environment is a complicated social and emotional issue as well as a scientific and legal one.


2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S1) ◽  
pp. s5-s5
Author(s):  
N.A. Lodhia ◽  
M. Strehlow ◽  
E. Pirrotta ◽  
B.N.V. Swathi ◽  
A. Gimkala ◽  
...  

BackgroundNon-vehicular trauma (NVT) accounts for 8% of all calls to the GVK Emergency Management and Research Institute (EMRI), which provides prehospital emergency care to 85 million residents of Andhra Pradesh, India. This study describes the characteristics and outcomes of patients with NVT transported by GVK EMRI.MethodsAll patients with NVT were prospectively enrolled over 28 12-hour periods (equally distributed over each hour of the day and day of the week) during July/August 2010. Patients not found at the scene, refusing service, or reporting self-inflicted injuries were excluded. Real-time demographic and clinical data were collected from prehospital care providers using a standardized questionnaire. Follow-up patient information was collected at 48-hours and 30-days following injury.ResultsA total of 1,569 patients were enrolled. Follow-up rates were 72% at 48 hours and 71% at 30 days. The mean patient age was 40 (SD = 18) and 67% were male. Adults (ages 18–64) accounted for most patients (80%), followed by elderly (age > 64, 12%) and children (age < 18, 8%). Of the patients, 71% were from rural/tribal areas and 89% from lower socioeconomic strata. Eighty-two percent called within 1 hour of injury. Median call-to-scene time was 19 minutes (SD = 15) and scene-to-hospital time was 25 minutes (SD = 21). Most patients suffered blunt injuries (85%) with falls accounting for 43% of all injuries. Of the injuries, 56% were accidents and 43% assaults. Most injuries involved head/neck (48%) and extremities (44%). Cumulative mortality rates prior to hospital arrival, at 48-hours and at 30-days were 1.1%, 3.2%, and 4.9% respectively. Falls accounted for 69% of all deaths. Falls and age > 65 were predictors of mortality (p < 0.0001). Of NVT survivors, 56% returned to baseline function and 28% were in significant pain or bed bound at 30-days post-injury.ConclusionThis initial study of prehospital NVT patients in India reveals that falls and elderly age were highly associated with death.


Author(s):  
Lorenzo Gamberini ◽  
Cosimo Picoco ◽  
Donatella Del Giudice ◽  
Corrado Zenesini ◽  
Marco Tartaglione ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and Importance: The dispatch of Advanced Life Support (ALS) teams in Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is still a hardly studied aspect of prehospital emergency logistics. In 2015, the dispatch algorithm of Emilia Est Emergency Operation Centre (EE-EOC) was implemented and the dispatch of ALS teams was changed from primary to secondary based on triage of dispatched vehicles for high-priority interventions when teams with Immediate Life Support (ILS) skills were dispatched. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effects on the appropriateness of ALS teams’ intervention and their employment time, and to compare sensitivity and specificity of the algorithm implementation. Design: This was a retrospective before-after observational study. Settings and Participants: Primary dispatches managed by EE-EOC involving ambulances and/or ALS teams were included. Two groups were created on the basis of the years of intervention (2013-2014 versus 2017-2018). Intervention: A switch from primary to secondary dispatch of ALS teams in case of high-priority dispatches managed by ILS teams was implemented. Outcomes: Appropriateness of ALS team intervention, total task time of ALS vehicles, and sensitivity and specificity of the algorithm were reviewed. Results: The study included 242,501 emergency calls that generated 56,567 red code dispatches. The new algorithm significantly increased global sensitivity and specificity of the system in terms of recognition of potential need of ALS intervention and the specificity of primary ALS dispatch. The appropriateness of ALS intervention was significantly increased; total tasking time per day for ALS and the number of critical dispatches without ALS available were reduced. Conclusion: The revision of the dispatch criteria and the extension of the two-tiered dispatch for ALS teams significantly increased the appropriateness of ALS intervention and reduced both the global tasking time and the number of high-priority dispatches without ALS teams available.


Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amelia Kenner-brininger ◽  
Lindsay Olson-Mack ◽  
Lorraine Calzone ◽  
Kristi L Koenig ◽  
Thomas M Hemmen

Background: Emergency Medical Services (EMS) play an important role as initial providers after stroke. Few data are available that capture Stroke Receiving System and EMS response and transport data. We used a stroke registry from a community of 3.3 million residents, 18 stroke receiving centers, and 19 ground transporting advanced life support EMS agencies to evaluate EMS response time, scene time, and transport times. Our aim was to inform the stroke community about duration of EMS care and guide future prehospital interventions. Methods: We included all cases from the San Diego County Stroke Registry arriving by EMS with associated computer automated dispatch (CAD) record and base hospital record (BHR) from July 2017 through December 2018. Records were linked on the EMS incident number, reviewed for accuracy. We analyzed EMS response, scene, transport and total run times (enroute to arrival) by receiving hospital. Results: Between July 2017 and December 2018 2,376 EMS patients were transported to 18 hospitals. Volume per hospital ranged from 11 to 483 patients over the study period. Mean (±SD) response time was 7.0 (±3.7) minutes, range: 5.3 to 9.3 minutes between hospitals. Mean (±SD) scene time was 13.1 (±5.2) minutes, range: 10.5 to 15.0 minutes between hospitals. Transport time averaged 13.8 (±7.7) minutes, range: 8.3 to 23.8 minutes between hospitals (IQR=8.5-17.9). The mean (±SD) total EMS run time was 33.8 (±10.8) minutes, range: 26.4 to 44.9 minutes between hospitals (IQR=26.4-39.9). Conclusion: Only minor variations in EMS response and scene times were observed across the Stroke Receiving Centers. However, transport time showed greater variation and contributed to the differences in total EMS run times. Many systems had short transport times, limiting prehospital interventions. Next steps include studying factors contributing to transport time variation to inform prehospital care and triage decisions of possible stroke patients to optimize transport times.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document