Factors Associated With Poor Long-Term Outcomes After Emergency Department Intubation.

Introduction While immediate complications of ED patients undergoing endotracheal intubation (ETI) have been explored, the relationship between ED ETI and patient status at hospital discharge is unknown. Methods We performed a retrospective review of all intubations performed in our ED for one calendar year in adult patients (>18 years of age). We abstracted patient and ETI factors (indication, complications, etc.) to determine their impact on patient outcomes. We defined a poor outcome as either (1) death or discharge to a nursing home if admitted to the hospital from home or (2) death if admitted to the hospital from a nursing home. We examined the univariate odds ratios for poor outcomes.  Results We identified 122 intubations; 64 (52.5%) had a poor outcome and 58 (47.5%) did not have a poor outcome. Age in years (odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.07) and ETI performed for an indication of "cardiac arrest" (OR 4.49, 95% CI 1.55-13.01) were the only variables associated with a poor outcome. Other patients and intubation variables were not associated with a poor outcome including; gender, difficult airway characteristics, intubator skill level, first attempt success, airway complications, and post-intubation hypoxia or hypotension. Conclusion In our sample from a single ED, over 50% of patients who undergo ED ETI either died in the hospital or failed to return home. While age and an ETI indication of "cardiac arrest" were associated with poor outcomes, future work is required to validate our findings in a larger cohort.

Real-Time Fatigue Mitigation with Air-Medical Personnel: The SleepTrackTXT2 Randomized Trial.

Objective: The aims of this study were: 1) to determine the short-term impact of the SleepTrackTXT2 intervention on air-medical clinician fatigue during work shifts and 2) determine the longer-term impact on sleep quality over 120 days. Methods: We used a multi-site randomized controlled trial study design with a targeted enrollment of 100 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02783027). The intervention was behavioral (non-pharmacological) and participation was scheduled for 120 days. Participation was voluntary. All consented participants answered baseline as well as follow-up surveys. All participants answered text message queries, which assessed self-rated fatigue, sleepiness, concentration, recovery, and hours of sleep. Intervention participants received additional text messages with recommendations for behaviors that can mitigate fatigue. Intervention participants received weekly text messages that promoted sleep. Our analysis was guided by the intent-to-treat principle. For the long-term outcome of interest (sleep quality at 120 days), we used a two-sample t-test on the change in sleep quality to determine the intervention effect. Results: Eighty-three individuals were randomized and 2,828 shifts documented (median shifts per participant =37, IQR 23-49). Seventy-one percent of individuals randomized (n = 59) participated up to the 120-day study period and 52% (n = 43) completed the follow-up survey. Of the 69,530 text messages distributed, participants responded to 61,571 (88.6%). Mean sleep quality at 120 days did not differ from baseline for intervention (p > 0.05) or control group participants (p > 0.05), and did not differ between groups (p > 0.05). There was no change from baseline to 120 days in the proportion with poor sleep quality in either group. Intra-shift fatigue increased (worsened) over the course of 12-hour shifts for participants in both study arms. Fatigue at the end of 12-hour shifts was higher among control group participants than participants in the intervention group (p < 0.05). Pre-shift hours of sleep were often less than 7 hours and did not differ between the groups over time. Conclusions: The SleepTrackTXT2 behavioral intervention showed a positive short-term impact on self-rated fatigue during 12-hour shifts, but did not impact longer duration shifts or have a longer-term impact on sleep quality among air-medical EMS clinicians.

Reliability and Validity of Survey Instruments to Measure Work-Related Fatigue in the Emergency Medical Services Setting: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to systematically search the literature to identify reliable and valid survey instruments for fatigue measurement in the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) occupational setting. METHODS: A systematic review study design was used and searched six databases, including one website. The research question guiding the search was developed a priori and registered with the PROSPERO database of systematic reviews: "Are there reliable and valid instruments for measuring fatigue among EMS personnel?" (2016:CRD42016040097). The primary outcome of interest was criterion-related validity. Important outcomes of interest included reliability (e.g., internal consistency), and indicators of sensitivity and specificity. Members of the research team independently screened records from the databases. Full-text articles were evaluated by adapting the Bolster and Rourke system for categorizing findings of systematic reviews, and the rated data abstracted from the body of literature as favorable, unfavorable, mixed/inconclusive, or no impact. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 1,257 unique records. Thirty-four unique experimental and non-experimental studies were determined relevant following full-text review. Nineteen studies reported on the reliability and/or validity of ten different fatigue survey instruments. Eighteen different studies evaluated the reliability and/or validity of four different sleepiness survey instruments. None of the retained studies reported sensitivity or specificity. Evidence quality was rated as very low across all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review, limited evidence of the reliability and validity of 14 different survey instruments to assess the fatigue and/or sleepiness status of EMS personnel and related shift worker groups was identified.

