RESUMO
Introduction: Situational awareness is essential during emergent procedures such as endotracheal intubation. Previous studies suggest that time distortion can occur during intubation. However, only in-hospital intubations performed by physicians have been studied. We aimed to determine whether time distortion affected paramedics performing intubation by examining the perceived vs actual total laryngoscopy time, defined as time elapsed from the laryngoscope blade entering the mouth until the endotracheal tube balloon passes the vocal cords. Methods: For this retrospective study we collected prehospital intubation data from a suburban, fire department-based emergency medical services (EMS) system from January 5, 2021-May 21, 2022. The perceived total laryngoscopy time was queried as a part of the electronic health record. Video laryngoscopy recordings were reviewed by a panel of experts to determine the actual time. Patients >18 years old who underwent intubation by paramedics with video laryngoscopy were included for analysis. The primary outcome was the difference between actual and perceived total laryngoscopy time. Secondary analysis examined the relationship between high time distortion, defined as the highest quartile of the primary outcome, and patient age, paramedic years of experience, perceived presence of difficult anatomy, excess secretions, use of rapid sequence intubation, and multiple intubation attempts. We conducted descriptive analysis followed by logistic regression analysis, chi-square tests, and Fisher exact tests when appropriate. Results: A total of 122 intubations were collected for analysis, and 10 were excluded due to lack of video recording. Final analysis included 112 intubations. Mean actual laryngoscopy time was 50.0 seconds (s) (95% confidence interval [CI] 43.7-56.3). Mean perceived laryngoscopy time was 27.8 s (95% CI 24.7-31.0). The median difference between actual and perceived time was 18 s (interquartile range 6-30). We calculated high time distortion as having a difference greater than 30 s between actual and perceived laryngoscopy time. None of the secondary variables had statistically significant associations with high time distortion. Overall, we show that the paramedic's perception of total laryngoscopy time is significantly underestimated even when accounting for paramedic experience and perceived airway difficulty. Conclusion: This study suggests that time distortion may lead to an unrecognized prolonged procedure time. Limitations include use of a convenience sample, small sample size, and potential uncollected confounding variables.
Assuntos
Serviços Médicos de Emergência , Intubação Intratraqueal , Laringoscopia , Paramédico , Percepção do Tempo , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Competência Clínica , Auxiliares de Emergência/psicologia , Intubação Intratraqueal/métodos , Laringoscopia/métodos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Gravação em VídeoRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Emergency medical services (EMS) systems increasingly grapple with rising call volumes and workforce shortages, forcing systems to decide which responses may be delayed. Limited research has linked dispatch codes, on-scene findings, and emergency department (ED) outcomes. This study evaluated the association between dispatch categorizations and time-critical EMS responses defined by prehospital interventions and ED outcomes. Secondarily, we proposed a framework for identifying dispatch categorizations that are safe or unsafe to hold in queue. METHODS: This retrospective, multi-center analysis encompassed all 9-1-1 responses from 8 accredited EMS systems between 1/1/2021 and 06/30/2023, utilizing the Medical Priority Dispatch System (MPDS). Independent variables included MPDS Protocol numbers and Determinant levels. EMS treatments and ED diagnoses/dispositions were categorized as time-critical using a multi-round consensus survey. The primary outcome was the proportion of EMS responses categorized as time-critical. A non-parametric test for trend was used to assess the proportion of time-critical responses Determinant levels. Based on group consensus, Protocol/Determinant level combinations with at least 120 responses (â¼1 per week) were further categorized as safe to hold in queue (<1% time-critical intervention by EMS and <5% time-critical ED outcome) or unsafe to hold in queue (>10% time-critical intervention by EMS or >10% time-critical ED outcome). RESULTS: Of 1,715,612 EMS incidents, 6% (109,250) involved a time-critical EMS intervention. Among EMS transports with linked outcome data (543,883), 12% had time-critical ED outcomes. The proportion of time-critical EMS interventions increased with Determinant level (OMEGA: 1%, ECHO: 38%, p-trend < 0.01) as did time-critical ED outcomes (OMEGA: 3%, ECHO: 31%, p-trend < 0.01). Of 162 unique Protocols/Determinants with at least 120 uses, 30 met criteria for safe to hold in queue, accounting for 8% (142,067) of incidents. Meanwhile, 72 Protocols/Determinants met criteria for unsafe to hold, accounting for 52% (883,683) of incidents. Seven of 32 ALPHA level Protocols and 3/17 OMEGA level Protocols met the proposed criteria for unsafe to hold in queue. CONCLUSIONS: In general, Determinant levels aligned with time-critical responses; however, a notable minority of lower acuity Determinant level Protocols met criteria for unsafe to hold. This suggests a more nuanced approach to dispatch prioritization, considering both Protocol and Determinant level factors.
