Prehospital intravenous fentanyl administered by ambulance personnel: a cluster-randomised comparison of two treatment protocols

The use of strong analgesics for prehospital pain management in children in the region of Southern Denmark: a register-based study

BACKGROUND

Acute pain in the prehospital setting is frequent and prehospital pain management presents multiple challenges, especially in children. There is a lack of high-level evidence regarding prehospital pain management in the paediatric population worldwide. In Denmark, this lack of evidence particularly concerns the frequency of the prehospital use of strong analgesics. Guidelines are sparse but there is evidence that prehospital fentanyl may be administered up to 5 µg/kg.

METHOD

This register-based study investigated the prehospital analgesic treatment in the population under 15 years from January 2017 to December 2022 in the Region of Southern Denmark. Data were extracted from electronic prehospital medical records. The analgesic treatment was characterised by the type of medication, dosage, administration method, and cause of ambulance dispatch. Lastly, response- and transport times were registered.

RESULTS

A total of 28,933 prehospital paediatric medical records were examined. In one in seventeen of all prehospital contacts with children, fentanyl, alfentanil, morphine and/or s-ketamine was administered. Three-quarters of the doses of strong analgesics were administered to patients older than 10 years. Fentanyl was the most frequently administered medication (96.4%). The median fentanyl-equipotent doses of opioids were 1.7 µg/kg adjusted according to standardised patient weight. In 63.4% of cases, the analgesic treatment was administered intravenously.

CONCLUSION

The doses of opioids as administered by the EMS personnel seem safe as 97% of the doses were within the recommended range and even at the lower end of the recommended range. Although apparently safe, the utilisation of strong analgesics points to a risk of under-treating pain in children.

Inhaled analgesics for the treatment of prehospital acute pain-A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Many prehospital emergency patients receive suboptimal treatment for their moderate to severe pain. Various factors may contribute. We aim to systematically review literature pertaining to prehospital emergency adult patients with acute pain and the pain-reducing effects, adverse events (AEs), and safety issues associated with inhaled analgetic agents compared with other prehospital analgesic agents.

METHODS

As part of an initiative from the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, we conducted a systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42018114399), applying the PRISMA guidelines, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), and Cochrane methods, searching the Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, PubMed, and EMBASE databases (updated March 2024). Inclusion criteria were the use of inhaled analgesic agents in adult patients with acute pain in the prehospital emergency care setting. All steps were performed by minimum of two individual researchers. The primary outcome was pain reduction; secondary outcomes were speed of onset, duration of effect, and relevant AEs.

RESULTS

We included seven studies (56,535 patients in total) that compared inhaled agents (methoxyflurane [MF] and nitrous oxide [N2O]) to other drugs or placebo. Study designs were randomized controlled trial (1; n = 60), randomized non-blinded study (1; n = 343), and randomized open-label study (1; n = 270). The remaining were prospective or retrospective observational studies. The evidence according to GRADE was of low or very low quality. No combined meta-analysis was possible. N2O may reduce pain compared to placebo, but not compared to intravenous (IV) paracetamol, and may be less effective compared to morphine and MF. MF may reduce pain compared to paracetamol, ketoprofen, tramadol, and fentanyl. Both agents may be associated with marked but primarily mild AEs.

CONCLUSION

We found low-quality evidence suggesting that both MF and N2O are safe and may have a role in the management of pain in the prehospital setting. There is low-quality evidence to support MF as a short-acting single analgesic or as a bridge to IV access and the administration of other analgesics. There may be occupational health issues regarding the prehospital use of N2O.

Analgesic Therapy with the Opioids Fentanyl and Morphine by Ambulance Personnel in Rural Areas: An Observational Study Over 7 Years

Background

The treatment of severe pain is one of the basic procedures of emergency medicine. In rural regions, longer arrival times of the emergency doctor prevent the earliest possible treatment of pain. Since 2014, a project for independent analgesia by ambulance personnel has been introduced in our ambulance service area.

