Prehospital Naloxone Administration Patterns during the Era of Synthetic Opioids.

Background: The opioid epidemic is an ongoing public health emergency, exacerbated in recent years by the introduction and rising prevalence of synthetic opioids. The National EMS Scope of Practice Model was changed in 2017 to recommend allowing basic life support (BLS) clinicians to administer intranasal (IN) naloxone. This study examines local IN naloxone administration rates for 4 years after the new recommendation, and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores and respiratory rates before and after naloxone administration.Methods: This retrospective cohort study evaluated naloxone administrations between April 1st 2017 and March 31st 2021 in a mixed urban-suburban EMS system. Naloxone dosages, routes of administration, and frequency of administrations were captured along with demographic information. Analysis of change in the ratio of IN to intravenous (IV) naloxone administrations per patient was performed, with the intention of capturing administration patterns in the area. Analyses were performed for change over time of IN naloxone rates of administration, change in respiratory rates, and change in GCS scores after antidote administration. ALS and BLS clinician certification levels were also identified. Bootstrapping procedures were used to estimate 95% confidence intervals for correlation coefficients.Results: Two thousand and ninety patients were analyzed. There was no statistically significant change in the IN/parenteral ratio over time (p = 0.79). Repeat dosing increased over time from 1.2 ± 0.4 administrations per patient to 1.3 ± 0.5 administrations per patient (r = 0.078, 95% CI: 0.036 - 0.120; p = 0.036). Mean respiratory rates before (mean = 12.6 - 12.6, r = -0.04, 95% CI: -0.09 - 0.01; p = 0.1) and after (mean = 15.2 - 14.9, r = -0.03, 95% CI: -0.08 - 0.01; p = 0.172) naloxone administration have not changed. While initial GCS scores have become significantly lower, GCS scores after administration of naloxone have not changed (initial median GCS 10 - 6, p < 0.001; final median GCS 15 - 15, p = 0.23).Conclusions: Current dosing protocols of naloxone appear effective in the era of synthetic opioids in our region, although patients may be marginally more likely to require repeat naloxone doses.

EMS Non-Transport of Low-Risk COVID-19 Patients.

Objectives: COVID-19 infections in the community have the potential to overwhelm both prehospital and in-hospital resources. Transport of well-appearing patients, in the absence of available emergency department treatment capacity, increases strain on the hospital and EMS system. In May of 2020, the Connecticut Office of EMS issued a voluntary, EMS-initiated, non-transport protocol for selected low-risk patients with symptoms consistent with COVID-19. We evaluated the implementation of this non-transport protocol in a mixed urban/suburban EMS system.Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of contemporaneously recorded quality improvement documentation for uses of the Connecticut COVID-19 non-transport protocol by EMS clinicians within our EMS system during two implementations: from 12/14/2020 to 5/1/21, and again from 1/3/22 to 2/18/22, which coincided with large COVID-19 case surges in our region.Results: The vast majority of patients treated under the non-transport protocol were not reevaluated by EMS or in our emergency departments in the subsequent 24 hours. There was reasonable adherence to the protocol, with 83% of cases appropriate for the non-transport protocol. The most common reasons for protocol violations were age outside of protocol scope (pediatric patients), failure of documentation, or vital signs outside of the established protocol parameters. We did not find an increased 24-hour ED visit rate in patients who were inappropriately triaged to the protocol. Of patients who had ED visits within 24 hours, only two were admitted, none to higher levels of care.Conclusion: Within this small study, EMS clinicians in our system were able to safely and accurately apply a non-transport protocol for patients presenting with symptoms consistent with COVID-19. This is consistent with previous literature suggesting that EMS-initiated non-transport is a viable strategy to reduce the burden on health systems.

An Evaluation of Prehospital Adenosine Use.