RESUMO
Early blood administration by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) to patients suffering from hemorrhagic shock improves outcomes. Prehospital blood programs represent an invaluable resuscitation capability that directly addresses hemorrhagic shock and mitigates subsequent multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Prehospital blood programs must be thoughtfully planned, have multiple safeguards, ensure adequate training and credentialing processes, and be responsible stewards of blood resources. According to the 2022 best practices model by Yazer et al, the four key pillars of a successful prehospital program include the following: (1) the rationale for the use and a description of blood products that can be transfused in the prehospital setting, (2) storage of blood products outside the hospital blood bank and how to move them to the patient in the prehospital setting, (3) prehospital transfusion criteria and administration personnel, and (4) documentation of prehospital transfusion and handover to the hospital team. This concepts paper describes our operational experience using these four pillars to make Maryland's inaugural prehospital ground-based low-titer O-positive whole blood program successful. These lessons learned may inform other EMS systems as they establish prehospital blood programs to help improve outcomes and enhance mass casualty response.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This study assesses the likelihood of clinical improvement and adverse events from EMS-administered diltiazem. Current prehospital protocols direct paramedics to administer diltiazem, a calcium channel blocker, to decrease the heart rate (HR) of symptomatic, hemodynamically stable patients with rapid atrial fibrillation. However, diltiazem can also cause systemic hypotension and bradycardia, which can precipitate end-organ injury.â¯. METHODS: To assess whether the rate control benefit of prehospital diltiazem outweighs the risk of adverse events, we conducted a retrospective chart review of all adult patients who received diltiazem from Maryland Advanced Life Support EMS clinicians between January 1, 2019, and March 31, 2022. Collected data included patient demographics, vital signs, diltiazem dose, transport times, administered medications, and procedures. The main outcomes were clinical improvement (HR <100 beats per minute or ≥20% decrease from the maximum HR) and adverse events (bradycardia or hypotension). Multivariable logistic regression was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: During the study period, 2396 patients received prehospital diltiazem and 94% of these patients (n = 2254) were included in the study. Overall, 1414 (63.8%) patients improved clinically, 604 (27.3%) patients achieved rate control as defined by a HR of <100 beats per minute, and 78 patients (3.5%) experienced an adverse event. Patients over the age of 50 were less likely to clinically improve with diltiazem administration. Adverse events were more likely in patients with systolic blood pressures (SBP) less than 140 mmHg, patients with maximum HR of less than 120 beats per minute, and patients who received nitroglycerin. CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital diltiazem is effective and safe for most patients. Adverse events are more likely in patients with baseline SBP less than 140 mmHg, HR less than 120 beats per minute, and concurrent nitroglycerin administration. Future opportunities for research include examining the relationship between adverse events and underlying etiology as well as investigating downstream outcomes.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: In an effort to improve sepsis outcomes the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) established a time sensitive sepsis management bundle as a core quality measure that includes blood culture collection, serum lactate collection, initiation of intravenous fluid administration, and initiation of broad-spectrum antibiotics. Few studies examine the effects of a prehospital sepsis alert protocol on decreasing time to complete CMS sepsis core measures. METHODS: This study was a retrospective cohort study of patients transported via EMS from December 1, 2018 to December 1, 2019 who met the criteria of the Maryland Statewide EMS sepsis protocol and compared outcomes between patients who activated a prehospital sepsis