Virtual reality simulation training in stroke thrombectomy centers with limited patient volume-Simulator performance and patient outcome.

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality simulation training may improve the technical skills of interventional radiologists when establishing endovascular thrombectomy at limited-volume stroke centers. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the technical thrombectomy performance of interventional radiologists improved after a defined virtual reality simulator training period. As part of the quality surveillance of clinical practice, we also assessed patient outcomes and thrombectomy quality indicators at the participating centers. METHODS: Interventional radiologists and radiology residents from three thrombectomy-capable stroke centers participated in a five months thrombectomy skill-training curriculum on a virtual reality simulator. The simulator automatically registered procedure time, the number of predefined steps that were correctly executed, handling errors, contrast volume, fluoroscopy time, and radiation dose exposure. The design was a before-after study. Two simulated thrombectomy cases were used as pretest and posttest cases, while seven other cases were used for training. Utilizing the Norwegian Stroke Register, we investigated clinical results in thrombectomy during the study period. RESULTS: Nineteen interventional radiologists and radiology residents participated in the study. The improvement between pretest and posttest cases was statistically significant for all outcome measures in both simulated cases, except for the contrast volume used in one case. Clinical patient outcomes in all three centers were well within the recommendations from multi-society consensus guidelines. CONCLUSION: Performance on the virtual reality simulator improved after training. Virtual reality simulation may improve the learning curve for interventional radiologists in limited-volume thrombectomy centers. No correlation alleged, the clinical data indicates that the centers studied performed thrombectomy in accordance with guideline-recommended standards.

Aeromedical retrieval services characteristics globally: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Aeromedical emergency retrieval services play an important role in supporting patients with critical and often life-threatening clinical conditions. Aeromedical retrieval services help to provide fast access to definitive care for critically ill patients in under-served regions. Typically, fixed-wing aeromedical retrieval becomes the most viable transport option compared with rotary-wing aircraft when distances away from centres of definitive care extend beyond 200 kms. To our knowledge, there are no studies that have investigated fixed-wing aeromedical services in the member countries of the organisation for economic cooperation and development (OECD). A description of the global characteristics of aeromedical services will inform international collaboration to optimise clinical outcomes for patients. AIM: In this scoping review, we aimed to describe the features of government- and not-for-profit organisation-owned fixed-wing aeromedical retrieval services in some of the member countries of the OECD. METHODS: We followed scoping review methodology based on the grey literature search strategy identified in earlier studies. This mostly involved internet-based searches of the websites of fixed-wing aeromedical emergency retrieval services affiliated with the OECD member countries. RESULTS: We identified 460 potentially relevant records after searching Google Scholar (n = 24) and Google search engines (n = 436). After removing ineligible and duplicate information, this scoping review identified 86 government-and not-for-profit-operated fixed-wing aeromedical retrieval services as existing in 17 OECD countries. Concentrations of the services were greatest in the USA followed by Australia, Canada, and the UK. The most prevalent business models used across the identified OECD member countries comprised the government, not-for-profit, and hybrid models. Three-quarters of the not-for-profit and two-fifths of the hybrid business models were in the USA compared to other countries studied. The government or state-funded business model was most common in Australia (11/24, 46%), Canada (4/24, 17%), and the UK (4/24, 17%). The frequently used service delivery models adopted for patients of all ages included primary/secondary retrievals, secondary retrievals only, and service specialisation models. Of these service models, primary/secondary retrieval involving the transportation of adults and children from community clinics and primary health care facilities to centres of definitive care comprised the core tasks performed by most of the aeromedical retrieval services studied. The service specialisation model provided an extra layer of specialist health care dedicated to the transportation of neonates and paediatrics. At least eight aeromedical retrieval services catered solely for children from birth to 16 years of age. One aeromedical service, the royal flying doctor service in Australia also provided primary health care and telehealth services in addition to primary retrieval and interhospital transfer of patients. The doctor and registered nurse/paramedic (Franco-German model) and the nurse and/or paramedic (Anglo-American model) configurations were the most common staffing models used across the aeromedical services studied. CONCLUSIONS: The development and composition of fixed-wing aeromedical emergency retrieval services operated by not-for-profit organisations and governments in the OECD countries showed diversity in terms of governance arrangements, services provided, and staffing models used. We do not fully understand the impact of these differences on the quality of service provision, including equitable service access, highlighting a need for further research.

