Evidence-Based Guidelines for Prehospital Pain Management: Recommendations.

This project sought to develop evidence-based guidelines for the administration of analgesics for moderate to severe pain by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) clinicians based on a separate, previously published, systematic review of the comparative effectiveness of analgesics in the prehospital setting prepared by the University of Connecticut Evidence-Based Practice Center for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). A technical expert panel (TEP) was assembled consisting of subject matter experts in prehospital and emergency care, and the development of evidence-based guidelines and patient care guidelines. A series of nine "patient/population-intervention-comparison-outcome" (PICO) questions were developed based on the Key Questions identified in the AHRQ systematic review, and an additional PICO question was developed to specifically address analgesia in pediatric patients. The panel made a strong recommendation for the use of intranasal fentanyl over intravenous (IV) opioids for pediatric patients without intravenous access given the supporting evidence, its effectiveness, ease of administration, and acceptance by patients and providers. The panel made a conditional recommendation for the use of IV non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) over IV acetaminophen (APAP). The panel made conditional recommendations for the use of either IV ketamine or IV opioids; for either IV NSAIDs or IV opioids; for either IV fentanyl or IV morphine; and for either IV ketamine or IV NSAIDs. A conditional recommendation was made for IV APAP over IV opioids. The panel made a conditional recommendation against the use of weight-based IV ketamine in combination with weight-based IV opioids versus weight-based IV opioids alone. The panel considered the use of oral analgesics and a conditional recommendation was made for either oral APAP or oral NSAIDs when the oral route of administration was preferred. Given the lack of a supporting evidence base, the panel was unable to make recommendations for the use of nitrous oxide versus IV opioids, or for IV ketamine in combination with IV opioids versus IV ketamine alone. Taken together, the recommendations emphasize that EMS medical directors and EMS clinicians have a variety of effective options for the management of moderate to severe pain in addition to opioids when designing patient care guidelines and caring for patients suffering from acute pain.

Evidence-Based Guidelines for Prehospital Pain Management: Literature and Methods.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency Medical Services (EMS) clinicians commonly encounter patients with acute pain. A new set of evidence-based guidelines (EBG) was developed to assist in the prehospital management of pain. Our objective was to describe the methods used to develop these evidence-based guidelines for prehospital pain management. METHODS: The EBG development process was supported by a previous systematic review conducted by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) covering nine different population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) questions. A technical expert panel (TEP) was formed and added an additional pediatric-specific PICO question. Identified evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework and tabulated into Summary of Findings tables. The TEP then utilized a rigorous systematic method, including the PanelVoice function, for recommendation development which was applied to generate Evidence to Decision Tables (EtD). This process involved review of the Summary of Findings tables, asynchronous member judging, and facilitated panel discussion to generate final consensus-based recommendations. RESULTS: The work product described above was completed by the TEP panel from September 2020 to April 2021. For these recommendations, the overall certainty of evidence was very low or low, data for decisions on cost effectiveness and equity were lacking, and feasibility was rated well across all categories. Based on the evidence, one strong and seven conditional recommendations were made, with two PICO questions lacking sufficient evidence to generate a recommendation. CONCLUSION: We describe a protocol that leveraged established EBG development techniques, the GRADE framework in conjunction with a previous AHRQ systematic review to develop treatment recommendations for prehospital pain management. This process allowed for mitigation of many confounders due to the use of virtual and electronic communication. Our approach may inform future guideline development and increase transparency in the prehospital recommendations development processes.

Prehospital Trauma Airway Management: An NAEMSP Position Statement and Resource Document.

Definitive management of trauma is not possible in the out-of-hospital environment. Rapid treatment and transport of trauma casualties to a trauma center are vital to improve survival and outcomes. Prioritization and management of airway, oxygenation, ventilation, protection from gross aspiration, and physiologic optimization must be balanced against timely patient delivery to definitive care. The optimal prehospital airway management strategy for trauma has not been clearly defined; the best choice should be patient-specific. NAEMSP recommends:The approach to airway management and the choice of airway interventions in a trauma patient requires an iterative, individualized assessment that considers patient, clinician, and environmental factors.Optimal trauma airway management should focus on meeting the goals of adequate oxygenation and ventilation rather than on specific interventions. Emergency medical services (EMS) clinicians should perform frequent reassessments to determine if there is a need to escalate from basic to advanced airway interventions.Management of immediately life-threatening injuries should take priority over advanced airway insertion.Drug-assisted airway management should be considered within a comprehensive algorithm incorporating failed airway options and balanced management of pain, agitation, and delirium.EMS medical directors must be highly engaged in assuring clinician competence in trauma airway assessment, management, and interventions.