alert and patients who did not activate a prehospital sepsis alert. The Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services Systems developed a sepsis protocol that instructs EMS providers to notify the nearest appropriate facility with a sepsis alert if a patient 18 years of age and older is suspected of having an infection and also presents with at least two of the following: temperature >38 °C or <35.5 °C, a heart rate >100 beats per minute, a respiratory rate >25 breaths per minute or end-tidal carbon dioxide less than or equal to 32 mmHg, a systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg, or a point of care lactate reading greater than or equal to 4 mmol/L. RESULTS: Median time to achieve all four studied CMS sepsis core measures was 103 min [IQR 61-153] for patients who received a prehospital sepsis alert and 106.5 min [IQR 75-189] for patients who did not receive a prehospital sepsis alert (p-value 0.105). Median time to completion was shorter for serum lactate collection (28 min. vs 35 min., p-value 0.019), blood culture collection (28 min. vs 38 min., p-value <0.01), and intravenous fluid administration (54 min. vs 61 min., p-value 0.025) but was not significantly different for antibiotic administration (94 min. vs 103 min., p-value 0.12) among patients who triggered a sepsis alert. CONCLUSION: This study questions the effectiveness of prehospital sepsis alert protocols on decreasing time to complete CMS sepsis core measures. Future studies should address if these times can be impacted by having EMS providers independently administer antibiotics.
Assuntos
Serviços Médicos de Emergência , Sepse , Humanos , Idoso , Estados Unidos , Adolescente , Adulto , Estudos Retrospectivos , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S. , Medicare , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/métodos , Sepse/terapia , Sepse/tratamento farmacológico , Ácido Láctico , Antibacterianos/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) is an advanced therapy typically managed by physicians and respiratory therapists in order to increase arterial oxygenation and decrease pulmonary arterial pressure. The Johns Hopkins Lifeline Critical Care Transportation Program (Lifeline) initiated a novel nurse-managed iNO protocol in order to optimize the oxygenation of critically ill patients during interfacility transport. This study was a retrospective chart review of adverse events associated with iNO initiation or continuation by Lifeline on patients transported from March 1, 2020, to August 1, 2022. Basic demographic data and adverse events were recorded. Recorded adverse events included hypotension defined as a mean arterial pressure (MAP) < 65â mmâ Hg, hypoxemia defined as a decrease of ≥ 10% arterial oxygenation saturation measured by pulse oximetry, new bradycardia or tachyarrhythmia, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels greater than 1.0 ppm, methemoglobinemia, and cardiac arrest. Fifteen patients were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection, of which one also had pulmonary emboli, 2 had bacterial pneumonia, 1 suffered cardiogenic shock from occlusive myocardial infarction and were on VA-ECMO, and 2 had significant thoracic trauma resulting in pulmonary contusions and hemopneumothorax. iNO was continued on 10 patients and initiated on 8 patients, 2 of whom were transitioned from inhaled epoprostenol. Hypotension occurred in 3 (16.7%) patients and one (5.56%) of the hypotensive patients subsequently went on to experience new atrial fibrillation with vasopressor titration. No patients developed worsening hypoxemia, elevated NO2 levels, methemoglobinemia, or suffered cardiac arrest. All 3 patients who experienced hypotension were already on vasopressor support and the hypotension resolved with medication titration. This study shows that iNO administration can be safely managed by appropriately trained nurses.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Hipotensão , Metemoglobinemia , Humanos , Óxido Nítrico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Metemoglobinemia/induzido quimicamente , Metemoglobinemia/tratamento farmacológico , Dióxido de Nitrogênio , Administração por Inalação , SARS-CoV-2 , Hipóxia/etiologia , Hipotensão/induzido quimicamente , Hipotensão/tratamento farmacológico , Cuidados CríticosRESUMO