Effect of Task Load Interventions on Fatigue in Emergency Medical Services Personnel and Other Shift Workers: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Modifying the task load of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel may mitigate fatigue, sleep quality and fatigue related risks. A review of the literature addressing task load interventions may benefit EMS administrators as they craft policies related to mitigating fatigue. We conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature to address the following question: "In EMS personnel, do task load interventions mitigate fatigue, mitigate fatigue-related risks, and/or improve sleep?" (PROSPERO 2016:CRD42016040114). METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature that described use of randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and observational study designs. We retained and reviewed research that involved EMS personnel or similar shift worker groups 18 years of age and older. Studies of 'healthy volunteers' and non-shift worker populations were excluded. Studies were included where the methodology of the study implied a theoretical framework of task load (or workload) affecting fatigue, and then fatigue related outcomes. Outcomes of interest included personnel safety, patient safety, personnel performance, acute fatigue, and cost to system. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to summarize findings and assess quality of evidence from very low to high quality. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 3,394 unique records resulting in 58 records included as potentially eligible. An additional 69 studies were reviewed in full following searches of bibliographies. We detected wide variation in the description and measurement of task load in the retained and excluded research. Among 127 potentially relevant studies reviewed in full, five were judged eligible. None of the retained studies reported findings germane to personnel safety, patient safety, or cost to system. We judged most studies to have serious or very serious risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of task load interventions on fatigue, fatigue-related risks, and/or sleep quality was not estimable and the overall quality of evidence was judged low or very low. There was considerable heterogeneity in how task load was defined and measured.

Shorter Versus Longer Shift Durations to Mitigate Fatigue and Fatigue-Related Risks in Emergency Medical Services Personnel and Related Shift Workers: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: This study comprehensively reviewed the literature on the impact of shorter versus longer shifts on critical and important outcomes for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel and related shift worker groups. METHODS: Six databases (e.g., PubMed/MEDLINE) were searched, including one website. This search was guided by a research question developed by an expert panel a priori and registered with the PROSPERO database of systematic reviews (2016:CRD42016040099). The critical outcomes of interest were patient safety and personnel safety. The important outcomes of interest were personnel performance, acute fatigue, sleep and sleep quality, retention/turnover, long-term health, burnout/stress, and cost to system. Screeners worked independently and full-text articles were assessed for relevance. Data abstracted from the retained literature were categorized as favorable, unfavorable, mixed/inconclusive, or no impact toward the shorter shift duration. This research characterized the evidence as very low, low, moderate, or high quality according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. RESULTS: The searched yielded n = 21,674 records. Of the 480 full-text articles reviewed, 100 reported comparisons of outcomes of interest by shift duration. We identified 24 different shift duration comparisons, most commonly 8 hours versus 12 hours. No one study reported findings for all 9 outcomes. Two studies reported findings linked to both critical outcomes of patient and personnel safety, 34 reported findings for one of two critical outcomes, and 64 did not report findings for critical outcomes. Fifteen studies were grouped to compare shifts <24 hours versus shifts ≥24 hours. None of the findings for the critical outcomes of patient and personnel safety were categorized as unfavorable toward shorter duration shifts (<24 hours). Nine studies were favorable toward shifts <24 hours for at least one of the 7 important outcomes, while findings from one study were categorized as unfavorable. Evidence quality was low or very low. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of existing evidence on the impact of shift duration on fatigue and fatigue-related risks is low or very low. Despite these limitations, this systematic review suggests that for outcomes considered critical or important to EMS personnel, shifts <24 hours in duration are more favorable than shifts ≥24 hours.