The variables perceived to be important during patient handover by South African prehospital care providers.

INTRODUCTION: High-acuity patients are typically transported directly to the emergency centre via ambulance by trained prehospital care providers. As such, the emergency centre becomes the first of many physical transition points for patients, where a change of care provider (or handover) takes place. The aim of this study was to describe the variables perceived to be important during patient handover by a cohort of South African prehospital care providers. METHODS: A purpose-designed questionnaire was used to gather data related to prehospital emergency care provider opinions on the importance of certain patient variables. RESULTS: We collected 175 completed questionnaires from 75 (43%) BAA, 49 (28%) ANA, 15 (9%) ECT, 16 (9%) ANT and 20 (11%) ECP respondents. Within the ten handover variables perceived to be most important for inclusion in emergency centre handover, five were related to vital signs. Blood pressure was ranked most important, followed by type of major injuries, anatomical location of major injuries, pulse rate, respiration rate and patient history. These were followed by Glasgow Coma Score, injuries sustained, patient priority, oxygen saturations and patient allergies. CONCLUSION: This study has provided some interesting results related to which handover elements prehospital care providers consider as most important to include in handover. More research is required to correlate these findings with the opinions of emergency centre staff.

Heart rate and systolic blood pressure in patients with minor to moderate, non-haemorrhagic injury versus normal controls.

BACKGROUND: Raised blood pressure (and heart rate (HR)) due to anxiety in a clinical situation is well described and is called the white coat effect (WCE). It is not known whether the pain and anxiety that results from trauma causes a measurable WCE. METHODS: A sample of patients with a non-haemorrhagic injury from the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) was compared with a healthy, non-injury sample from the Health Survey for England (HSE) databases. Two-way analysis of variance with rank transformation of data was used to compare systolic blood pressure (SBP) and HR between the groups at different ages. In the injured group, the SBP and HR were also compared between spinally immobilised and non-immobilised patients. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference between the groups for both HR and SBP (p<0.001). Median HR remained approximately 10 bpm higher in the TARN set when compared to the HSE set, irrespective of age. The difference for SBP was not considered clinically relevant (the highest was 5 mm Hg). There was no significant difference between immobilised and non-immobilised patients, for either HR or SBP (p=0.07 and 0.3, respectively). DISCUSSION: Median HR remained approximately 10 bpm higher in the TARN (injury) set compared to the HSE (non-injury, control) set, irrespective of age. Understanding that HR reacts in this way for mild to moderately injured patients is important as it will affect clinical interpretation during the initial assessment.