Changes in temperature in preheated crystalloids at ambient temperatures relevant to a prehospital setting: an experimental simulation study with the application of prehospital treatment of trauma patients suffering from accidental hypothermia.

BACKGROUND: Accidental hypothermia is common in all trauma patients and contributes to the lethal diamond, increasing both morbidity and mortality. In hypotensive shock, fluid resuscitation is recommended using fluids with a temperature of 37-42°, as fluid temperature can decrease the patient's body temperature. In Sweden, virtually all prehospital services use preheated fluids. The aim of the present study was to investigate how the temperature of preheated infusion fluids is affected by the ambient temperatures and flow rates relevant for prehospital emergency care. METHODS: In this experimental simulation study, temperature changes in crystalloids preheated to 39 °C were evaluated. The fluid temperature changes were measured both in the infusion bag and at the patient end of the infusion system. Measurements were conducted in conditions relevant to prehospital emergency care, with ambient temperatures varying between - 4 and 28 °C and flow rates of 1000 ml/h and 6000 ml/h, through an uninsulated infusion set at a length of 175 cm. RESULTS: The flow rate and ambient temperature affected the temperature in the infusion fluid both in the infusion bag and at the patient end of the system. A lower ambient temperature and lower flow rate were both associated with a greater temperature loss in the infusion fluid. CONCLUSION: This study shows that both a high infusion rate and a high ambient temperature are needed if an infusion fluid preheated to 39 °C is to remain above 37 °C when it reaches the patient using a 175-cm-long uninsulated infusion set. It is apparent that the lower the ambient temperature, the higher the flow rate needs to be to limit temperature loss of the fluid.

Development of a trigger tool to identify harmful incidents, no harm incidents, and near misses in prehospital emergency care.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Medical Services (EMS) are a unique setting because care for the chief complaint is given across all ages in a complex and high-risk environment that may pose a threat to patient safety. Traditionally, a reporting system is commonly used to raise awareness of adverse events (AEs); however, it could fail to detect an AE. Several methods are needed to evaluate patient safety in EMS. In this light, this study was conducted to (1) develop a national ambulance trigger tool (ATT) with a guide containing descriptions of triggers, examples of use, and categorization of near misses (NMs), no harm incidents (NHIs), and harmful incidents (HIs) and (2) use the ATT on randomly selected ambulance records. METHODS: The ambulance trigger tool was developed in a stepwise manner through (1) a literature review; (2) three sessions of structured group discussions with an expert panel having knowledge of emergency medical service, patient safety, and development of trigger tools; (3) a retrospective record review of 900 randomly selected journals with three review teams from different geographical locations; and (4) inter-rater reliability testing between reviewers. RESULTS: From the literature review, 34 triggers were derived. After removing clinically irrelevant ones and combining others through three sessions of structured discussions, 19 remained. The most common triggers identified in the 900 randomly selected records were deviation from treatment guidelines (30.4%), the patient is non conveyed after EMS assessment (20.8%), and incomplete documentation (14.4%). The positive triggers were categorized as a near miss (40.9%), no harm (3.7%), and harmful incident (0.2%). Inter-rater reliability testing showed good agreement in both sessions. CONCLUSION: This study shows that a trigger tool together with a retrospective record review can be used as a method to measure the frequency of harmful incidents, no harm incidents, and near misses in the EMS, thus complementing the traditional reporting system to realize increased patient safety.

Pre-hospital predictors of an adverse outcome among patients with dyspnoea as the main symptom assessed by pre-hospital emergency nurses - a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Dyspnoea is one of the most common reasons for patients contacting emergency medical services (EMS). Pre-hospital Emergency Nurses (PENs) are independently responsible for advanced care and to meet these patients individual needs. Patients with dyspnoea constitute a complex group, with multiple different final diagnoses and with a high risk of death. This study aimed to describe on-scene factors associated with an increased risk of a time-sensitive final diagnosis and the risk of death. METHODS: A retrospective observational study including patients aged ≥16 years, presenting mainly with dyspnoea was conducted. Patients were identified thorough an EMS database, and were assessed by PENs in the south-western part of Sweden during January to December 2017. Of 7260 missions (9% of all primary missions), 6354 were included. Among those, 4587 patients were randomly selected in conjunction with adjusting for unique patients with single occasions. Data were manually collected through both EMS- and hospital records and final diagnoses were determined through the final diagnoses verified in hospital records. Analysis was performed using multiple logistic regression and multiple imputations. RESULTS: Among all unique patients with dyspnoea as the main symptom, 13% had a time-sensitive final diagnosis. The three most frequent final time-sensitive diagnoses were cardiac diseases (4.1% of all diagnoses), infectious/inflammatory diseases (2.6%), and vascular diseases (2.4%). A history of hypertension, renal disease, symptoms of pain, abnormal respiratory rate, impaired consciousness, a pathologic ECG and a short delay until call for EMS were associated with an increased risk of a time-sensitive final diagnosis. Among patients with time-sensitive diagnoses, approximately 27% died within 30 days. Increasing age, a history of renal disease, cancer, low systolic blood pressures, impaired consciousness and abnormal body temperature were associated with an increased risk of death. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with dyspnoea as the main symptom, age, previous medical history, deviating vital signs, ECG pattern, symptoms of pain, and a short delay until call for EMS are important factors to consider in the prehospital assessment of the combined risk of either having a time-sensitive diagnosis or death.

Adverse events in prehospital emergency care: a trigger tool study.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital emergency care has developed rapidly during the past decades. The care is given in a complex context which makes prehospital care a potential high-risk activity when it comes to patient safety. Patient safety in the prehospital setting has been only sparsely investigated. The aims of the present study were 1) To investigate the incidence of adverse events (AEs) in prehospital care and 2) To investigate the factors contributing to AEs in prehospital care. METHODS: We used a retrospective study design where 30 randomly selected prehospital medical records were screened for AEs each month in three prehospital organizations in Sweden during a period of one year. A total of 1080 prehospital medical records were included. The record review was based on the use of 11 screening criteria. RESULTS: The reviewers identified 46 AEs in 46 of 1080 (4.3%) prehospital medical records. Of the 46 AEs, 43 were classified as potential for harm (AE1) (4.0, 95% CI = 2.9-5.4) and three as harm identified (AE2) (0.3, 95% CI = 0.1-0.9). However, among patients with a life-threatening condition (priority 1), the risk of AE was higher (16.5%). The most common factors contributing to AEs were deviations from standard of care and missing, incomplete, or unclear documentation. The most common cause of AEs was the result of action(s) or inaction(s) by the emergency medical service (EMS) crew. CONCLUSIONS: There were 4.3 AEs per 100 ambulance missions in Swedish prehospital care. The majority of AEs originated from deviations from standard of care and incomplete documentation. There was an increase in the risk of AE among patients who the EMS team assessed as having a life-threatening condition. Most AEs were possible to avoid.