Methods

Over a period of 7 years the mission protocols were recorded and statistically evaluated within the framework of an observational study. Among other things, the attendance and transport times, vital signs, pain level, symptom groups (body region) and classification according to disease or accident mechanism were recorded. Treatment data by medication, including dosages, were recorded for fentanyl (monotherapy), morphine (monotherapy) and a combination (change from morphine to fentanyl, additional application of esketamine, metamizole or butylscopolamine).

Results

In 659 patients, the opioids fentanyl and morphine were used by the ambulance staff, 596 data sets could be evaluated. When an emergency physician was requested, the average time of presence at the scene was 34.8 +- 11.7 min, in cases of unavailability it was 29.0 +-9.8 min (p<0.0001). Analgesic therapy resulted in a reduction of pain from NRS 8.4 (+-1.3) to NRS 3.5 +-1.8 (p<0.0001). Pain intensity after treatment by emergency paramedics compared to emergency physicians was not significantly different with NRS 3.5 +- 1.7 versus NRS 3.6 +-1.9 (p=0.788). Fentanyl was used at a mean dose of 0.18mg +- 0.11 and morphine at a mean dose of 4.4mg +- 3.6mg. There was no clinically relevant decrease in oxygen saturation or respiratory rate in any of the treatment groups. Antagonisation of the opioid effect with naloxone was not necessary in any case.

Conclusion

Analgesia with morphine and fentanyl by specially trained ambulance personnel according to defined rules of use is a safe and necessary procedure for patients, especially in rural regions.

Application of analgesics in emergency services in Germany: a survey of the medical directors

ABSTRAC

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute pain is an essential element of pre-hospital care for injured and critically ill patients. Clinical studies indicate the need for improvement in the prehospital analgesia.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess the current situation in out of hospital pain management in Germany regarding the substances, indications, dosage and the delegation of the use of analgesics to emergency medical service (EMS) staff.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A standardized survey of the medical directors of the emergency services (MDES) in Germany was carried out using an online questionnaire. The anonymous results were evaluated using the statistical software SPSS (Chi-squared test, Mann-Whitney-U test).

RESULTS

Seventy-seven MDES responsible for 989 rescue stations and 397 EMS- physician bases in 15 federal states took part in this survey. Morphine (98.7%), Fentanyl (85.7%), Piritramide (61%), Sufentanil (18.2%) and Nalbuphine (14,3%) are provided as opioid analgesics. The non-opioid analgesics (NOA) including Ketamine/Esketamine (98,7%), Metamizole (88.3%), Paracetamol (66,2%), Ibuprofen (24,7%) and COX-2-inhibitors (7,8%) are most commonly available. The antispasmodic Butylscopolamine is available (81,8%) to most rescue stations. Fentanyl is the most commonly provided opioid analgesic for treatment of a traumatic pain (70.1%) and back pain (46.8%), Morphine for visceral colic-like (33.8%) and non-colic pain (53.2%). In cases of acute coronary syndrome is Morphine (85.7%) the leading analgesic substance. Among the non-opioid analgesics is Ketamine/Esketamine (90.9%) most frequently provided to treat traumatic pain, Metamizole for visceral colic-like (70.1%) and non-colic (68.6%) as well as back pain (41.6%). Butylscopolamine is the second most frequently provided medication after Metamizole for "visceral colic-like pain" (55.8%). EMS staff (with or without a request for presence of the EMS physician on site) are permitted to use the following: Morphine (16.9%), Piritramide (13.0%) and Nalbuphine (10.4%), and of NOAs for (Es)Ketamine (74.1%), Paracetamol (53.3%) and Metamizole (35.1%). The dosages of the most important and commonly provided analgesic substances permitted to independent treatment by the paramedics are often below the recommended range for adults (RDE). The majority of medical directors (78.4%) of the emergency services consider the independent application of analgesics by paramedics sensible. The reason for the relatively rare authorization of opioids for use by paramedics is mainly due to legal (in)certainty (53.2%).

CONCLUSION

Effective analgesics are available for EMS staff in Germany, the approach to improvement lies in the area of application. For this purpose, the adaptations of the legal framework as well as the creation of a guideline for prehospital analgesia are useful.

