Procedural Sedation and Analgesia in Trauma Patients in an Out-of-Hospital Emergency Setting: A Prospective Multicenter Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The quality of procedural analgesia and sedation among trauma patients has not been studied much in the prehospital setting. The main objective of this study was to characterize the quality of procedural analgesia sedation practices in prehospital settings in trauma patients. METHODS: This was an open-label observational prospective multicenter study (January 01, 2012-December 31, 2013). We included all consecutive trauma victims undergoing a potentially painful procedure on the accident scene. The primary endpoint was the procedural pain intensity. RESULTS: Data for 210 patients aged 11 to 98 years were analyzed. The most common lesions were limb fractures or dislocations. The most common procedures were limb realignment and splinting. Overall, 25 different drug combinations [with paracetamol [acetaminophen], non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, nefopam, opioids, loco-regional anesthesia, Equimolar Mixture of Oxygen/Nitrous Oxide (EMONO), sedative drugs] were used by the emergency medical services (EMS). One hundred seventeen patients (55%) received either one or two sedative drugs (among ketamine, propofol, and midazolam), 171 patients (81%) received morphine that was combined with a sedative drug in 54% of cases. During the procedure, 95 patients, 45% [95% Confidence Interval (CI) 39-52] experienced intense to severe pain. Among patients who received sedative drugs, 27% (32/117) had intense to severe pain vs. 68% (63/93) in patients who did not, that is, 40% difference [95% CI 33.8-47.0]. Seventeen patients (8%) experienced 18 adverse events of which 6 were respiratory adverse events. A deep sedation occurred in 17 patients. No center had any specific protocols for procedural sedation analgesia. CONCLUSION: Procedural sedation-analgesia was inadequate in almost half of the trauma patients in the out-of-hospital setting. The reasons of these failures were probably multiple. The non-administration of a sedative drug despite an indication or non-adapted doses, in the context of a lack of specific protocols, was certainly one of them.

Nitrous oxide/oxygen plus acetaminophen versus morphine in ST elevation myocardial infarction: open-label, cluster-randomized, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown disparate results on the consequences of morphine use in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). No study has evaluated alternative treatments that could be at least non-inferior to morphine without its potentially damaging consequences for myocardial function and platelet reactivity. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether nitrous oxide/oxygen plus intravenous acetaminophen (NOO-A) is non-inferior to morphine to control chest pain in STEMI patients. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, cluster-randomized, controlled, non-inferiority study compared NOO-A with morphine in 684 prehospital patients with ongoing suspected STEMI of < 12 h duration and a pain rating score ≥ 4. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving pain relief (numeric rating score ≤ 3) after 30 min. Secondary safety endpoints included serious adverse events and death at 30 days. RESULTS: The median baseline pain score was 7.0 in both groups. The primary endpoint occurred in 51.7% of the NOO-A group and 73.6% of the morphine group (absolute risk difference - 21.7%; 95% confidence interval - 29.6 to - 13.8). At 30 days, the rate of serious adverse events was 16.0 and 18.8% in the NOO-A and morphine groups respectively (p = NS). The rate of death was 1.8% (NOO-A group) and 3.8% (morphine group) (p = NS). CONCLUSION: Analgesia provided by NOO-A was inferior to morphine at 30 min in patients with acute STEMI in the prehospital setting. Rates of serious adverse events did not differ between groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02198378.

Epidural analgesia in ICU chest trauma patients with fractured ribs: retrospective study of pain control and intubation requirements.

BACKGROUND: Nonintubated chest trauma patients with fractured ribs admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) are at risk for complications and may require invasive ventilation at some point. Effective pain control is essential. We assessed whether epidural analgesia (EA) in patients with fractured ribs who were not intubated at ICU admission decreased the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We also looked for risk factors for IMV. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective, observational, multicenter study conducted in 40 ICUs in France included consecutive patients with three or more fractured ribs who were not intubated at admission between July 2013 and July 2015. RESULTS: Of the 974 study patients, 788 were included in the analysis of intubation predictors. EA was used in 130 (16.5%) patients, and 65 (8.2%) patients required IMV. Factors independently associated with IMV were chronic respiratory disease (P = 0.008), worse SAPS II (P < 0.0001), flail chest (P = 0.02), worse Injury Severity Score (P = 0.0003), higher respiratory rate at admission (P = 0.02), alcohol withdrawal syndrome (P < 0.001), and noninvasive ventilation (P = 0.04). EA was not associated with decreases in IMV requirements, median numerical rating scale pain score, or intravenous morphine requirements from day 1 to day 7. CONCLUSIONS: EA was not associated with a lower risk of IMV in chest trauma patients with at least 3 fractured ribs, moderate pain, and no intubation on admission. Further studies are needed to clarify the optimal pain control strategy in chest trauma patients admitted to the ICU, notably those with severe pain or high opioid requirements.