Do all pediatric patients who have a febrile seizure require transport by advanced life support?

Outcomes of Pediatric Patients in Secondary Transport to Tertiary Hospital: A Retrospective Observational Study

OBJECTIVES

Emergency medical service (EMS) providers play an important role in determining which hospital to choose. To date, there is no evidence-based guideline to support their decisions, except for major trauma cases. Secondary transport is considered when a patient needs further investigation or treatment after primary transport, but this can delay treatment and put patients at unnecessary risk. The objective of this study was to investigate the outcomes of pediatric secondary transport patients to tertiary hospitals.

METHODS

This was a citywide population-based observational study conducted in Kobe, Japan. We reviewed the EMS registry to identify secondary transport patients younger than 19 years and investigated their clinical characteristics. We excluded cases of unknown hospital destinations, nontransported cases, and major trauma patients who followed a different protocol for a hospital destination. The primary endpoint was the hospital outcome 12 hours after transport. Because there was no link between the EMS patient transport data and the hospital medical records, a probabilistic linkage was performed to obtain the hospital outcomes. Patients who required secondary transport were compared with patients transported directly to tertiary hospitals.

RESULTS

A total of 13,720 pediatric patients were transported from the field by Kobe EMS between January 2013 and December 2015. Among them, 81 pediatric patients (0.6%) required secondary transport to tertiary hospitals within 24 hours of the primary transport, whereas a total of 3673 patients (27%) were transported directly to tertiary hospitals. Despite no apparent difference in prehospital severity, secondary transport patients were associated with higher hospitalization rates and a need for critical care compared with those who had direct transport. Seizure was the most common reason for the use of secondary transport, and 89% of the seizure patients were hospitalized after undergoing secondary transport; minor trauma was the second most common reason for the use of secondary transport, and 53% of the patients were hospitalized.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the characteristics of the secondary transport patients and hospital outcomes revealed a heterogeneity in pediatric prehospital transport. It is recommended that the development of pediatric EMS destination guidelines cover children's diverse conditions. Further studies are required, and linkages between prehospital and hospital data will help promote a better understanding of appropriate hospital destinations.

Retrospective Evaluation of Risk Factors for Pediatric Secondary Transport

OBJECTIVE

Emergency medical services (EMS) typically transports patients to the nearest emergency department (ED). After initial presentation, children who require specialized care must undergo secondary transport, exposing them to additional risks and delaying definitive treatment. EMS direct transport protocols exist for major trauma and certain adult medical conditions, however the same cannot be said for pediatric medical conditions or injuries that do not meet trauma center criteria ('minor trauma'). To explore the utility of such future protocols, we sought to first describe the pediatric secondary transport population and examine prehospital risk factors for secondary transport.

METHODS

Pediatric secondary transport patients aged 0-18 years were identified. Patients meeting state EMS trauma protocol criteria or who were clinically unstable were excluded. Data were abstracted by chart review of EMS, community hospital ED, and specialty hospital records. Patients were compared to control patients with similar conditions who did not require secondary transport.

RESULTS

This study identified 211 medical or minor trauma pediatric secondary transport patients between 2013 and 2014. The three most prevalent conditions were seizure (n = 52), isolated orthopedic injury (n = 49), and asthma/respiratory distress (n = 27). Increased odds of secondary transport for seizure patients were associated with administration of supplemental oxygen, glucose measurement, and online medical direction; for isolated orthopedic injuries, online medical direction; and for asthma/respiratory distress, administration of supplemental oxygen, and online medical direction. Decreased odds of secondary transport for seizure patients were associated with a higher GCS; for isolated orthopedic injuries, increased age and oxygen saturation; and for asthma/respiratory distress, administration of albuterol only.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with seizures, isolated orthopedic injuries, and asthma/respiratory distress comprised the majority of the medical or minor trauma pediatric secondary transport population. Each of those conditions had specific risk factors for secondary transport. This study's results provide information to guide future prospective studies and the development of direct transport protocols for those populations.

Pre-hospital care after a seizure: Evidence base and United Kingdom management guidelines

PURPOSE

Seizures are a common presentation to pre-hospital emergency services and they generate significant healthcare costs. This article summarises the United Kingdom (UK) Ambulance Service guidelines for the management of seizures and explores the extent to which these guidelines are evidence-based.

METHODS

Summary of the Clinical Practice Guidelines of the UK Joint Royal Colleges Ambulance Liaison Committee relating to the management of seizures. Review of the literature relating to pre-hospital management of seizure emergencies.