Comparison of three regimens with inhalational methoxyflurane versus intranasal fentanyl versus intravenous morphine in pre-hospital acute pain management: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (PreMeFen)

BACKGROUND

Pre-hospital pain management has traditionally been performed with intravenous (IV) morphine, but oligoanalgesia remain a recognized problem. Pain reduction is essential for patient satisfaction and is regarded as a measure of successful treatment. We aim to establish whether non-invasive methods such as inhalation of methoxyflurane is non-inferior to intranasal fentanyl or non-inferior to the well-known IV morphine in the pre-hospital treatment of acute pain.

METHOD/DESIGN

The PreMeFen study is a phase three, three-armed, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial to compare three regimens of analgesics: inhalation of methoxyflurane and intranasal (IN) fentanyl versus IV morphine. It is an open-label trial with a 1:1:1 randomization to the three treatment groups. The primary endpoint is the change in pain numeric rating scale (NRS) (0-10) from baseline to 10 min after start of investigational medicinal product administration (IMP). The non-inferiority margin was set to 1.3, and a sample size of 270 patients per protocol (90 in each treatment arm) will detect this difference with 90% power.

DISCUSSION

We chose a study design with comparison of analgesic regimens rather than fixed doses because of the substantial differences in drug characteristics and for the results to be relevant to inform policymakers in the pre-hospital setting. We recognize that easier administration of analgesics will lead to better pain management for many patients if the regimens are as good as the existing, and hence, we chose a non-inferiority design. The primary endpoint, the change in pain (NRS) after 10 min, is set to address the immediate need of pain reduction for patients with acute prehospital pain. On a later stage, more analgesic methods are often available. PreMeFen is a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial comparing three analgesic regimens aiming to establish whether inhalation of methoxyflurane or intranasal fentanyl is as good as IV morphine for fast reduction of acute pain in the prehospital setting.

The Pain Management of Trauma Patients in the Emergency Department

The vast majority of injured patients suffer from pain. Systematic assessment of pain on admission to the emergency department (ED) is a cornerstone of translating the best treatment strategies for patient care into practice. Pain must be measured with severity scales that are validated in clinical practice, including for specific populations (such as children and older adults). Although primary care ED of trauma patients focuses on resuscitation, diagnosis and treatment, pain assessment and management remains a critical element as professionals are not prepared to provide effective and early therapy. To date, most EDs have pain assessment and management protocols that take into account the patient's hemodynamic status and clinical condition and give preference to non-pharmacological approaches where possible. When selecting medications, the focus is on those that are least disruptive to hemodynamic status. Pain relief may still be necessary in hemodynamically unstable patients, but caution should be exercised, especially when using opioids, as absorption may be impaired or shock may be exacerbated. The analgesic dose of ketamine is certainly an attractive option. Fentanyl is clearly superior to other opioids in initial resuscitation and treatment as it has minimal effects on hemodynamic status and does not cause central nervous system depression. Inhaled analgesia techniques and ultrasound-guided nerve blocks are also increasingly effective solutions. A multimodal pain approach, which involves the use of two or more drugs with different mechanisms of action, plays an important role in the relief of trauma pain. All EDs must have policies and promote the adoption of procedures that use multimodal strategies for effective pain management in all injured patients.

Pain Management in a Prehospital Emergency Setting: A Retrospective Observational Study

Purpose

Acute pain is a prevalent symptomatology in prehospital emergency care. Although inadequate assessment and treatment of acute pain are associated with various complications, about 43% of adults suffering from pain are undertreated. This phenomenon is poorly studied, and limited data are available in the literature. The objective was to investigate the pain management in a prehospital emergency health-care setting, verifying pain assessment, pharmacological treatment adherence and the effectiveness of pain relief therapy.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective observational study was conducted in a sample including all adults treated by the professionals of nurse-staffed ambulances and medical cars in an Italian Emergency Medical Services (EMS) from 1 January 2019 to 31 May 2019. We collected both demographic information and Numeric Rating Scale scores, which evaluated presence and intensity of pain, from the EMS paper forms. All analyses were performed using SPSS, version 27.