Background: The specialty of emergency medical services (EMS) medicine focuses on providing out-of-hospital patient care, including initial stabilization, treatment, and transport in specially equipped vehicles including ambulances and airframe platforms to hospitals and better-resourced destinations. The Core Content of EMS Medicine outlines the knowledge, procedures, and psychomotor skills relevant to prehospital patient care. However, this document does not specify the high-consequence skills that are infrequently performed and that carry high levels of complexity as well as potential morbidity. We refer to these as high-acuity low-occurrence (HALO) skills. Additionally, there is no consensus definition of what meets the criteria for a HALO skill. The goals of this pilot study were twofold: (1) to determine a consensus definition for a HALO skill and (2) to survey EMS fellowship faculty to identify an initial set of EMS physician trainee skills that meet the HALO definition. Methods: Using a modified Delphi method, we established a consensus definition of a HALO skill as well as skills that met this definition for EMS physicians. Demographic information was collected from the experts. Results: There was 100% agreement in the definition provided of a HALO skill. No additional proposed definitions were provided. Thirteen HALO skills were suggested by the panel from the originally proposed 56 skills, requiring three rounds to establish consensus. Final skill domains emphasized by the expert panel include airway management, obstetric emergencies, and shock management. Conclusions: We present an initial consensus definition of a HALO skill and a recommended list of HALO skills for EMS physicians in training. Opportunity exists for further research to validate the definition and list of HALO skills through the sampling of a broader group of EMS physicians.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Administration of epinephrine has been associated with worse neurological outcomes for survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The publication of the 2018 PARAMEDIC-2 trial, a randomized and double-blind study of epinephrine in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, provides the strongest evidence to date that epinephrine increases return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) but not neurologically intact survival. This study aims to determine if Emergency Medical Services (EMS) cardiac arrest protocols have changed since the publication of PARAMEDIC-2. METHODS: States in the US utilizing mandatory or model state-wide EMS protocols, including Washington DC, were included in this study. The nontraumatic cardiac arrest protocol as of January 1, 2018 was compared to the protocol in effect on January 1, 2021 to determine if there was a change in the administration of epinephrine. Protocols were downloaded from the relevant state EMS website. If a protocol could not be obtained, the state medical director was contacted. RESULTS: A 2021 state-wide protocol was found for 32/51 (62.7%) states. Data from 2018 were available for 21/51 (41.2%) states. Of the 11 states without data from 2018, all follow Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) guidelines in the 2021 protocol. Five (15.6%) of the states with a state-wide protocol made a change in the cardiac arrest protocols. Maximum cumulative epinephrine dose was limited to 4mg in Maryland and 3mg in Vermont. Rhode Island changed epinephrine in shockable rhythms to be administered after three cycles of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and an anti-arrhythmic. Rhode Island also added an epinephrine infusion as an option. No states removed epinephrine administration from their cardiac arrest protocol. Simple statistical analysis was performed with Microsoft Excel. CONCLUSION: Several states have adjusted cardiac arrest protocols since 2018. The most frequent change was limiting the maximum cumulative dosage of epinephrine. One state changed timing of epinephrine dosing depending on the rhythm and also provided an option of an epinephrine infusion in place of bolus dosing. While the sample size is small, these changes may reflect the future direction of prehospital cardiac arrest protocols. Significant limitations apply, including the exclusion of local and regional protocols which are more capable of quickly adjusting to new research. Additionally, this study is only focused on EMS in the United States.
