Prehospital use of a modified HEART Pathway and point-of-care troponin to predict cardiovascular events.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02709135).

Prehospital Modified HEART Score Predictive of 30-Day Adverse Cardiac Events.

Introduction The History, Electrocardiogram (ECG), Age, Risk Factors, and Troponin (HEART) score is a decision aid designed to risk stratify emergency department (ED) patients with acute chest pain. It has been validated for ED use, but it has yet to be evaluated in a prehospital setting. Hypothesis A prehospital modified HEART score can predict major adverse cardiac events (MACE) among undifferentiated chest pain patients transported to the ED. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients with chest pain transported by two county-based Emergency Medical Service (EMS) agencies to a tertiary care center was conducted. Adults without ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were included. Inter-facility transfers and those without a prehospital 12-lead ECG or an ED troponin measurement were excluded. Modified HEART scores were calculated by study investigators using a standardized data collection tool for each patient. All MACE (death, myocardial infarction [MI], or coronary revascularization) were determined by record review at 30 days. The sensitivity and negative predictive values (NPVs) for MACE at 30 days were calculated. RESULTS: Over the study period, 794 patients met inclusion criteria. A MACE at 30 days was present in 10.7% (85/794) of patients with 12 deaths (1.5%), 66 MIs (8.3%), and 12 coronary revascularizations without MI (1.5%). The modified HEART score identified 33.2% (264/794) of patients as low risk. Among low-risk patients, 1.9% (5/264) had MACE (two MIs and three revascularizations without MI). The sensitivity and NPV for 30-day MACE was 94.1% (95% CI, 86.8-98.1) and 98.1% (95% CI, 95.6-99.4), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital modified HEART scores have a high NPV for MACE at 30 days. A study in which prehospital providers prospectively apply this decision aid is warranted. Stopyra JP , Harper WS , Higgins TJ , Prokesova JV , Winslow JE , Nelson RD , Alson RL , Davis CA , Russell GB , Miller CD , Mahler SA . Prehospital modified HEART score predictive of 30-day adverse cardiac events. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(1):58-62.

Medical Provider Ballistic Protection at Active Shooter Events.

There is some controversy about whether ballistic protective equipment (body armor) is required for medical responders who may be called to respond to active shooter mass casualty incidents. In this article, we describe the ongoing evolution of recommendations to optimize medical care to injured victims at such an incident. We propose that body armor is not mandatory for medical responders participating in a rapid-response capacity, in keeping with the Hartford Consensus and Arlington Rescue Task Force models. However, we acknowledge that the development and implementation of these programs may benefit from the availability of such equipment as one component of risk mitigation. Many police agencies regularly retire body armor on a defined time schedule before the end of its effective service life. Coordination with law enforcement may allow such retired body armor to be available to other public safety agencies, such as fire and emergency medical services, providing some degree of ballistic protection to medical responders at little or no cost during the rare mass casualty incident. To provide visual demonstration of this concept, we tested three "retired" ballistic vests with ages ranging from 6 to 27 years. The vests were shot at close range using police-issue 9mm, .40 caliber, .45 caliber, and 12-gauge shotgun rounds. Photographs demonstrate that the vests maintained their ballistic protection and defeated all of these rounds.

North Carolina College of Emergency Physicians' Guidance Document on Emergency Medical Services.

The North Carolina College of Emergency Physicians (NCCEP) Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Committee uses an evidence-based approach in writing its protocols and procedures. The most recent revision of the NCCEP document, which was started in late 2010, lasted for more than 1 year and utilized committee members from across the state. Four meetings were held at locations across North Carolina. In addition, 2 surveys were sent to get input from EMS providers. Since 2010, the document has been updated on an ongoing basis, aligning it with the latest evidence-based medicine.

Deployable, portable, and temporary hospitals; one state's experiences through the years.

This article will review the use of temporary hospitals to augment the healthcare system as one solution for dealing with a surge of patients related to war, pandemic disease outbreaks, or natural disaster. The experiences highlighted in this article are those of North Carolina (NC) over the past 150 years, with a special focus on the need following the September 11, 2001 (9/11) attacks. It will also discuss the development of a temporary hospital system from concept to deployment, highlight recent developments, emphasize the need to learn from past experiences, and offer potential solutions for assuring program sustainability. Historically, when a particular situation called for a temporary hospital, one was created, but it was usually specific for the event and then dismantled. As with the case with many historical events, the details of the 9/11 attacks will fade into memory, and there is a concern that the impetus which created the current temporary hospital program may fade, as well. By developing a broader and more comprehensive approach to disaster responses through all-hazards preparedness, it is reasonable to learn from these past experiences, improve the understanding of current threats, and develop a long-term strategy to sustain these resources for future disaster medical needs.

Disaster planning: the past, present, and future concepts and principles of managing a surge of burn injured patients for those involved in hospital facility planning and preparedness.

The 9/11 attacks reframed the narrative regarding disaster medicine. Bypass strategies have been replaced with absorption strategies and are more specifically described as "surge capacity." In the succeeding years, a consensus has coalesced around stratifying the surge capacity into three distinct tiers: conventional, contingency, and crisis surge capacities. For the purpose of this work, these three distinct tiers were adapted specifically to burn surge for disaster planning activities at hospitals where burn centers are not located. A review was conducted involving published plans, other related academic works, and findings from actual disasters as well as modeling. The aim was to create burn-specific definitions for surge capacity for hospitals where a burn center is not located. The three-tier consensus description of surge capacity is delineated in their respective stratifications by what will hereinafter be referred to as the three "S's"; staff, space, and supplies (also referred to as supplies, pharmaceuticals, and equipment). This effort also included the creation of a checklist for nonburn center hospitals to assist in their development of a burn surge plan. Patients with serious burn injuries should always be moved to and managed at burn centers, but during a medical disaster with significant numbers of burn injured patients, there may be impediments to meeting this goal. It may be necessary for burn injured patients to remain for hours in an outlying hospital until being moved to a burn center. This work was aimed at aiding local and regional hospitals in developing an extemporizing measure until their burn injured patients can be moved to and managed at a burn center(s).

Thoracic compression fractures as a result of shock from a conducted energy weapon: a case report.

The Taser is an electrical conducted energy weapon used by law enforcement officers throughout the United States and the world. Though generally regarded as safe, conducted energy weapons can produce injuries. In this case report we describe for the first time thoracic spine compression fractures resulting from a conducted energy weapon discharge. Physicians who may care for patients who have been exposed to a conducted energy weapon discharge should be aware of this as a possible complication.