Opioids for Treatment of Pre-hospital Acute Pain: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Acute pain is a frequent symptom among patients in the pre-hospital setting, and opioids are the most widely used class of drugs for the relief of pain in these patients. However, the evidence base for opioid use in this setting appears to be weak. The aim of this systematic review was to explore the efficacy and safety of opioid analgesics in the pre-hospital setting and to assess potential alternative therapies. METHODS: The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Scopus, and Epistemonikos databases were searched for studies investigating adult patients with acute pain prior to their arrival at hospital. Outcomes on efficacy and safety were assessed. Risk of bias for each included study was assessed according to the Cochrane approach, and confidence in the evidence was assessed using the GRADE method. RESULTS: A total of 3453 papers were screened, of which the full text of 125 was assessed. Twelve studies were ultimately included in this systematic review. Meta-analysis was not undertaken due to substantial clinical heterogeneity among the included studies. Several studies had high risk of bias resulting in low or very low quality of evidence for most of the outcomes. No pre-hospital studies compared opioids with placebo, and no studies assessed the risk of opioid administration for subgroups of frail patients. The competency level of the attending healthcare provider did not seem to affect the efficacy or safety of opioids in two observational studies of very low quality. Intranasal opioids had a similar effect and safety profile as intravenous opioids. Moderate quality evidence supported a similar efficacy and safety of synthetic opioid compared to morphine. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence for pre-hospital opioid administration to relieve acute pain is scarce and the overall quality of evidence is low. Intravenous administration of synthetic, fast-acting opioids may be as effective and safe as intravenous administration of morphine. More controlled studies are needed on alternative routes for opioid administration and pre-hospital pain management for potentially more frail patient subgroups.

Maintaining immobilization devices on trauma patients during chest and pelvic X-ray: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Most trauma systems and traumatic spinal injury guidelines mandate spinal stabilization from the site of injury to a radiological confirmation or refutal of spinal injury. Vacuum mattresses have been advocated for patients in need of prehospital spinal stabilization. PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of different vacuum mattresses on standard resuscitation bay conventional radiography of chest and pelvis, especially regarding artefacts. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used a mobile X-ray machine to perform chest and pelvic conventional radiography on an anthropomorphic whole-body phantom with a trauma transfer board, three different vacuum mattresses, and without any stabilization device. The vacuum mattresses were investigated in activated, deactivated, and stretched after deactivated states. Two radiologists assessed the artefacts independently. Agreement was measured using kappa coefficient. RESULTS: All radiographs were of good technical quality and fully diagnostic. With the exception of one disagreed occurrence, artefacts were seen to hamper clinical judgment exclusively with activated vacuum mattresses. There was substantial agreement on artefact assessment. The observed agreement was 0.82 with a kappa coefficient of 0.71. The first vacuum mattress caused no artefacts hampering with clinical judgment. CONCLUSION: Our study concludes that it is feasible to maintain some vacuum mattresses through resuscitation bay conventional radiography of chest and pelvis. They do not result in artefacts hampering with clinical judgment. Our vacuum mattress No. 1 is recommendable for this purpose. Together with our previous findings our present results indicate that some vacuum mattresses may be used throughout the initial resuscitation bay assessment and CT examination.

Ketamine for the treatment of prehospital acute pain: a systematic review of benefit and harm.

BACKGROUND: Few publications have addressed prehospital use of ketamine in analgesic doses. We aimed to assess the effect and safety profile of ketamine compared with other analgesic drugs (or no drug) in adult prehospital patients with acute pain. METHODS: A systematic review of clinical trials assessing prehospital administration of ketamine in analgesic doses compared with other analgesic drugs or no analgesic treatment in adults. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Epistemonikos from inception until 15 February 2020, including relevant articles in English and Nordic languages. We used the Cochrane and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodologies and exclusively assessed patient-centred outcomes. Two independent authors screened trials for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. RESULTS: We included eight studies (2760 patients). Ketamine was compared with various opioids given alone, and intranasal ketamine given with nitrous oxide was compared with nitrous oxide given alone. Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and one cluster randomised trial included 699 patients. One prospective cohort included 27 patients and two retrospective cohorts included 2034 patients. Five of the eight studies had high risks of bias. Pain score with ketamine is probably lower than after opioids as demonstrated in a cluster-RCT (308 patients) and a retrospective cohort (158 patients) study, Δvisual analogue scale -0.4 (-0.8 to 0.0) and Δnumeric pain rating scale -3.0 (-3.86 to -2.14), respectively. Ketamine probably leads to less nausea and vomiting (risk ratio (RR) 0.24 (0.11 to 0.52)) but more agitation (RR 7.81 (1.85 to 33)) than opioids. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic literature review finds that ketamine probably reduces pain more than opioids and with less nausea and vomiting but higher risk of agitation. Risk of bias in included studies is high. OTHER: Scandinavian society of anaesthesiology and intensive care medicine funded meetings and software. The Norwegian Air Ambulance Foundation funded publication. Otherwise this research received no grant from any agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018114399.