Characteristics and Experiences of Women Physicians and Professionals in NAEMSP.

Introduction: One of the six guiding principles of the EMS Agenda 2050 is to foster a socially equitable care delivery system. A specific recommendation within this principle is that "local EMS leadership, educators and clinicians [should] reflect the diversity of their communities." Research has shown that women comprise a minority of emergency medicine services (EMS) field clinicians. In academic settings, women are represented at lower rates among experienced EMS faculty than within Emergency Medicine clinicians or faculty at large. The reasons for these differences are also unknown. Little data exist describing the number or experience of female physicians and professionals in EMS.Purpose: Our objective was to describe the composition and experiences of EMS physicians, researchers and professionals who participate in the Women in EMS group of the National Association of EMS Physicians (NAEMSP).Methods: We performed a cross-sectional, mixed-methods descriptive study of women belonging to the Women in EMS Committee of NAEMSP. A survey was sent to the 143 members of this group using a list-serve, and the data was collected in Redcap.Results: Seventy-four people completed the survey. Respondents were 96% female, 82% Caucasian, 11% underrepresented minorities (URM), and 7% LGBTQI. Of the 88% that are physicians, 78% are board certified in Emergency Medicine, compared to 55% in EMS. Forty-eight percent reported they received some form of mentorship. Among these respondents, a minority reported female mentorship, which was usually from a remote rather than local mentor (41% vs. 15%). Eighty-three percent of respondents had experienced some form of discrimination or harassment in their career, but only 68% reported their workplace culture discourages such behavior. Thirty-three percent of respondents report receiving unequal recognition because of gender. Thematic evaluation of the qualitative responses showed that respondents felt there were fewer barriers to mentorship and professional advancement opportunities in local work versus national engagement.Conclusions: In a survey evaluating representation of female professionals in EMS, participants reported on their career representations, and experiences of gender-based inequity within their EMS career settings. Several opportunities exist to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion for women in EMS based on our findings.

Appropriate Air Medical Services Utilization and Recommendations for Integration of Air Medical Services Resources into the EMS System of Care: A Joint Position Statement and Resource Document of NAEMSP, ACEP, and AMPA.

This update to the 2013 joint position statement, Appropriate and Safe Utilization of Helicopter Emergency Medical Services, provides guidance for air medical services utilization based on currently available evidence. Air medical services utilization considerations fall into three major categories: clinical considerations, safety considerations, and system integration and quality assurance.Clinically, air medical services should accomplish one or more of three primary patient-centered goals: initiation or continuation of locally unavailable advanced or specialty care; expedited delivery to definitive care for time-sensitive interventions; and/or extraction from physically remote or otherwise inaccessible locations that limit timely access to necessary care. Ground-EMS (GEMS) transport is preferred when it is able to provide the necessary level of care and timely transport to definitive care.Risk identification and safety of both the patient and crew must be uniformly balanced against the anticipated degree of patient medical benefit. While auto-ready and auto-launch practices may increase access to air medical services, they also risk over-use, and so must be rigorously reviewed. Safety is enhanced during multi-agency emergency responses by coordinated interagency communication, ideally through centralized communication centers. Helicopter shopping and reverse helicopter shopping both create significant safety risks and their use is discouraged.Regional EMS systems must integrate air medical services to facilitate appropriate utilization in alignment with the primary patient goals while being cognizant of local indications, resources, and needs. To maximize consistent, informed air medical services utilization decisions, specific indications for and limitations to air medical services utilization that align with local and regional system and patient needs should be identified, and requests routed through centralized coordinating centers supported by EMS physicians.To limit risk and promote appropriate utilization of air medical services, GEMS clinicians should be encouraged to cancel an air medical services response if it is not aligned with at least one of the three primary patient-centered goals. Similarly, air medical services clinicians should be empowered to redirect patient transport to GEMS. Air medical services should not routinely be used solely to allow GEMS to remain in their primary service area.

The Role of Emergency Medical Services in the Opioid Epidemic.

The opioid crisis is an ongoing public health concern and EMS agencies are in a critical position to reach at-risk populations. The traditional role of EMS in treating acute opioid overdoses has expanded to include preventative strategies as well as long-term treatment and recovery options. EMS agencies are uniquely positioned to partner with local community resources and hospitals to combine efforts in implementing harm-reduction strategies.

