RESUMO
Background: The use of cervical collars in adult patients with possible injuries to the cervical spine has been an accepted standard of care for many years, despite the absence of evidence for the efficacy of these devices in preventing unwanted movement and harm. Changes to the terminology and recommendations of major trauma guidelines have been made but are limited by low quality evidence. In this context, little is known about what practitioners know, believe, and do, when managing the cervical spine of trauma patients. Methods: In this quantitative, observational, descriptive, cross-sectional survey a specifically designed questionnaire was used to collect data on the knowledge, attitude, and practices of practitioners managing adult trauma patients regarding cervical collars at three hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Results: A total of 128 completed questionnaires were collected, captured, and analysed. Participants with the additional qualification of ATLS and DipPEC had a mean knowledge score of 8.1 (SD=1.70), compared to those with no additional qualification of 4.5 (SD=1.9) (p<0.001). Participants in the Emergency Department (ED) attained a mean knowledge score of 7.1 (SD=2.2) followed by Surgery (Mean=6, SD=2.0), Orthopaedics (Mean=5.5, SD=1.7) and ICU/Anaesthetics (Mean=4.4, SD=1.8), p<0.001. Head blocks only were most frequently used by 97.4 % of ED, 55.6 % of Surgery, 3.8 % Orthopaedic and 22.2 % ICU/Anaesthetics participants (p<0.001). Conclusion: The knowledge of management principles of cervical spine injuries was influenced by the department in which practitioners worked, the frequency that they managed patients with suspected injuries and additional courses. Head blocks were the most frequently used spinal protection device in all three hospitals. Most participants would be open to a change in practice if new guidelines were recommended. Further research is needed to determine the optimal management of patients with suspected cervical spine injuries and the role of motion restriction devices in limiting movement of the injured spine.
RESUMO
Background: The use of cervical collars in adult patients with possible injuries to the cervical spine has been an accepted standard of care for many years, despite the absence of evidence for the efficacy of these devices in preventing unwanted movement and harm. Changes to the terminology and recommendations of major trauma guidelines have been made but are limited by low quality evidence. In this context, little is known about what practitioners know, believe, and do, when managing the cervical spine of trauma patients. Methods: In this quantitative, observational, descriptive, cross-sectional survey a specifically designed questionnaire was used to collect data on the knowledge, attitude, and practices of practitioners managing adult trauma patients regarding cervical collars at three hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Results: A total of 128 completed questionnaires were collected, captured, and analysed. Participants with the additional qualification of ATLS and DipPEC had a mean knowledge score of 8.1 (SD=1.70), compared to those with no additional qualification of 4.5 (SD=1.9) (p<0.001). Participants in the Emergency Department (ED) attained a mean knowledge score of 7.1 (SD=2.2) followed by Surgery (Mean=6, SD=2.0), Orthopaedics (Mean=5.5, SD=1.7) and ICU/Anaesthetics (Mean=4.4, SD=1.8), p<0.001. Head blocks only were most frequently used by 97.4 % of ED, 55.6 % of Surgery, 3.8 % Orthopaedic and 22.2 % ICU/Anaesthetics participants (p<0.001). Conclusion: The knowledge of management principles of cervical spine injuries was influenced by the department in which practitioners worked, the frequency that they managed patients with suspected injuries and additional courses. Head blocks were the most frequently used spinal protection device in all three hospitals. Most participants would be open to a change in practice if new guidelines were recommended. Further research is needed to determine the optimal management of patients with suspected cervical spine injuries and the role of motion restriction devices in limiting movement of the injured spine.
Assuntos
Ferimentos e Lesões , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Equipamentos e ProvisõesRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The Covid-19 pandemic triggered unprecedented nationwide regulations aimed primarily at slowing the spread of the virus. The objective of this study was to describe the effect of these regulations on the number and severity of trauma presentations to a regional emergency department in Kwa-Zulu Natal. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of the triage register at Edendale Hospital Emergency Department was conducted, comparing all trauma presentations in the month of April 2020 with those from the preceding two years. The number of patients, mechanism of trauma and severity of illness were recorded and compared. RESULTS: A 47% reduction in the number of trauma cases was recorded for April 2020. The proportion of severe cases did not change. The categories showing a major decrease were motor vehicle accidents, pedestrian vehicle accidents, assault and gunshot wounds. The incidence of dog bite wounds and burns remained unchanged. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the burden of trauma presenting to the emergency department was decreased in the month of April 2020 by the regulations implemented in response to the Covid-19 pandemic.