Mind the GAHP: A novel protocol for improved vascular access in the hypotensive patient.

Background: Obtaining intravenous access in hypotensive patients is challenging and may critically delay resuscitation. The Graduated Vascular Access for Hypotensive Patient (GAHP) protocol leverages intraosseous fluid boluses to specifically dilate proximal veins. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of GAHP in maximizing venous targets through early distal intraosseous access and a small fluid bolus. Methods: This was a prospective randomized cadaveric pilot study to evaluate extremity venous engorgement during intraosseous infusion. Cadavers (n = 23) had an intraosseous needle inserted into four sites: distal radius, proximal humerus, distal femur, and distal tibia. Intraosseous saline was rapidly infused, venous optimization was measured using real-time ultrasound. Primary outcome was maximum vessel circumference increase with intraosseous infusion. Secondary outcomes were: time to maximum circumference, and infusion volume required. Statistical analyses included Levene's test for equality of variances, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and generalized estimating equation. Results: There was a significant mean increase of 1.03 cm (95% CI 0.86, 1.20), representing a difference of 102%. We found no significant difference in time to optimize vessel circumference across sites, but volume required significantly differed. Conclusion: GAHP quickly and effectively increased the circumference of anatomically adjacent veins. Anatomical sites did not differ on time to reach maximum enlargement of vessels following intraosseous infusion but did differ in terms of volume required to maximize vessel circumference. Further research is needed using live, hypotensive patients.

Validation of a Simulation-Based Resuscitation Curriculum for Maternal Cardiac Arrest.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the knowledge, skills, and self-efficacy of health care participants completing a simulation-based blended learning training curriculum on managing maternal medical emergencies and maternal cardiac arrest (Obstetric Life Support). METHODS: A formative assessment of the Obstetric Life Support curriculum was performed with a prehospital cohort comprising emergency medical services professionals and a hospital-based cohort comprising health care professionals who work primarily in hospital or urgent care settings and respond to maternal medical emergencies. The training consisted of self-guided precourse work and an instructor-led simulation course using a customized low-fidelity simulator. Baseline and postcourse assessments included multiple-choice cognitive test, self-efficacy questionnaire, and graded Megacode assessment of the team leader. Megacode scores and pass rates were analyzed descriptively. Pre- and post-self-confidence assessments were compared with an exact binomial test, and cognitive scores were compared with generalized linear mixed models. RESULTS: The training was offered to 88 participants between December 2019 and November 2021. Eighty-five participants consented to participation; 77 participants completed the training over eight sessions. At baseline, fewer than half of participants were able to achieve a passing score on the cognitive assessment as determined by the expert panel. After the course, mean cognitive assessment scores improved by 13 points, from 69.4% at baseline to 82.4% after the course (95% CI 10.9-15.1, P <.001). Megacode scores averaged 90.7±6.4%. The Megacode pass rate was 96.1%. There were significant improvements in participant self-efficacy, and the majority of participants (92.6%) agreed or strongly agreed that the course met its educational objectives. CONCLUSION: After completing a simulation-based blended learning program focused on managing maternal cardiac arrest using a customized low-fidelity simulator, most participants achieved a defensible passing Megacode score and significantly improved their knowledge, skills, and self-efficacy.

Comparison Between a Color-only Method and a Food and Drug Administration-approved Validation Method for a Pediatric Color-coded Syringe Using Midazolam: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the use of a color-only method syringe for accuracy and timeliness when administrating midazolam. This method was compared with a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved validation method. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, crossover trial was conducted to compare the dosing accuracy and timeliness of the color-only syringe method versus the validation method. Twenty-five participants prepared pediatric midazolam doses according to their preferred method, a FDA-approved validation method, and a color-only method. Primary endpoints included dosing accuracy and time to medication administration. RESULTS: The preferred 3-kg calculations had a median margin of error of 5.6% and a median time to completion of 55.6 seconds. The color-only method took less time to complete than the validation method (median time: 29.5 seconds vs 58.2 seconds). There was no statistically significant difference in errors between the color-only method and the validation method. None of the participants reported a mistake using the color-only method, whereas 25% (5/20) reported a mistake using the validation method. Only 20% (4/20) of participants believed that the validation method found or eliminated any mistakes. There were 8 medication errors identified when participants used the method of choice, 4 with the validation method, and 1 with the color-only method. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in dosing errors between the FDA-approved validation method and the color-only method. Use of a color-only method did reduced time to medication administration when compared with a preferred method and an FDA-approved validation method.