Assuntos
Serviços Médicos de Emergência , Epinefrina , Parada Cardíaca Extra-Hospitalar , Humanos , Suporte Vital Cardíaco Avançado , Reanimação Cardiopulmonar/métodos , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/métodos , Epinefrina/uso terapêutico , Parada Cardíaca Extra-Hospitalar/tratamento farmacológico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Estados UnidosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Ambulance patients who are unable to be quickly transferred to an emergency department (ED) bed represent a key contributing factor to ambulance offload delay (AOD). Emergency department crowding and associated AOD are exacerbated by multiple factors, including infectious disease outbreaks such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Initiatives to address AOD present an opportunity to streamline ambulance offload procedures while improving patient outcomes. STUDY OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the initial outcomes and impact of a novel Emergency Medical Service (EMS)-based Hospital Liaison Program (HLP) on ambulance offload times (AOTs). METHODS: Ambulance offload times associated with EMS patients transported to a community hospital six months before and after HLP implementation were retrospectively analyzed using proportional significance tests, t-tests, and multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: A proportional increase in incidents in the zero to <30 minutes time category after program implementation (+2.96%; P <.01) and a commensurate decrease in the proportion of incidents in the 30 to <60 minutes category (-2.65%; P <.01) were seen. The fully adjusted regression model showed AOT was 16.31% lower (P <.001) after HLP program implementation, holding all other variables constant. CONCLUSION: The HLP is an innovative initiative that constitutes a novel pathway for EMS and hospital systems to synergistically enhance ambulance offload procedures. The greatest effect was demonstrated in patients exhibiting potentially life-threatening symptoms, with a reduction of approximately three minutes. While small, this outcome was a statistically significant decrease from the pre-intervention period. Ultimately, the HLP represents an additional strategy to complement existing approaches to mitigate AOD.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Serviços Médicos de Emergência , Ambulâncias , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Hospitais , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
Background: Early during the COVID-19 pandemic, Emergency Medical Services (EMS) systems encountered many challenges that prompted crisis-level strategies. Maryland's statewide EMS system implemented the Viral Syndrome Pandemic Triage Protocol which contained a decision tool to help identify patients potentially safe for self-care at home. Objectives: This study assessed the effects of the Maryland Viral Syndrome Pandemic Triage Protocol and the safety of referring patients for self-care at home. Methods: This is a retrospective statewide analysis of EMS patients from March 19 thru September 4, 2020, who were not transported and had documentation of the Viral Syndrome Pandemic Triage Protocol's decision support tool completed, as well as a random sample of 150 patients who were not transported and did not have documentation of the decision tool. Descriptive statistics were performed as well as a two-stage multivariable logistic regression model for the outcomes of ED presentation within 24 hours and subsequent hospitalization. Results: 301 EMS patients were documented as triaged to home using the protocol and outcomes data were available for 282 (94%). 41(14.5%) patients presented to an ED within 24 hours and 14 (5% of 282) required inpatient hospitalization. Nine (3.2%) patients were subsequently hospitalized with a diagnosis of COVID-19 illness. Of those patients for whom the decision tool was not documented, 35 (23%) had an ED visit within 24 hours and 15 (10%) were hospitalized (p = 0.075). Multivariate logistic regression model results (N = 432) suggest that those with documentation of triage protocol use had some advantage over those patients without documentation. The 95% CIs of the estimated effect of Triage/No Triage protocol documented were wide and crossed the 1.0 limit but overall, all effects Odds Ratios and Adjust Odds Ratios were consistently over 1.0 with the lowest value of 1.3 and the highest value of 2.1. Conclusion: Most patients (95%) who were triaged to self-care at home with home documented decision support tool use did not require hospitalization within 24 hours following EMS encounter and this appears to be safe. Future opportunity exists to incorporate such tools into comprehensive pandemic preparedness strategies along with appropriate follow up and quality improvement mechanisms.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Serviços Médicos de Emergência , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Humanos , Pandemias , Estudos Retrospectivos , TriagemRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: There are limited data regarding the typical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients requiring interfacility transport or the clinical capabilities of the out-of-hospital transport clinicians required to provide safe transport. The objective of this study is to provide epidemiologic data and highlight the clinical skill set and decision making needed to transport critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of persons under investigation for COVID-19 transported during the first 6 months of the pandemic by Johns Hopkins Lifeline was performed. Patients who required interfacility transport and tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by polymerase chain reaction assay were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients (25.4%) required vasopressor support, 35 patients (13.1%) were pharmacologically paralyzed, 15 (5.60%) were prone, and 1 (0.75%) received an inhaled pulmonary vasodilator. At least 1 ventilator setting change occurred for 59 patients (22.0%), and ventilation mode was changed for 11 patients (4.10%) during transport. CONCLUSION: The safe transport of critically ill patients with COVID-19 requires experience with vasopressors, paralytic medications, inhaled vasodilators, prone positioning, and ventilator management. The frequency of initiated critical interventions and ventilator adjustments underscores the tenuous nature of these patients and highlights the importance of transport clinician reassessment, critical thinking, and decision making.
