Location of cardiac arrests in the public access defibrillation trial.

BACKGROUND: The Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Trial found an overall doubling in the number of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (CA) survivors when a lay responder team was equipped with an automated external defibrillator (AED), compared with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) alone. OBJECTIVES: To describe the types of facilities that participated in the trial and to report the incidence of CA and survival in these different types of facilities. METHODS: In this post-hoc analysis of PAD Trial data, the physical characteristics of the participating facilities and the numbers of presumed CAs, treatable CAs, and survivors are reported for each category of facilities. RESULTS: There were 625 presumed CAs at 1,260 participating facilities. Just under half (n = 291) of the presumed CAs were classified as treatable CAs. Treatable CAs occurred at a rate of 2.9 per 1,000 person-years of exposure; rates were highest in fitness centers (5.1) and golf courses (4.8) and lowest in office complexes (0.7) and hotels (0.7). Survival from treatable CA was highest in recreational complexes (0.5), public transportation sites (0.4), and fitness centers (0.4) and lowest in office complexes (0.1) and residential facilities (0.0). CONCLUSIONS: During the PAD Trial, the exposure-adjusted rate of treatable CA was highest in fitness centers and golf courses, but the incidence per facility was low to moderate. Survival from treatable cardiac arrest was highest in recreational complexes, public transportation facilities, and fitness centers.

Time to analgesia for patients with painful extremity injuries transported to the emergency department by ambulance.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the time to analgesia for patients with painful, isolated extremity injuries brought to the emergency department (ED) by emergency medical services (EMS). METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all patients presenting with isolated, painful extremity injuries during an 18-month period to a Level 1 trauma center. Medical records were reviewed by diagnostic codes for extremity injuries. INCLUSION CRITERIA: patients 18 years or older transported to the ED by EMS; isolated, painful extremity injuries; received parenteral analgesia in the ED or by EMS. Excluded: multiple trauma patients, interfacility transfers, hemodynamically unstable patients, head-injured patients, intoxicated patients, and patients with mental status changes. Data elements: age, sex, EMS arrival time, EMS medication time, hospital triage time, and ED medication time. All "times to analgesia" were calculated from the EMS arrival time on scene. RESULTS: Extremity injuries were identified in 706 patients. Of these, 104 patients with painful, isolated, extremity injuries met all inclusion criteria. Thirteen (12.5%) of 104 received analgesia by EMS during prehospital care. Ninety-one patients (88%) first received parenteral analgesia in the ED. The mean time to analgesia for EMS treated patients was 23 minutes (95% CI 16.7-30.2). Mean time to analgesia for patients treated in the ED was 113 minutes (95% CI 99.2-128.1). Mean time to analgesia after triage in this group was 75 minutes (95% CI 60.8-89.7). CONCLUSION: In this study, patients received analgesia sooner when administered by EMS during prehospital care. There was a significant time delay after triage for patients first medicated in the ED.

Regional EMS experience with etomidate for facilitated intubation.

OBJECTIVE: To report the preliminary experience of the Central New York emergency medical services (EMS) region with etomidate for prehospital facilitated intubation. METHODS: Prospective recording of all intubations (facilitated and nonfacilitated) was completed during the first six months of the etomidate protocol, from January 1 to June 30, 2000. These results were compared with retrospective comparison data obtained for an 18-month period from stored documented prehospital care reports (PCRs), a period when diazepam was used for facilitated intubation. RESULTS: During the study period, 343 (84%) of 409 attempted intubations were successful. Of these, 24 facilitated intubations (using etomidate) were attempted (all on breathing, agitated patients), and 19 (79%, CI 63%-95%) were successful. Eighteen of these (95%) were intubated successfully on the first attempt. The median age of the patients requiring intubation was 70 years (range 14-90), and 60% were female. There were no reported incidences of vomiting, broken teeth, or bleeding. The region's prior 18-month experience using diazepam for facilitated intubation resulted in ten (23%, CI 1%-36%) successful intubations of 43 facilitated intubation attempts. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary data suggest increased rates of success for facilitated intubation using etomidate, when compared with diazepam, with most intubations successful on the first attempt. Limitations of this study include a small sample size and self-reporting of airway data by paramedics.

Blind tracheal intubation by paramedics through the LMA-Unique.

OBJECTIVE: The manufacturer of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) reports success rates of 30-93% by practitioners attempting tracheal intubation through the LMA-Classic. No prior studies describe success rates through the (disposable) LMA-Unique by paramedics. The objective of this study was to measure the success rate of paramedics attempting to intubate the trachea blindly through the LMA-Unique. METHODS: During a paramedic refresher class and an emergency medical services teaching day conference, paramedics previously trained in the use of the LMA-Unique as a "rescue" airway device were instructed in the technique of tracheal intubation through the LMA-Unique. A Laerdal LMA-mannequin was immobilized with an extrication collar and held by an investigator in the head-neutral position. Paramedics were first asked to insert the LMA-Unique as previously trained, and to confirm adequate ventilation by seeing inflation of the mannequin's lungs. Then, subjects were asked to pass a well-lubricated 6-0 Mallinckrodt endotracheal tube through the LMA-Unique within a 60-second period. Tracheal placement of the endotracheal tube was then confirmed by visualization of the expanding mannequin lungs. Rates of success of LMA-Unique placement and endotracheal tube placement were measured. RESULTS: Fifty of the 52 (96%; CI 91% to 100%) paramedics successfully inserted the LMA-Unique on the first attempt. Only 11 of the 52 (21%; CI 10% to 32%) paramedics were successful in blind placement of the endotracheal tube into the trachea through the LMA-Unique within a 60-second period. The failures (41 of the 52) were visually confirmed to be located in the esophagus. CONCLUSION: In this study, when attempting blind tracheal intubation through the LMA-Unique, paramedics were rarely successful in tracheal placement. Basic LMA-Unique insertion, however, had a very high success rate.