Results

The study sample was composed of 629 people: 310 males (49%) and 319 females (51%), with an average age of 64.2±22 years (range 18-108). Pain information was collected in 75.5% (n = 475) of our sample; among them 222 patients (46.7%) suffered from pain. We recorded that 79.7% (n = 177) of the subjects with pain received no pharmacological treatment, and in almost all of the treated cases they did not adhere to the analgesia algorithm in use. Among those who were pharmacologically treated, pain statistically significantly decreased in intensity, from before to after, in both emergency vehicles (nurse-staffed ambulances pre m = 8.36±0.9 vs post m = 4.18±2.2, p<0.001; medical cars pre m = 7.25±1.7 vs post m = 3.50±2.6, p<0.001). Subsequently, pain was only re-ascertained in 24.3% of subjects.

Conclusion

Our findings confirm that pain is a prevalent symptom in prehospital patients, especially in the younger age range, but that it remains an underrecognized, underestimated, and undertreated symptom with the risk of causing worse health outcomes.

Disparities in Prehospital Non-Traumatic Pain Management

INTRODUCTION

While prior research has identified racial disparities in prehospital analgesia for traumatic pain, little is known about non-traumatic pain. Using a national prehospital dataset, we sought to evaluate for racial and ethnic disparities in analgesia given by EMS for non-traumatic pain.

METHODS

We analyzed the 2018 and 2019 data from the ESO Data Collaborative, a collection of de-identified prehospital electronic health records from nearly 1,300 participating EMS agencies in the US. We included all transported, adult, non-traumatic encounters with a primary or secondary impression of a pain complaint, and we stratified encounters based on race and ethnicity as recorded by the EMS clinicians. We performed a mixed model analysis, modeling EMS agency as a random intercept and adjusting for age, sex, pain location, level of service, location of incident, and highest pain score. With non-Hispanic White patients as the reference group, we then evaluated the association between race/ethnicity and receiving any pain medication (acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, or opioids), receiving opioid pain medication, and receiving pain medication within 20 minutes of EMS arrival.

RESULTS

We included 1,035,486 patients; 67.5% non-Hispanic White, 26.8% Black, 4.9% Hispanic, 0.5% Asian, 0.1% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 0.2% American Indian or Alaska Native patients. 4.7% of patients received pain medications. Compared to White patients (5.1%), Black patients were less likely to receive pain medication (3.3%, aOR 0.7; 95% CI 0.7-0.7) and Hispanics were more likely to receive pain medication (7.6%, aOR 1.5; 95% CI 1.4-1.6). Black patients were also less likely to receive opioids (1.8% for Black v 3.0% for White, aOR 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-0.7), while Hispanic patients were more likely to receive opioids (4.9%, aOR 1.4; 95% CI 1.3-1.5). The odds of receiving pain medication within 20 minutes was lower for Black patients (aOR 0.9; 95% CI 0.8-0.95) but no different for Hispanic patients (aOR 1.0; 95% CI 0.9-1.1), when compared to White patients.

CONCLUSION

Pain medication administration is uncommon for non-traumatic pain complaints. While Black patients were less likely than White patients to receive pain medications and receive pain medication within 20 minutes, Hispanics were more likely to receive pain medications.

Pre-Hospital Administration of Opioids in Trauma Patients: Is Dose Associated With Outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Opioids are commonly used as an analgesic agent in the prehospital setting. Current efforts to prevent and control prescription opioid overuse are focused on the in-hospital and post-discharge phases. The aim of our study was to assess the associations between pre-hospital opioids use and in-hospital outcomes among trauma patients.

METHODS

We performed a 2 year (2016-2017) retrospective analysis of our Level-I trauma center database. We included all adult trauma patients (age > 18y) who received pre-hospital opioids (Fentanyl (F) or Morphine-Sulfate (MS)). Outcome measures were emergency-department (ED) hypotension (SPB < 90 mmHg), ED intubation, prescription opioid medication upon discharge, and mortality. Multivariate logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

In total, 709 patients were included in the analysis. Cutoff values of 200 mcg F and 15 mg MS were significantly associated with adverse outcomes. Overall, the ED hypotension rate was 14.4%, ED intubation rate was 6%, and ED mortality rate was 3.1%. On regression analysis, higher dosages of both pre-hospital F and pre-hospital MS were independently associated with increased odds of ED hypotension, ED intubation, and discharge on opioid medications, but not with ED mortality.

