Bleeding Control Protections Within US Good Samaritan Laws.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States, all 50 states and the District of Columbia have Good Samaritan Laws (GSLs). Designed to encourage bystanders to aid at the scene of an emergency, GSLs generally limit the risk of civil tort liability if the care is rendered in good faith. Nation-wide, a leading cause of preventable death is uncontrolled external hemorrhage. Public bleeding control initiatives aim to train the public to recognize life-threatening external bleeding, perform life-sustaining interventions (including direct pressure, tourniquet application, and wound packing), and to promote access to bleeding control equipment to ensure a rapid response from bystanders. METHODS: This study sought to identify the GSLs in each state and the District of Columbia to identify what type of responder is covered by the law (eg, all laypersons, only trained individuals, or only licensed health care providers) and if bleeding control is explicitly included or excluded in their Good Samaritan coverage. RESULTS: Good Samaritan Laws providing civil liability qualified immunity were identified in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. One state, Oklahoma, specifically includes bleeding control in its GSLs. Six states - Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, and Missouri - have laws that define those covered under Good Samaritan immunity, generally limiting protection to individuals trained in a standard first aid or resuscitation course or health care clinicians. No state explicitly excludes bleeding control from their GSLs, and one state expressly includes it. CONCLUSION: Nation-wide across the United States, most states have broad bystander coverage within GSLs for emergency medical conditions of all types, including bleeding emergencies, and no state explicitly excludes bleeding control interventions. Some states restrict coverage to those health care personnel or bystanders who have completed a specific training program. Opportunity exists for additional research into those states whose GSLs may not be inclusive of bleeding control interventions.

Trauma and Intensive Care Nursing Knowledge and Attitude of Foley Catheter Insertion and Maintenance.

In the acute care setting, the majority of urinary tract infections are associated with indwelling urinary catheters. Despite guidelines for proper use, catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) continue to occur in critically ill/injured patients. There is a paucity of data on the translation between CAUTI prevention education and behavioral change. This project evaluated nurse's clinical knowledge and attitude toward Foley catheter insertion and maintenance to determine the benefits of addressing gaps in knowledge and inconsistencies in attitude through education.A prospective cohort study was conducted with registered nurses from the emergency room, trauma/surgical, and medical intensive care units. Participant's clinical knowledge and attitude toward Foley catheter usage and CAUTIs were evaluated using a 20-question survey tool before and after a CAUTI education program.Forty-eight nurses completed the presurvey, educational training, and postsurvey. The mean postsurvey score was significantly higher (86.9 ± 8.3%) than the presurvey score (76.0 ± 12.3%) for the knowledge section of the survey. There was no marked difference in participant attitude following the educational training, with mean presurvey and postsurvey scores of 91.3 ± 7.0% and 89.8 ± 5.3%, respectively. After the course, participants were more confident in their clinical knowledge; however, perception regarding CAUTI prevention did not improve. A series of unannounced rounding observations before and after the intervention showed an improvement in proper Foley catheter maintenance.Catheter-associated urinary tract infection prevention education was an effective countermeasure to address gaps in clinical knowledge, but modifying attitudes was difficult to achieve. In the short term, the training appeared to improve proper maintenance in clinical practice.

Clinical clearance of the cervical spine in blunt trauma patients younger than 3 years: a multi-center study of the american association for the surgery of trauma.

BACKGROUND: Cervical spine clearance in the very young child is challenging. Radiographic imaging to diagnose cervical spine injuries (CSI) even in the absence of clinical findings is common, raising concerns about radiation exposure and imaging-related complications. We examined whether simple clinical criteria can be used to safely rule out CSI in patients younger than 3 years. METHODS: The trauma registries from 22 level I or II trauma centers were reviewed for the 10-year period (January 1995 to January 2005). Blunt trauma patients younger than 3 years were identified. The measured outcome was CSI. Independent predictors of CSI were identified by univariate and multivariate analysis. A weighted score was calculated by assigning 1, 2, or 3 points to each independent predictor according to its magnitude of effect. The score was established on two thirds of the population and validated using the remaining one third. RESULTS: Of 12,537 patients younger than 3 years, CSI was identified in 83 patients (0.66%), eight had spinal cord injury. Four independent predictors of CSI were identified: Glasgow Coma Score <14, GCSEYE = 1, motor vehicle crash, and age 2 years or older. A score of <2 had a negative predictive value of 99.93% in ruling out CSI. A total of 8,707 patients (69.5% of all patients) had a score of <2 and were eligible for cervical spine clearance without imaging. There were no missed CSI in this study. CONCLUSIONS: CSI in patients younger than 3 years is uncommon. Four simple clinical predictors can be used in conjunction to the physical examination to substantially reduce the use of radiographic imaging in this patient population.