Can emergency care practitioners differentiate between an avoided emergency department attendance and an avoided admission?

BACKGROUND: After a 999 call to the ambulance service, there is no 'gold standard' for determining whether the actions of an emergency care practitioner (ECP) result in a patient avoiding attendance at an emergency department (ED) or avoiding an admission to hospital. Within the Great Western Ambulance Service NHS Trust this outcome has previously been measured using an audit form completed by the ECP. However, the accuracy of the ECP's opinion has not been assessed. AIM: To evaluate the accuracy of the ECP's opinion when deciding whether their actions resulted in a patient avoiding attendance at an ED or avoiding hospital admission. METHODS: Over a 10-week-period in 2009, quantitative data were collected using a case review approach. Anonymised patient consultation records were independently reviewed by an ED consultant and a general practitioner. The decision as to whether the actions of the ECP resulted in the patient avoiding ED attendance or hospital admission was compared between the three healthcare professionals using descriptive statistics and κ values to assess inter-rater agreement. RESULTS: Overall inter-rater agreement between the three healthcare professionals was κ=0.385 (fair agreement). The complete agreement rate on a case by case basis for all three healthcare professionals was 80.2% (138/172). CONCLUSION: This study provides some evidence that ECPs can accurately report on whether their actions, at the time of that care episode, result in a patient avoiding attendance at an ED or avoiding a hospital admission.

Randomised comparison of the effectiveness of the laryngeal mask airway supreme, i-gel and current practice in the initial airway management of prehospital cardiac arrest (REVIVE-Airways): a feasibility study research protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Effective cardiopulmonary resuscitation with appropriate airway management improves outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Historically, tracheal intubation has been accepted as the optimal form of OHCA airway management in the UK. The Joint Royal Colleges Ambulance Liaison Committee recently concluded that newer supraglottic airway devices (SADs) are safe and effective devices for hospital procedures and that their use in OHCA should be investigated. This study will address an identified gap in current knowledge by assessing whether it is feasible to use a cluster randomised design to compare SADs with current practice, and also to each other, during OHCA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The primary objective of this study is to assess the feasibility of a cluster randomised trial to compare the ventilation success of two newer SADs: the i-gel and the laryngeal mask airway supreme to usual practice during the initial airway management of OHCA. The secondary objectives are to collect data on ventilation success, further airway interventions required, loss of a previously established airway during transport, airway management on arrival at hospital (or termination of the resuscitation attempt), initial resuscitation success, survival to intensive care admission, survival to hospital discharge and patient outcome at 3 months. Ambulance paramedics will be randomly allocated to one of the three methods of airway management. Adults in medical OHCA attended by a trial paramedic will be eligible for the study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval for the study has been obtained from a National Health Service Research Ethics Committee with authority to review proposals for trials of a medical device in incapacitated adults. The results will be made publicly available on an open access website, and we will publish the findings in appropriate journals and present them at national and international conferences relevant to the subject field. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: 18528625.