CONCLUSION

Pre-hospital administration of high dose opioids is associated with increased odds of adverse outcomes. Collaborative efforts to standardize and control the overuse of opioids should target the pre-hospital setting to limit opioid associated adverse effects.

Nurse-Administered Analgesic Treatment in Italian Emergency Medical Services: A Nationwide Survey

Background

Acute pain is common among patients requiring assistance from prehospital emergency medical services (EMS). Nonetheless, the undertreatment of pain in this context remains a frequent phenomenon. Timely and effective analgesia is a crucial feature in emergency medicine. To ensure analgesia provision, prehospital paramedics and nurses can administer analgesics via standard operating protocols or under a physician’s remote supervision. Information about such protocols in Italian EMS is lacking.

Objective

Evaluation of the availability of nurse’s standard analgesia protocols in Italy’s prehospital EMS settings.

Methods

A cross-sectional online survey involved all 74 Italian emergency medical dispatch centres (EMDCs). Aside from descriptive statistics, we used χ²-analysis and Spearman-rank correlation to look for associations between geographical areas’ dependence upon independent variable categories and their correlations.

Results

Of all the 74 Italian EMDCs, 70 (94.6%) completed the survey, covering 100 provinces out of a total of 107 (93.5%). Operating nurses’ prehospital analgesia protocols are available in 46 provinces (46.0%). The availability of prehospital analgesia protocols is more extended in northern Italy EMDCs (n=30, 66.7%) than in central Italy (n=9, 42.8%) and southern Italy and islands (n=7, 20.6%). Morphine (76.1% for medical patients and 95.7% for trauma) and paracetamol (89.1% for both) are the most common drugs included in the prehospital analgesia protocols.

Conclusion

Despite international consensus on the necessity, efficacy, and safety of nurses’ prehospital analgesia provision, nurse-administered analgesia protocols are available in less than half of Italian provinces, with substantial differences between northern, central, and southern areas. These results indirectly indicate potential undertreatment of prehospital pain in Italy and yield practice improvements.

Analgesia in adult trauma patients in physician-staffed Austrian helicopter rescue: a 12-year registry analysis

Background

Sufficient analgesia is an obligation, but oligoanalgesia (NRS> 3) is frequently observed prehospitally. Potent analgesics may cause severe adverse events. Thus, analgesia in the helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) setting is challenging. Adequacy, efficacy and administration safety of potent analgesics pertaining to injured patients in HEMS were analysed.

Methods

Observational study evaluating data from 14 year-round physician-staffed helicopter bases in Austria in a 12-year timeframe.

Results

Overall, 47,985 (34.3%) patients received analgesics, 26,059 of whom were adult patients, injured and not mechanically ventilated on site. Main drugs administered were opioids (n=20,051; 76.9%), esketamine (n=9082; 34.9%), metamizole (n=798; 3.1%) and NSAIDs (n=483; 1.9%). Monotherapy with opioids or esketamine was the most common regimen (n=21,743; 83.4%), while opioids together with esketamine (n= 3591; 13.8%) or metamizole (n=369; 1.4%) were the most common combinations. Females received opioids less frequently than did males (n=6038; 74.5% vs. n=14,013; 78.1%; p< 0.001). Pain relief was often sufficient (> 95%), but females more often had moderate to severe pain on arrival in hospital (n=34; 5.0% vs. n=59; 3.2%; p=0.043). Administration of potent analgesics was safe, as indicated by MEES, SpO₂ and respiratory rates. On 10% of all missions, clinical patient assessment was deemed sufficient by HEMS physicians and monitoring was spared.

Conclusions

Opioids and esketamine alone or in combination were the analgesics of choice in physician-staffed HEMS in Austria. Analgesia was often sufficient, but females more than males suffered from oligoanalgesia on hospital arrival. Administration safety was high, justifying liberal use of potent analgesics in physician-staffed HEMS.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13049-021-00839-9.