Advanced Life Support for Out-of-Hospital Chest Pain: The OPALS Study†.

Context: As many as 14% of patients transported by ambulance with chest pain die prior to hospital discharge. To date, no high-quality controlled trials have revealed that prehospital advanced life support interventions affect survival for these patients. Objective: The Ontario Prehospital Advanced Life Support (OPALS) Study assessed the effect of adding an advance life support service to an existing basic life support emergency medical service program, on the rate of mortality and morbidity for patients with out-of-hospital chest pain. Design: Controlled clinical trial comparing survival for 9 months before and 9 after instituting an advanced life support program. Setting: Thirteen urban and suburban Ontario communities (populations ranging from 30,000 to 750,000; total, 2.5 million). Patients: All adult patients with a primary complaint of chest pain and transported by paramedics to the emergency department. Intervention: Paramedics were trained in standard advanced life support, which includes endotracheal intubation, intravenous furosemide and morphine, oral ASA, and sublingual NTG. Emergency medical services within each community had to meet predefined criteria in order to qualify for the advanced life support phase. Main Outcome Measure: Survival to hospital discharge. Results: Overall, 12,168 patients were enrolled in either the basic life support phase (N = 5,788) or the advanced life support phase (N = 6,380). The rate of mortality significantly decreased from 4.3% in the basic life support phase to 3.2% in the advanced life support phase (absolute change 1.1, 95% CI 0.4-1.8, P = 0.0013). We also demonstrated a decrease in mortality for the subgroup of patients with a discharge diagnosis of myocardial infarction (13.1 percent vs 8.2 percent, P = 0.002). Conclusions: The addition of a prehospital advanced life support program to an existing basic life support emergency medical service was associated with a significant decrease in the mortality rate among patients complaining of chest pain. Future research should clarify the most effective interventions and target specific populations.

Advanced life support for out-of-hospital respiratory distress.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory distress is a common symptom of patients transported to hospitals by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel. The benefit of advanced life support for such patients has not been established. METHODS: The Ontario Prehospital Advanced Life Support (OPALS) Study was a controlled clinical trial that was conducted in 15 cities before and after the implementation of a program to provide advanced life support for patients with out-of-hospital respiratory distress. Paramedics were trained in standard advanced life support, including endotracheal intubation and the administration of intravenous drugs. RESULTS: The clinical characteristics of the 8138 patients in the two phases of the study were similar. During the first phase, no patients were treated by paramedics trained in advanced life support; during the second phase, 56.6% of patients received this treatment. Endotracheal intubation was performed in 1.4% of the patients, and intravenous drugs were administered to 15.0% during the second phase. This phase of the study was also marked by a substantial increase in the use of nebulized salbutamol and sublingual nitroglycerin for the relief of symptoms. The rate of death among all patients decreased significantly, from 14.3% to 12.4% (absolute difference, 1.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4 to 3.4; P=0.01) from the basic-life-support phase to the advanced-life-support phase (adjusted odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.5). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a specific regimen of out-of-hospital advanced-life-support interventions to an existing EMS system that provides basic life support was associated with a decrease in the rate of death of 1.9 percentage points among patients with respiratory distress.