Maintaining immobilisation devices on trauma patients during CT: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the possibility of secondary deterioration of spinal injuries, it is desirable to maintain the spinal immobilisation that is applied in the prehospital setting throughout computed tomography (CT) scanning. A previous study found that metallic components within the inflation valve of the vacuum mattresses caused CT artefacts. The aim of our study was to investigate the effect of vacuum mattresses with plastic valves on CT artefacts, the radiation dose, and noise compared to a trauma transfer board and the spine boards currently used in our trauma system. METHODS: We scanned an anthropomorphic whole body phantom with different immobilisation devices on a 128-slice CT scanner using the standard polytrauma CT-protocol at our institution. The phantom was scanned without any immobilisation device and with three different vacuum mattresses, two spine boards, and one trauma transfer board. Two radiologists independently assessed the artefacts. Agreement between the two radiologists was measured using the kappa coefficient. The radiation dose and noise were assessed. RESULTS: One spine board produced major artefacts due to its metal components. One of the vacuum mattresses resulted in artefacts that impaired clinical judgement. Otherwise, the artefacts predominantly did not impede clinical judgement and were mainly subtle. One of the vacuum mattresses resulted in no artefacts that affected clinical judgement. The overall inter-rater agreement was substantial (0.86, kappa 0.77). We did not observe any artefacts due to plastic valves. The mean CT radiation dose was slightly higher for two of the devices in the head series than that for the trauma transfer board, used as the standard in our system. Only marginal differences were noted for the other devices and series. Small differences in image noise were found between the devices. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that it is feasible to maintain some vacuum mattresses with plastic valves on trauma patients during CT scanning. The tested mattresses did not result in a considerably increased radiation dose or artefacts that hampered clinical judgement. One of the tested vacuum mattresses produced no artefacts that hampered clinical judgement whatsoever.

Comparison of the Vacuum Mattress versus the Spine Board Alone for Immobilization of the Cervical Spine Injured Patient: A Biomechanical Cadaveric Study.

STUDY DESIGN: A biomechanical cadaveric study. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the amount of motion generated in an unstable cervical spine fracture with use of the vacuum mattress versus the spine board alone. Our hypothesis is that the vacuum mattress will better immobilize an unstable cervical fracture. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Trauma patients in the United States are immobilized on a rigid spine board, whereas in many other places, vacuum mattresses are used with the proposed advantages of improved comfort and better immobilization of the spine. METHODS: Unstable subaxial cervical injuries were surgically created in five fresh whole human cadavers. The amount of motion at the injured motion segment during testing was measured using a Fastrak, three-dimensional, electromagnetic motion analysis device (Polhemus Inc.). The measurements recorded in this investigation included maximum displacements during application and removal of the device, while tilting to 90°, during a bed transfer, and a lift onto a gurney. Linear and angular displacements were compared using the Generalized Linear Model analysis of variance for repeated measures for each of the six dependent variables (three planes of angulations and three axes of displacement). RESULTS: There was more motion in all six planes of motion during the application process with use of the spine board alone, and this was statistically significant for axial rotation (P = 0.011), axial distraction (P = 0.035), medial-lateral translation (P = 0.027), and anteroposterior translation (P = 0.026). During tilting, there was more motion with just the spine board, but this was only statistically significant for anteroposterior translation (P = 0.033). With lifting onto the gurney, there was more motion with the spine board in all planes with statistical significance, except lateral bending. During the removal process, there was more motion with the spine board alone, and this was statistically significant for axial rotation (P = 0.035), lateral bending (P = 0.044), and axial distraction (P = 0.023). CONCLUSION: There was more motion when using a spine board alone during typical maneuvers performed during early management of the spine injured patient than the vacuum mattress. There may be benefit of use of the vacuum mattress versus the spine board alone in preventing motion at an unstable, subaxial cervical spine injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Does the novel lateral trauma position cause more motion in an unstable cervical spine injury than the logroll maneuver?