National Assessment of Quality Programs in Emergency Medical Services.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to understand the adoption of clinical quality measurement throughout the United States on an EMS agency level, the features of agencies that do participate in quality measurement, and the level of physician involvement. It also aims to barriers to implementing quality improvement initiatives in EMS. METHODS: A 46-question survey was developed to gather agency level data on current quality improvement practices and measurement. The survey was distributed nationally via State EMS Offices to EMS agencies nation-wide using Surveymonkey©. A convenience sample of respondents was enrolled between August and November, 2015. Univariate, bivariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to describe demographics and relationships between outcomes of interest and their covariates using SAS 9.3©. RESULTS: A total of 1,733 surveys were initiated and 1,060 surveys had complete or near-complete responses. This includes agencies from 45 states representing over 6.23 million 9-1-1 responses annually. Totals of 70.5% (747) agencies reported dedicated QI personnel, 62.5% (663) follow clinical metrics and 33.3% (353) participate in outside quality or research program. Medical director hours varied, notably, 61.5% (649) of EMS agencies had <5 hours of medical director time per month. Presence of medical director time was correlated with tracking of QI measures. Air medical [OR 9.64 (1.13, 82.16)] and hospital-based EMS agencies [OR 2.49 (1.36, 4.59)] were more likely to track quality measures compared to fire-based agencies. Agencies in rural only environments were less likely to follow clinical quality metrics. (OR 0.47 CI 0.31 -0.72 p < 0.0004). For those that track QI measures, the most common are; Response Time (Emergency) (68.3%), On-Scene Time (66.4%), prehospital stroke screen (64.6%), aspirin administration (64.5%), and 12 lead ECG in chest pain patients (63.0%). CONCLUSIONS: EMS agencies in the United States have significant practice variability with regard to quality improvement resources, medical direction and specific clinical quality measures. More research is needed to understand the impact of this variation on patient care outcomes.

Appropriate and safe utilization of helicopter emergency medical services: a joint position statement with resource document.

This position statement with accompanying resource document is the result of a collaborative effort of a writing group comprised of members of the Air Medical Physician Association (AMPA), the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), the National Association of EMS Physicians (NAEMSP), and the American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM). This document has been jointly approved by the boards of all four organizations. Patients benefit from the appropriate utilization of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS). EMS and regional health care systems must have and follow guidelines for HEMS utilization to facilitate proper patient selection and ensure clinical benefit. Clinical benefit can be provided by Meaningfully shortening the time to delivery of definitive care to patients with time-sensitive medical conditions Providing necessary specialized medical expertise or equipment to patients before and/or during transport Providing transport to patients inaccessible by other means of transport The decision to use HEMS is a medical decision, separate from the aviation determination whether a transport can be completed safely. Physicians with specialized training and experience in EMS and air medical transport must be integral to HEMS utilization decisions, including guideline development and quality improvement activities. Safety management systems must be developed, adopted, and adhered to by air medical operators when making decisions to accept and continue every HEMS transport. HEMS must be fully integrated within the local, regional, and state emergency health care systems. HEMS programs cannot operate independently of the surrounding health care environment. The EMS and health care systems must be involved in the determination of the number of HEMS assets necessary to provide appropriate coverage for their region. Excessive resources may lead to competitive practices that can affect utilization and negatively impact safety. Inadequate resources will delay receipt of definitive care. National guidelines for appropriate utilization of HEMS must be developed. These guidelines should be national in scope yet allow local, regional, and state implementation. A National HEMS Agenda for the Future should be developed to address HEMS utilization and availability and to identify and support a research strategy for ongoing, evidence-based refinement of utilization guidelines.

Microsimulation of financial impact of demand surge on hospitals: the H1N1 influenza pandemic of fall 2009.

OBJECTIVE: Microsimulation was used to assess the financial impact on hospitals of a surge in influenza admissions in advance of the H1N1 pandemic in the fall of 2009. The goal was to estimate net income and losses (nationally, and by hospital type) of a response of filling unused hospital bed capacity proportionately and postponing elective admissions (a "passive" supply response). METHODS: Epidemiologic assumptions were combined with assumptions from other literature (e.g., staff absenteeism, profitability by payer class), Census data on age groups by region, and baseline hospital utilization data. Hospital discharge records were available from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Hospital bed capacity and staffing were measured with the American Hospital Association's (AHA) Annual Survey. RESULTS: Nationwide, in a scenario of relatively severe epidemiologic assumptions, we estimated aggregate net income of $119 million for about 1 million additional influenza-related admissions, and a net loss of $37 million for 52,000 postponed elective admissions. IMPLICATIONS: Aggregate and distributional results did not suggest that a policy of promising additional financial compensation to hospitals in anticipation of the surge in flu cases was necessary. The analysis identified needs for better information of several types to improve simulations of hospital behavior and impacts during demand surges.