The out-of-hospital validation of the Canadian C-Spine Rule by paramedics.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We designed the Canadian C-Spine Rule for the clinical clearance of the cervical spine, without need for diagnostic imaging, in alert and stable trauma patients. Emergency physicians previously validated the Canadian C-Spine Rule in 8,283 patients. This study prospectively evaluates the performance characteristics, reliability, and clinical sensibility of the Canadian C-Spine Rule when used by paramedics in the out-of-hospital setting. METHODS: We conducted this prospective cohort study in 7 Canadian regions and involved alert (Glasgow Coma Scale score 15) and stable adult trauma patients at risk for neck injury. Advanced and basic care paramedics interpreted the Canadian C-Spine Rule status for all patients, who then underwent immobilization and assessment in the emergency department to determine the outcome, clinically important cervical spine injury. RESULTS: The 1,949 patients enrolled had these characteristics: median age 39.0 years (interquartile range 26 to 52 years), female patients 50.8%, motor vehicle crash 62.5%, fall 19.9%, admitted to the hospital 10.8%, clinically important cervical spine injury 0.6%, unimportant injury 0.3%, and internal fixation 0.3%. The paramedics classified patients for 12 important injuries with sensitivity 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 74% to 100%) and specificity 37.7% (95% CI 36% to 40%). The kappa value for paramedic interpretation of the Canadian C-Spine Rule (n=155) was 0.93 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.99). Paramedics conservatively misinterpreted the rule in 320 (16.4%) patients and were comfortable applying the rule in 1,594 (81.7%). Seven hundred thirty-one (37.7%) out-of-hospital immobilizations could have been avoided with the Canadian C-Spine Rule. CONCLUSION: This study found that paramedics can apply the Canadian C-Spine Rule reliably, without missing any important cervical spine injuries. The adoption of the Canadian C-Spine Rule by paramedics could significantly reduce the number of out-of-hospital cervical spine immobilizations.

STI initiative: Improving testing for sexually transmitted infections in women.

Canadian urgent care and walk-in medical clinics provide health care for a population that may be poorly covered by traditional health care structures. Despite evidence suggesting that women with urinary complaints experience a high incidence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), this population may be under-tested in this particular setting. The aim of this quality improvement initiative was to increase STI testing in women presenting with GU complaints. Implementation of an opt-out method of STI testing for women ages 16 and older was introduced at three walk-in clinics. Women presenting with GU complaints were given the opportunity to provide samples for both conventional urine culture and nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) for non-viral STIs. Patients received treatment according to standard of care and public health was notified as per local regulations. Testing rate and STI incidence was tracked via clinic electronic medical records (EMRs). Overall results were tracked using run charts and compared to historical data for the year prior to the start of the project. Over a 1 year period prior to this intervention, only 65 STI tests were performed in over 1100 GU complaints (5.5%). Six STIs were identified during this time. During the 36-week project period, testing increased to 45% of the patient population (320/707). The STI detected incidence increased from 0.51% to 1.4% in all women, and from 0.84% to 3.4% in women aged 16-29 years. An opt-out method was an effective intervention for increasing STI testing within the walk-in clinic setting. With optimisation, significant increases in testing rates can be obtained without substantially increasing clinic workload and at no economic cost to the clinic. As expected, detected incidence rates of STIs were higher than the recognised population prevalence.

Advanced cardiac life support in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: The Ontario Prehospital Advanced Life Support (OPALS) Study tested the incremental effect on the rate of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of adding a program of advanced life support to a program of rapid defibrillation. METHODS: This multicenter, controlled clinical trial was conducted in 17 cities before and after advanced-life-support programs were instituted and enrolled 5638 patients who had had cardiac arrest outside the hospital. Of those patients, 1391 were enrolled during the rapid-defibrillation phase and 4247 during the subsequent advanced-life-support phase. Paramedics were trained in standard advanced life support, which includes endotracheal intubation and the administration of intravenous drugs. RESULTS: From the rapid-defibrillation phase to the advanced-life-support phase, the rate of admission to a hospital increased significantly (10.9 percent vs. 14.6 percent, P<0.001), but the rate of survival to hospital discharge did not (5.0 percent vs. 5.1 percent, P=0.83). The multivariate odds ratio for survival after advanced life support was 1.1 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 1.5); after an arrest witnessed by a bystander, 4.4 (95 percent confidence interval, 3.1 to 6.4); after cardiopulmonary resuscitation administered by a bystander, 3.7 (95 percent confidence interval, 2.5 to 5.4); and after rapid defibrillation, 3.4 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.4 to 8.4). There was no improvement in the rate of survival with the use of advanced life support in any subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of advanced-life-support interventions did not improve the rate of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in a previously optimized emergency-medical-services system of rapid defibrillation. In order to save lives, health care planners should make cardiopulmonary resuscitation by citizens and rapid-defibrillation responses a priority for the resources of emergency-medical-services systems.