Emergency Medical Services Protocols for Assessment and Treatment of Patients with Ventricular Assist Devices.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ventricular assist devices (VADs) represent a growing population presenting to Emergency Medical Services (EMS), but little is known about their prehospital care. This study aimed to characterize current EMS protocols in the United States for patients with VADs. METHODS: States with state-wide EMS protocols were included. Protocols were obtained from the state EMS website. If not available, the office of the state medical director was contacted. For each state, protocols were analyzed for patient and VAD assessment and treatment variables. RESULTS: Of 32 states with state-wide EMS protocols, 21 had VAD-specific protocols. With 17 (81%) states noting a pulse may not be palpable, protocols recommended assessing alternate measures of perfusion and mean arterial pressure (MAP; 15 [71%]). Assessment of VAD was advised through listening for pump hum (20 [95%]) and alarms (20 [95%]) and checking the power supply (15 [71%]). For treatment, EMS prehospital consultation was required to begin chest compression in three (14%) states, and mechanical (device) chest compressions were not permitted in two (10%) states. Contact information for VAD coordinator was listed in a minority of five (24%) states. Transport of VAD equipment/backup bag was advised in 18 (86%) states. DISCUSSION: This national analysis of EMS protocols found VAD-specific EMS protocols are not universally adopted in the United States and are variable when implemented, highlighting a need for VAD teams to partner with EMS agencies to inform standardized protocols that optimize these patients' care.

Do prehospital sepsis alerts decrease time to complete CMS sepsis measures?

INTRODUCTION: In an effort to improve sepsis outcomes the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) established a time sensitive sepsis management bundle as a core quality measure that includes blood culture collection, serum lactate collection, initiation of intravenous fluid administration, and initiation of broad-spectrum antibiotics. Few studies examine the effects of a prehospital sepsis alert protocol on decreasing time to complete CMS sepsis core measures. METHODS: This study was a retrospective cohort study of patients transported via EMS from December 1, 2018 to December 1, 2019 who met the criteria of the Maryland Statewide EMS sepsis protocol and compared outcomes between patients who activated a prehospital sepsis alert and patients who did not activate a prehospital sepsis alert. The Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services Systems developed a sepsis protocol that instructs EMS providers to notify the nearest appropriate facility with a sepsis alert if a patient 18 years of age and older is suspected of having an infection and also presents with at least two of the following: temperature >38 °C or <35.5 °C, a heart rate >100 beats per minute, a respiratory rate >25 breaths per minute or end-tidal carbon dioxide less than or equal to 32 mmHg, a systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg, or a point of care lactate reading greater than or equal to 4 mmol/L. RESULTS: Median time to achieve all four studied CMS sepsis core measures was 103 min [IQR 61-153] for patients who received a prehospital sepsis alert and 106.5 min [IQR 75-189] for patients who did not receive a prehospital sepsis alert (p-value 0.105). Median time to completion was shorter for serum lactate collection (28 min. vs 35 min., p-value 0.019), blood culture collection (28 min. vs 38 min., p-value <0.01), and intravenous fluid administration (54 min. vs 61 min., p-value 0.025) but was not significantly different for antibiotic administration (94 min. vs 103 min., p-value 0.12) among patients who triggered a sepsis alert. CONCLUSION: This study questions the effectiveness of prehospital sepsis alert protocols on decreasing time to complete CMS sepsis core measures. Future studies should address if these times can be impacted by having EMS providers independently administer antibiotics.

Graduate Medical Education in Tactical Medicine and the Impact of ACGME Accreditation of EMS Fellowships.

Physician interest in tactical medicine as an area of professional practice has grown significantly over the past decade. The prevalence of physician involvement in terms of medical oversight and operational support of civilian tactical medicine has experienced tremendous growth during this timeframe. Factors contributing to this trend are multifactorial and include enhanced law enforcement agency understanding of the role of the tactical physician, support for the engagement of qualified medical oversight, increasing numbers of physicians formally trained in tactical medicine, and the ongoing escalation of intentional mass-casualty incidents worldwide. Continued vigilance for the sustenance of adequate and appropriate graduate medical education resources for physicians seeking training in the comprehensive aspects of tactical medicine is essential to ensure continued advancement of the quality of casualty care in the civilian high-threat environment.