BACKGROUND: Adenosine has been safely used by paramedics for the treatment of stable supraventricular tachycardia since the mid-1990s. However, there continues to be variability in paramedics' ability to identify appropriate indications for adenosine administration. As the first of a planned series of studies aimed at improving the accuracy of SVT diagnosis and successful administration of adenosine by paramedics, this study details the current usage patterns of adenosine by paramedics. METHODS: This cross-sectional retrospective study investigated adenosine use within a large northeast EMS region from January 1, 2019, through September 30, 2021. Excluding pediatric and duplicate case reports, we created a dataset containing patient age, sex, and vital signs before, during, and after adenosine administration; intravenous line location; and coded medical history from paramedic narrative documentation, including a history of atrial fibrillation, suspected arrhythmia diagnosis, and effect of adenosine. In cases with available prehospital electrocardiograms (EKGs) for review, two physicians independently coded the arrhythmia diagnosis and outcome of adenosine administration. Statistical analysis included interrater reliability with Cohen's kappa statistic. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-three cases were included for final analysis, 84 did not have a documented EKG for review. Categorization of presenting rhythms in these cases occurred by a physician reviewing EMS narrative and documentation. Forty of these 84 cases (48%) were adjudicated as SVT likely, 32 (38%) as SVT unlikely and 12 (14%) as uncategorized due to lack of supporting documentation. Of the 99 cases with EKGs available to review, there was substantial agreement of arrhythmia diagnosis interpretation between physician reviewers (Cohen's kappa 0.77-1.0); 54 cases were adjudicated as SVT by two physician reviewers. Other identified cardiac rhythms included atrial fibrillation (16), sinus tachycardia (11), and ventricular tachycardia (2). Adenosine cardioversion occurred in 47 of the 99 cases with EKGs available for physician review (47.5%). Adenosine cardioversion was also deemed to occur in 87% (47/54) of cases when the EKG rhythm was physician adjudicated SVT. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the use of adenosine as a prehospital treatment for SVT while highlighting the need for continued efforts to improve paramedics' identification and management of tachyarrhythmias.

Early Changes in Patient Access Interval during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: COVID-19 was first reported in the United States in January 2020. Its spread throughout the country required EMS systems to rapidly adapt to patient needs while protecting EMS personnel. EMS agencies developed protocols requiring personnel to don enhanced personal protective equipment prior to patient contact. We hypothesized that the Patient Access Interval (PAI), defined as the time from wheels stopped on scene to initial patient contact, had increased during the COVID pandemic. This had the potential to affect patient outcomes, particularly in time-sensitive emergencies such as cardiac arrest or respiratory distress. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used commercial ambulance data from the four largest cities in Connecticut at two different time points: (Pre-COVID) March-May 2019, and (COVID) March-May 2020. PAI was calculated from contemporaneously reported scene times. Total cases were analyzed, and sub-analyses performed for calls located at extended care facilities (ECFs), for all emergent (Echo/Delta) calls, and for medical cardiac arrest calls. Results: 92,846 total cases were evaluated: 50,083 from 2019, and 42,763 from 2020. Cases that did not include necessary time data for PAI were removed, yielding 75,796 total cases (41,852 from 2019, 33,944 from 2020). The average PAI increased from 1 minute 55 seconds (1 m:55s) Pre-COVID to 2 m:18s COVID. ECF PAI increased from 2 m:39s to 3 m:42s. Echo/Delta PAI increased from 1 m:42s to 2 m:07s. Medical cardiac arrest PAI increased from 1 m:27s to 2 m:04s, and ECF cardiac arrest PAI increased from 2 m:18s to 4 m:35s (all comparisons p < 0.01). Conclusions: There were statistically significant increases in all studied PAIs during COVID. The 23 second increase in PAI for all calls may not have been clinically significant in most cases; however, for life-threatening patient presentations, the increase may have been particularly relevant. The increased PAI was compounded in the ECF environment, possibly due to state-mandated screening and temperature checks of EMS personnel before entering facilities. This was highlighted in the ECF cardiac arrest data, which demonstrated a clinically significant increase in PAI of 2m:17s. While this study was limited by the accuracy of contemporaneous time reports by EMS, the results support our hypothesis that PAI had increased during the COVID pandemic.