Assuntos
COVID-19/terapia , Competência Clínica , Tomada de Decisão Clínica/métodos , Cuidados Críticos/métodos , Transporte de Pacientes/métodos , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Terapia Combinada , Cuidados Críticos/normas , Cuidados Críticos/estatística & dados numéricos , Estado Terminal , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Maryland , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Gravidade do Paciente , Transferência de Pacientes/métodos , Transferência de Pacientes/normas , Transferência de Pacientes/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Transporte de Pacientes/normas , Transporte de Pacientes/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in the frequent transfer of critically ill patients, yet there is little information available to assist critical care transport programs in protecting their clinicians from disease exposure in this unique environment. The Lifeline Critical Care Transport Program has implemented several novel interventions to reduce the risk of staff exposure. METHODS: Several safety interventions were implemented at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. These initiatives included the deployment of a transport safety officer, a receiving clean team for select interfacility transports, and modifications in personal protective equipment. RESULTS: From February 29, 2020, to August 29, 2020, there were 1,041 transports of persons under investigation, 660 (63.4%) of whom were ultimately found to be COVID-19 positive. Approximately one third were ground transports, 11 (1.1%) were by air, and the remainder were intrahospital transports. There were 0 documented staff exposures or illnesses during the study period. CONCLUSION: The adaptation of these safety measures resulted in 0 staff exposures or illnesses while maintaining a high-volume, high-acuity critical care transport program. These interventions are the first of their kind to be implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic and offer a framework for other organizations and future disease outbreaks.
Assuntos
COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis/métodos , Serviços Médicos de Emergência , Pandemias , Gestão da Segurança/normas , Transporte de Pacientes , Baltimore/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Cuidados Críticos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , SARS-CoV-2 , Gestão da Segurança/métodos , Transporte de Pacientes/organização & administraçãoRESUMO
Background Sepsis is a medical emergency that requires prompt recognition and treatment. Multiple Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies across the United States have implemented sepsis protocols. In 2016, Maryland instituted its own state-wide EMS sepsis protocol which includes fluid resuscitation, vasopressor administration, and requires alerting the hospital of an incoming sepsis patient. Objective The purpose of this study was to quantify the perspectives of EMS medical directors in Maryland regarding prehospital sepsis care and to identify challenges encountered during the implementation of the statewide sepsis protocol. Methods A 17-question survey was sent to all 24 jurisdictional medical directors in the state of Maryland. Results A total of 14 (58%) medical directors responded, representing four of the five EMS regions in the state. More than half (57%) stated sepsis alerting was a priority in their jurisdiction; however, in a listing of eight initiatives, sepsis was the least prioritized. Most (64%) respondents believed their clinicians had adequate training on sepsis. A majority (79%) of medical directors surveyed felt that core measures of sepsis management would be beneficial. The potentially most helpful core measures were the volume of IV fluid administration (92%), true positive sepsis alerts (83%), and cases of failure to activate a sepsis alert (75%). Engagement of field personnel was rated as the biggest challenge for the implementation of a sepsis protocol in general, and lack of a thermometer on EMS units (50%) was the largest hurdle specifically in the 2016 statewide sepsis protocol. Surveyed medical directors (86%) believe the most difficult obstacle to overcome for EMS clinicians in the treatment of sepsis are nonspecific signs and symptoms. Conclusions Prehospital sepsis care was viewed to be important amongst the medical directors surveyed. However, significant challenges to implementation of a sepsis protocol and delivery of prehospital sepsis care are perceived by jurisdictional medical directors. Additional investment and dedication to sepsis care will advance prehospital sepsis treatment in Maryland.