Enhancing systems to improve the management of acute, unscheduled care.

For acutely ill patients, health care services are available in many different settings, including hospital-based emergency departments (EDs), retail clinics, federally qualified health centers, and outpatient clinics. Certain conditions are the sole domain of particular settings: stabilization of critically ill patients can typically only be provided in EDs. By contrast, many conditions that do not require hospital resources, such as advanced radiography, admission, and same-day consultation can often be managed in clinic settings. Because clinics are generally not open nights, and often not on weekends or holidays, the ED remains the only option for face-to-face medical care during these times. For patients who can be managed in either setting, there are many open research questions about which is the best setting, because these venues differ in terms of access, costs of care, and potentially, quality. Consideration of these patients must be risk-adjusted, as patients may self-select a venue for care based upon perceived acuity. We present a research agenda for acute, unscheduled care in the United States developed in conjunction with an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-funded conference hosted by the American College of Emergency Physicians in October 2009, titled "Improving the Quality and Efficiency of Emergency Care Across the Continuum: A Systems Approach." Given the possible increase in ED utilization over the next several years as more people become insured, understanding differences in cost, quality, and access for conditions that may be treated in EDs or clinic settings will be vital in guiding national health policy.

The effect of performance incentives on resident documentation in an emergency medicine residency program.

We sought to improve resident chart documentation in an academic emergency department using an incentive. A stipend for educational expenses was offered to residents for documenting charts above specific threshold Evaluation & Management (E&M) levels. Comparisons were made with historical levels. Twenty-two residents participated over 4 months (70% received the stipend). Documentation levels increased significantly from 2.86 and 3.04 during historical controls to 3.31 during the study period (p < 0.05). Fifty-six percent of charts were documented at 99284 or 99285 during the study period compared to 39% and 23% in the control periods (p < 0.05). Three months after the plan (with no incentives), documentation continued to improve, with 59% documented at 99284 or 99285. Mean collection per patient was $48.05 for the study period and $42.36 and $35.86 for the historical periods (p < 0.05). Implementation of a resident incentive program to enhance chart documentation may considerably improve documentation and resident education in proper chart documentation.

Documentation and coding education in emergency medicine residency programs: a national survey of residents and program directors.

PURPOSES: To assess attitudes and practices of documentation and coding education for emergency medicine residents (EMRs). METHODS: Questions regarding documentation teaching methods were formulated into online surveys for program directors (PDs) and EMRs. RESULTS: Fifty-three of 104 PDs and 446 of 576 EMRs who received the survey completed it. Although 93% of EMRs and 63% of PDs believe proper chart documentation is an important skill, only 18% of EMRs and 25% of PDs believe their program's teaching was adequate. Eleven percent of EMRs reported that they were comfortable with their knowledge of documentation. EMRs who received formal lectures and feedback reported higher comfort levels with their knowledge of documentation (3.3 ± 1.1 vs. 4.5 ± 1.4, p < 0.05) than those who did not receive formal lectures and feedback. CONCLUSIONS: Although most physicians who were surveyed agreed that documentation and coding is a vital skill, many EMRs and PDs report inadequate instruction. Resident education may benefit from broader implementation of formal lectures and formal feedback on documentation and coding skills.

The prehospital 12-lead electrocardiogram: impact on management of the out-of-hospital acute coronary syndrome patient.

The electrocardiogram (ECG), when applied in the prehospital setting, has a significant effect on the patient with chest pain. The potential effect on the patient includes both diagnostic and therapeutic issues, including the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and the indication for thrombolysis. The prehospital ECG may also detect an ischemic change that has resolved with treatment delivered by emergency medical services (EMS) prior to the patient's arrival in the emergency department (ED). Perhaps the most significant issue in the management of chest-pain patients involves the effect of the out-of-hospital ECG on the ED-based delivery of reperfusion therapy, such as thrombolysis. In AMI patients with ST-segment elevations, it has been conclusively demonstrated that information obtained from the prehospital ECG reduces the time to hospital-based reperfusion treatment. Importantly, these benefits are encountered with little increase in EMS resource use or on-scene time.