Paramedic use of advanced life support procedures: experience and attitude survey

Determinants of on-scene time in injured patients treated by physicians at the site

INTRODUCTION

The controversy surrounding the use of advanced life support (ALS) for the pre-hospital management of trauma pivots on the fact that these procedures could cause significant and life-threatening delays to definitive in-hospital care. In Montreal, Québec, on-site ALS to injured patients is provided by physicians only. The purpose of this study was to identify parameters associated with the duration of scene time for patients with moderate to severe injuries treated by physicians at the scene.

HYPOTHESIS

The use of on-site ALS by physicians is associated with a significant increase in scene time.

METHODS

A total of 576 patients with moderate to severe injuries are included in the analysis. This group was part of a larger cohort used in the prospective evaluation of trauma care in Montreal. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, multiple linear regression, and multiple logistic regression techniques were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Use of ALS in general was associated with a statistically significant increase in the mean scene time of 6.5 min. (p = .0001). Significant increases in mean scene time were observed for initiation of an intravenous route (mean = 6.6 min., p = .0001), medication administration (mean = 5.7 min., p = .0001), and pneumatic antishock garment (PASG) application (mean = 9.3 min., p = .03). Similar differences were observed for total prehospital time. A significant increase in the relative odds for having long scene times (> 20 min.) also was associated with the use of ALS. This level of scene time was associated with a significant increase in the odds of dying (OR = 2.6, p = .009).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that physician-provided, on-site ALS causes significant increase in scene time and total prehospital time. These delays are associated with an increase in the risk for death in patients with severe injuries.

Air medical tracheal intubation: establishing a threshold for this QA indicator

Endotracheal intubation is a critical skill necessary in a number of situations encountered by air medical personnel. The purpose of this study was to establish a threshold for the quality assurance indicator of successful tracheal intubation in a physician-staffed air medical system. The records of all patients transported by a physician-staffed air medical system over a 36-month period were reviewed. One hundred and forty-three patients had endotracheal intubation attempted. Blind nasotracheal intubation attempts were successful in 71% of those in whom it was attempted, while the overall intubation success rate was 92%. Based on this study and the existing literature, a threshold of 90% is recommended for the quality assurance indicator of successful tracheal intubation in physician-staffed air medical systems.

Prehospital blind nasotracheal intubation by paramedics

Blind nasotracheal intubation attempts by paramedics in the field were prospectively reviewed. In particular, we analyzed the frequency, success rate, complication rate, frequency of performance by each paramedic, indications, and patient outcome. Blind nasotracheal intubation was attempted in 324 patients and successful in 231. The average success rate for medical patients was 72.2% (195 of 270 attempts) and for trauma patients was 66.7% (36 of 54 attempts). This difference was not significant (P greater than .05). Even with 59.8% of the 82 participating paramedics attempting blind nasotracheal intubation less than four times over the 19-month study period, the average success rate was 71.3%. There was a significant increase in success when blind nasotracheal intubation was attempted more than three times during the study period (P less than .005). Major complications occurred in 0.9% (three) of the patients. The overall complication rate was 13% (42). The incidence of complications tended to decline with increasing paramedic frequency but did not reach statistical significance (P greater than .05). Blind nasotracheal intubation is a safe initial field airway approach in spontaneously breathing patients in whom there are no contraindications. Even with a low frequency of performance, success and complication rates are acceptable.