Peri-intubation factors affecting emergency physician choice of paralytic agent for rapid sequence intubation of trauma patients.

INTRODUCTION: No study has assessed predictors of physician choice between the succinylcholine (Succ) and rocuronium (Roc) for rapid sequence intubation (RSI) during the initial resuscitation of trauma patients in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated of the use of Succ and Roc for adult trauma patients undergoing RSI at a Level 1 trauma center. The primary outcome was to identify factors affecting physician choice of paralytic agent for RSI analyzed by cluster analysis using pre-intubation vital signs and early mortality. The secondary outcome was to identify factors influencing physician choice of paralytic agent using a logistic regression model reported as adjusted odds ratios (aOR). RESULTS: The analysis included 215 patients, including 148 receiving Succ and 67 receiving Roc. The two groups were similar in regard to age, provider level of training, mean GCS (10 vs. 10) and median ISS (27 vs. 27). Cluster analysis using peri-intubation patient vital signs and early mortality indicates that patients with predominantly abnormal vital signs and early mortality were more likely to receive Roc (74%) than those without abnormal vital signs prior to intubation or early mortality (24%). Hypoxemia prior to RSI (aOR 12.3 [2.5-60.9]) and the use of video laryngoscopy (VL) (aOR 5.5 [1.2-24.6]) were associated with the choice to use Roc. CONCLUSIONS: Roc was more frequently chosen for paralysis in the patient cluster with predominantly abnormal peri-intubation vital signs and higher rate of early ED mortality. The use of Roc was associated with hypoxemia prior to RSI and VL.

Emergency Department use of Apneic Oxygenation Versus Usual Care During Rapid Sequence Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial (The ENDAO Trial).

OBJECTIVES: Desaturation leading to hypoxemia may occur during rapid sequence intubation (RSI). Apneic oxygenation (AO) was developed to prevent the occurrence of oxygen desaturation during the apnea period. The purpose of this study was to determine if the application of AO increases the average lowest oxygen saturation during RSI when compared to usual care (UC) in the emergency setting. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted at an academic, urban, Level I trauma center. All patients requiring intubation were included. Exclusion criteria were patients in cardiac or traumatic arrest or if preoxygenation was not performed. An observer, blinded to study outcomes and who was not involved in the procedure, recorded all times, while all saturations were recorded in real time by monitors on a secured server. Two-hundred patients were allocated to receive AO (n = 100) or UC (n = 100) by predetermined randomization in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS: A total of 206 patients were enrolled. There was no difference in lowest mean oxygen saturation between the two groups (92, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 91 to 93 in AO vs. 93, 95% CI = 92 to 94 in UC; p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in lowest mean oxygen saturation between the two groups. The application of AO during RSI did not prevent desaturation of patients in this study population.