OBJECTIVE: Prehospital personnel who lack advanced airway management training must rely on basic techniques when transporting unconscious trauma patients. The supine position is associated with a loss of airway patency when compared to lateral recumbent positions. Thus, an inherent conflict exists between securing an open airway using the recovery position and maintaining spinal immobilization in the supine position. The lateral trauma position is a novel technique that aims to combine airway management with spinal precautions. The objective of this study was to compare the spinal motion allowed by the novel lateral trauma position and the well-established log-roll maneuver. METHODS: Using a full-body cadaver model with an induced globally unstable cervical spine (C5-C6) lesion, we investigated the mean range of motion (ROM) produced at the site of the injury in six dimensions by performing the two maneuvers using an electromagnetic tracking device. RESULTS: Compared to the log-roll maneuver, the lateral trauma position caused similar mean ROM in five of the six dimensions. Only medial/lateral linear motion was significantly greater in the lateral trauma position (1.4mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.4, 2.4mm)). CONCLUSIONS: In this cadaver study, the novel lateral trauma position and the well-established log-roll maneuver resulted in comparable amounts of motion in an unstable cervical spine injury model. We suggest that the lateral trauma position may be considered for unconscious non-intubated trauma patients.

The Norwegian guidelines for the prehospital management of adult trauma patients with potential spinal injury.

The traditional prehospital management of trauma victims with potential spinal injury has become increasingly questioned as authors and clinicians have raised concerns about over-triage and harm. In order to address these concerns, the Norwegian National Competence Service for Traumatology commissioned a faculty to provide a national guideline for pre-hospital spinal stabilisation. This work is based on a systematic review of available literature and a standardised consensus process. The faculty recommends a selective approach to spinal stabilisation as well as the implementation of triaging tools based on clinical findings. A strategy of minimal handling should be observed.

Does turning trauma patients with an unstable spinal injury from the supine to a lateral position increase the risk of neurological deterioration?--A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Airway protection and spinal precautions are competing concerns in the treatment of unconscious trauma patients. The placement of such patients in a lateral position may facilitate the acquisition of an adequate airway. However, trauma dogma dictates that patients should be transported in the supine position to minimize spinal movement. In this systematic review, we sought to answer the following question: Given an existing spinal injury, will changing a patient's position from supine to lateral increase the risk of neurological deterioration? METHODS: The review protocol was published in the PROSPERO database (Reg. no. CRD42012001190). We performed literature searches in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL and the British Nursing Index and included studies of traumatic spinal injury, lateral positioning and neurological deterioration. The search was updated prior to submission. Two researchers independently completed each step in the review process. RESULTS: We identified 1,164 publications. However, none of these publications reported mortality or neurological deterioration with lateral positioning as an outcome measure. Twelve studies used movement of the injured spine with lateral positioning as an outcome measure; eleven of these investigations were cadaver studies. All of these cadaver studies reported spinal movement during lateral positioning. The only identified human study included eighteen patients with thoracic or lumbar spinal fractures; according to the study authors, the logrolling technique did not result in any neurological deterioration among these patients. CONCLUSIONS: We identified no clinical studies demonstrating that rotating trauma patients from the supine position to a lateral position affects mortality or causes neurological deterioration. However, in various cadaver models, this type of rotation did produce statistically significant displacements of the injured spine. The clinical significance of these cadaver-based observations remains unclear. The present evidence for harm in rotating trauma patients from the supine position to a lateral position, including the logroll maneuver, is inconclusive.