RESULTS

Much standard practice relating to the emergency out of hospital management of patients with seizures is drawn from generic Advanced Life Support (ALS) guidelines although many patients do not need ALS during or after a seizure and the benefit of many ALS interventions in seizure patients remains to be established. The majority of studies identified pertain to medical treatment of status epilepticus. These papers show that benzodiazepines are safe and effective but it is not possible to draw definitive conclusions about the best medication or the optimal route of administration.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base for current pre-hospital guidelines for seizure emergencies is incomplete. A large proportion of patients are transported to hospital after a seizure but many of these may be suitable for home management. However, there is very little research into alternative care pathways or criteria that could be used to help paramedics avoid transport to hospital. More research is needed to improve care for people after a seizure and to improve the cost-effectiveness of the healthcare systems within which they are treated.

Emergency medical services in Saudi Arabia: A study on the significance of paramedics and their experiences on barriers as inhibitors of their efficiency

BACKGROUND

Emergency Medical Services (EMS) provides out-of-hospital acute medical care to different types of serious emergencies. The team of EMS includes paramedics, besides many other staff working in the pre-hospital setting. Although the paramedics are the first responders to the patient in emergency, they face several barriers, which interfere with their efficiency.

AIM

However, the magnitude of these obstacles is not known, hence; it was found worthwhile to evaluate the depth of these difficulties.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire that included eight different commonly experienced barriers and four different variables of strength was framed. The questionnaire was served to 140 paramedics in three different regions (Jeddah, Riyadh, and Dammam) of Saudi Arabia.

RESULTS

The positive response obtained was statistically significant for traffic congestion (P<0.01; P<0.001), nuisance by bystanders and family members (P<0.001), lack of competence of doctors and the administration in the EMS routines (P<0.05; P<0.01; P<0.001), lack of trust and confidence (P<0.001) lack of independence (P<0.001), patient's resistance (P<0.001), Interference of legal issues and litigation proceedings (P<0.05; P<0.001), paramedic's impression on general public and the family of the patients (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The authorities in the hospitals and EMS administration should improve the barriers which interfere with the efficiency of a paramedic and cause gross humiliation to the patients, and the Health authorities should impart proper education and training to the paramedics.

Pediatric emergency medical services and their drawbacks

Aim:

To survey the literature on Pediatric Emergency Medical Services (PEMS) with an aim to focus its drawbacks and emphasize the means of improvement.

Materials and Methods:

Published articles selected for inclusion were based on the significance and understanding of literature search on different aspects of PEMS. To meet this criterion, PubMed, PubMed Central, Science Direct, Uptodate, Med Line, comprehensive databases, Cochrane library and the Internet (Google, Yahoo) were thoroughly searched.

Results:

PEMS provide out-of-hospital medical care and/or transport the patients to definitive care. The task force represents specialties of ambulance transport, first aid, emergency medical care, life saving, trauma, emergency medicine, water rescue, and extrication. Preliminary care is undertaken to save the patients from different medical exigencies. The techniques and procedures of basic and advanced life-support are employed. A large number of weaknesses are recorded in PEMS system, such as ambulance transport irregularities, deficit equipment, lack of expertise, and ignorance of the pre-hospital care providers. These are discussed with special reference to a few examples of medical exigencies.

Conclusions:

The appointments in PEMS should be regularized with specific qualifications, experience, and expertise in different areas. Responsibility of PEMS should not be left to pre-hospital care providers, who are non clinicians and lack proper education and training. Pediatricians should be adequately trained to play an active role in PEMS. Meetings should be convened to discuss the lapses and means of improvement. Networks of co-operation between pre-hospital providers and experts in the emergency department should be established.

Quality initiatives in the emergency department

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To report on recent advances in quality initiatives in emergency departments (EDs), with a special focus on applicability to pediatric EDs (PED) RECENT FINDINGS: Although healthcare quality improvement has made great strides in the last couple of decades, quality improvement efforts in pediatrics have lagged behind. Over the last decade, as quality initiatives have matured in adult hospitals, there has been a downstream effect on general EDs, as system-wide clinical guidelines are usually initiated through the ED--such efforts are being reported in the literature. There is significant overlap in quality improvement efforts in adult and pediatric EDs. In this article, we review the recent relevant articles, with particular emphasis on pediatrics where appropriate.

SUMMARY

There is an opportunity in pediatric emergency medicine to reduce practice variability, decrease cost and improve efficiency of care. There is an urgent need to report the successes and failures of these initiatives, so we can develop benchmarks and optimize services provided in the PED.