Prospective Randomized Trial of Standard Left Anterolateral Thoracotomy Versus Modified Bilateral Clamshell Thoracotomy Performed by Emergency Physicians.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Resuscitative thoracotomy is a time-sensitive, lifesaving procedure that may be performed by emergency physicians. The left anterolateral thoracotomy (LAT) is the standard technique commonly used in the United States to gain rapid access to critical intrathoracic structures. However, the smaller incision and subsequent limited exposure may not be optimal for the nonsurgical specialist to complete time-sensitive interventions. The modified bilateral anterior clamshell thoracotomy (MCT) developed by Barts Health NHS Trust clinicians at London's Air Ambulance overcomes these inherent difficulties, maximizes thoracic cavity visualization, and may be the ideal technique for the nonsurgical specialist. The aim of this study is to identify the optimal technique for the nonsurgical-specialist-performed resuscitative thoracotomy. Secondary aims of the study are to identify technical difficulties, procedural concerns, and physician preferences. METHODS: Emergency medicine staff and senior resident physicians were recruited from an academic Level I trauma center. Subjects underwent novel standardized didactic and skills-specific training on both the MCT and LAT techniques. Later, subjects were randomized to the order of intervention and performed both techniques on separate fresh, nonfrozen human cadaver specimens. Success was determined by a board-certified surgeon and defined as complete delivery of the heart from the pericardial sac and subsequent 100% occlusion of the descending thoracic aorta with a vascular clamp. The primary outcome was time to successful completion of the resuscitative thoracotomy technique. Secondary outcomes included successful exposure of the heart, successful descending thoracic aortic cross clamping, successful procedural completion, time to exposure of the heart, time to descending thoracic aortic cross-clamp placement, number and type of iatrogenic injuries, correct anatomic structure identification, and poststudy participant questionnaire. RESULTS: Sixteen emergency physicians were recruited; 15 met inclusion criteria. All participants were either emergency medicine resident (47%) or emergency medicine staff (53%). The median number of previously performed training LATs was 12 (interquartile range 6 to 15) and the median number of previously performed MCTs was 1 (interquartile range 1 to 1). The success rates of our study population for the MCT and LAT techniques were not statistically different (67% versus 40%; difference 27%; 95% confidence interval -61% to 8%). However, staff emergency physicians were significantly more successful with the MCT compared with the LAT (88% versus 25%; difference 63%; 95% CI 9% to 92%). Overall, the MCT also had a significantly higher proportion of injury-free trials compared with the LAT technique (33% versus 0%; difference 33%; 95% CI 57% to 9%). Physician procedure preference favored the MCT over the LAT (87% versus 13%; difference 74%; 95% CI 23% to 97%). CONCLUSION: Resuscitative thoracotomy success rates were lower than expected in this capable subject population. Success rates and procedural time for the MCT and LAT were similar. However, the MCT had a higher success rate when performed by staff emergency physicians, resulted in less periprocedural iatrogenic injuries, and was the preferred technique by most subjects. The MCT is a potentially feasible alternative resuscitative thoracotomy technique that requires further investigation.

Prehospital Battlefield Casualty Intervention Decision Cognitive Study.

INTRODUCTION: Airway compromise is the third most common cause of preventable battlefield death. Surgical cricothyroidotomy (SC) is recommended by Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) guidelines when basic airway maneuvers fail. This is a descriptive analysis of the decision-making process of prehospital emergency providers to perform certain airway interventions. METHODS: We conducted a scenario-based survey using two sequential video clips of an explosive injury event. The answers were used to conduct descriptive analyses and multivariable logistic regression models to estimate the association between the choice of intervention and training factors. RESULTS: There were 254 respondents in the survey, 176 (69%) of them were civilians and 78 (31%) were military personnel. Military providers were more likely to complete TCCC certification (odds ratio [OR]: 13.1; confidence interval [CI]: 6.4-26.6; P-value < 0.001). The SC was the most frequently chosen intervention after each clip (29.92% and 22.10%, respectively). TCCC-certified providers were more likely to choose SC after viewing the two clips (OR: 1.9; CI: 1.2-3.2; P-value: 0.009), even after controlling for relevant factors (OR: 2.3; CI: 1.1-4.8; P-value: 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: Military providers had a greater propensity to be certified in TCCC, which was found to increase their likelihood to choose the SC in early prehospital emergency airway management.

Cardiac case study. 50-year-old male with chest pressure.

This case study represented a patient with a relatively uncomplicated myocardial infarction that, after prompt prehospital care and transport, was successfully halted in the emergency department with fibrinolytic therapy. This patient was provided excellent care in the prehospital setting because the paramedic and his EMT-B partner worked together effectively as a team. Although ECG monitoring, IV therapy and medication administration are beyond the usual scope of practice of an EMTB, many EMS systems are training their EMT-Bs to assist with these important procedures and interventions. This involves preparing IV equipment and supplies, applying the cardiac monitor, and recognizing and handling the various paramedic medications. This enhanced role of the EMT-B allows the paramedic to perform a more focused and careful patient assessment. A cohesive working relationship between BLS and ALS personnel is absolutely crucial to the outcome of the patient. Although each level of prehospital provider possesses a different knowledge of pathophysiology and patient management, it is the combined contributions and efforts of each provider that will afford patients the high quality of care they deserve.

Newborn resuscitation.

Assessment and management of the newborn is a very rapid sequence of events. Unlike adult resuscitation, where the goal is to "restore" the breathing and perfusion that they once had, the goal of resuscitating a newborn is to "initiate" effective breathing and perfusion. It is of paramount importance for prehospital care providers to be prepared to handle these critical cases in an expedient manner. The vast majority of newborns breathe spontaneously at delivery or very shortly thereafter, with little intervention required by EMS; however, EMS providers should always be mentally and physically prepared to assist a struggling newborn.