Is the supine position associated with loss of airway patency in unconscious trauma patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Airway compromise is a leading cause of death in unconscious trauma patients. Although endotracheal intubation is regarded as the gold standard treatment, most prehospital providers are not trained to perform ETI in such patients. Therefore, various lateral positions are advocated for unconscious patients, but their use remains controversial in trauma patients. We conducted a systematic review to investigate whether the supine position is associated with loss of airway patency compared to the lateral position. METHODS: The review protocol was published in the PROSPERO database (Reg. no. CRD42012001190). We performed literature searches in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and British Nursing Index and included studies related to airway patency, reduced level of consciousness and patient position. We conducted meta-analyses, where appropriate. We graded the quality of evidence with the GRADE methodology. The search was updated in June 2014. RESULTS: We identified 1,306 publications, 39 of which were included for further analysis. Sixteen of these publications were included in meta-analysis. We did not identify any studies reporting direct outcome measures (mortality or morbidity) related to airway compromise caused by the patient position (lateral vs. supine position) in trauma patients or in any other patient group. In studies reporting only indirect outcome measures, we found moderate evidence of reduced airway patency in the supine vs. the lateral position, which was measured by the apnea/hypopnea index (AHI). For other indirect outcomes, we only found low or very low quality evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Although concerns other than airway patency may influence how a trauma patient is positioned, our systematic review provides evidence supporting the long held recommendation that unconscious trauma patients should be placed in a lateral position.

Motion produced in the unstable cervical spine by the HAINES and lateral recovery positions.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the amount of segmental vertebral motion produced with the lateral recovery position and the HAINES technique when performed on cadavers with destabilized cervical spines. METHODS: The cervical spines of 10 cadavers were surgically destabilized at the C5-C6 vertebral segment. Sensors from an electromagnetic tracking device were affixed to the vertebrae in question to monitor the amount of anterior/posterior, medial/lateral, and distraction/compression linear motion produced during the application of the two study techniques. RESULTS: The statistical analysis of linear motion data did not reveal any significant differences between the two recovery positions. CONCLUSION: At this time, no single version of the recovery position can be endorsed for the spine-injured trauma patient. More research is needed to fully ascertain the safety of commonly used recovery positions.

Emergency cricothyrotomy--a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: An emergency cricothyrotomy is the last-resort in most airway management protocols and is performed when it is not possible to intubate or ventilate a patient. This situation can rapidly prove fatal, making it important to identify the best method to establish a secure airway. We conducted a systematic review to identify whether there exists superiority between available commercial kits versus traditional surgical and needle techniques. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE and other databases were searched for pertinent studies. The inclusion criteria included manikin, animal and human studies and there were no restrictions regarding the professional background of the person performing the procedure. RESULTS: In total, 1,405 unique references were identified; 108 full text articles were retrieved; and 24 studies were included in the review. Studies comparing kits with one another or with various surgical and needle techniques were identified. The outcome measures included in this systematic review were success rate and time consumption. The investigators performing the studies had chosen unique combinations of starting and stopping points for time measurements, making comparisons between studies difficult and leading to many conflicting results. No single method was shown to be better than the others, but the size of the studies makes it impossible to draw firm conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: The large majority of the studies were too small to demonstrate statistically significant differences, and the limited available evidence was of low or very low quality. That none of the techniques in these studies demonstrated better results than the others does not necessarily indicate that each is equally good, and these conclusions will likely change as new evidence becomes available.

The lateral trauma position: what do we know about it and how do we use it? A cross-sectional survey of all Norwegian emergency medical services.

BACKGROUND: Trauma patients are customarily transported in the supine position to protect the spine. The Airway, Breathing, Circulation, Disability, and Exposure (ABCDE) principles clearly give priority to airways. In Norway, the lateral trauma position (LTP) was introduced in 2005. We investigated the implementation and current use of LTP in Norwegian Emergency Medical Services (EMS). METHODS: All ground and air EMS bases in Norway were included. Interviews were performed with ground and air EMS supervisors. Questionnaires were distributed to ground EMS personnel. RESULTS: Of 206 ground EMS supervisors, 201 answered; 75% reported that LTP is used. In services using LTP, written protocols were present in 67% and 73% had provided training in LTP use. Questionnaires were distributed to 3,025 ground EMS personnel. We received 1,395 (46%) valid questionnaires. LTP was known to 89% of respondents, but only 59% stated that they use it. Of the respondents using LTP, 77% reported access to written protocols. Flexing of the top knee was reported by 78%, 20% flexed the bottom knee, 81% used under head padding. Of 24 air EMS supervisors, 23 participated. LTP is used by 52% of the services, one of these has a written protocol and three arrange training. CONCLUSIONS: LTP is implemented and used in the majority of Norwegian EMS, despite little evidence as to its possible benefits and harms. How the patient is positioned in the LTP differs. More research on LTP is needed to confirm that its use is based on evidence that it is safe and effective.