Pre-hospital guidelines for CPR-Induced Consciousness (CPRIC): A scoping review.

Background: CPR-Induced Consciousness is an emerging phenomenon with a paucity of consensus guidelines from peak resuscitative bodies. Local prehospital services have had to implement their own CPR-Induced Consciousness guidelines. This scoping review aims to identify prehospital CPR-Induced Consciousness guidelines and compare or contrast their management options. Objective: The purpose of this scoping review is to identify and compare as many prehospital CPR-Induced Consciousness guidelines as feasible, highlight common management trends, and discuss the factors that might impact CPR-Induced Consciousness guidelines and the management trends identified. Design: To search for prehospital CPR-Induced Consciousness guidelines, a bibliographical search of five databases was undertaken (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus, and CINAHL plus). Also included was a grey literature search arm, comprised of four search strategies: 1. Customised Google search, 2. Hand searching of targeted websites, 3. Grey literature databases, 4. Consultation with subject experts. Results: Our search extracted 23 prehospital CPR-Induced Consciousness guidelines and one good practise statement from the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Of the 23 prehospital guidelines available, we identified 20 different ways of treating CPR-Induced Consciousness. Midazolam was the most frequently used drug to treat CPR-Induced Consciousness (14/23, 61%), followed by Ketamine (11/23, 48%) and Fentanyl (9/23, 39%). Conclusion: Prehospital CPR-Induced Consciousness guidelines are both exceptionally uncommon and vary substantially from each other. This has a flow-on effect towards data collection and only serves to continue CPR-Induced Consciousness's relatively unknown status surrounding both knowledge of, and the effect CPR-Induced Consciousness treatment has on cardiac arrest outcomes.

Recommendations on the Appropriate Level of Medical Support at Ultramarathons.

Participation in ultramarathons continues to grow, especially among older individuals and among younger runners who may have less running and wilderness experience than many past participants. While ultramarathons tend to have relatively few serious medical issues, adverse medical incidents do occur. These factors make it increasingly important that appropriate safety precautions and medical support are defined and implemented at these events to enhance the safety of participants, spectators, and volunteers. This document establishes the minimum recommended level of medical support that should be available at ultramarathons based on current knowledge and the experience of the authors. It offers a balance that is intended to avoid excessive stress on the local medical system while also precluding undue burden on events to provide medical support beyond that which is practical. We propose a three-level classification system to define the extent of medical services, personnel, systems, supplies, and equipment in place and recommend the level of medical support based on event size, distance/duration, remoteness, and environmental conditions that may be encountered during the event. This document also outlines the recommended education and training of medical providers and discusses other medical and logistical considerations related to the provision of medical support at ultramarathons. We suggest that ultramarathon organizers review and adopt these recommendations to enhance safety and reduce the risk of adverse events to participants.

Implementing Prehospital Evidence-Based Guidelines: A Systematic Literature Review.

OBJECTIVE: As prehospital research advances, more evidence-based guidelines (EBGs) are implemented into emergency medical services (EMS) practice. However, incomplete or suboptimal prehospital EBG implementation may hinder improvement in patient outcomes. To inform future efforts, this study's objective was to review existing evidence pertaining to prehospital EBG implementation methods. METHODS: This study was a systematic literature review and evaluation following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Google Advanced Search were searched without language or publication date filters for articles addressing prehospital EBG implementation. Conference proceedings, textbooks, and non-English articles were excluded. GRADE was applied to the remaining articles independently by three of five study investigators. Study characteristics and salient findings from the included articles are reported. RESULTS: The systematic literature review identified 1,367 articles, with 41 meeting inclusion criteria. Most articles described prehospital EBG implementation (n = 24, 59%), or implementation barriers (n = 13, 32%). Common study designs were statement documents (n = 12, 29%), retrospective cohort studies (n = 12, 29%), and cross-sectional studies (n = 9, 22%). Using GRADE, evidence quality was rated low (n = 18, 44%), or very low (n = 23, 56%). Salient findings from the articles included: (i) EBG adherence and patient outcomes depend upon successful implementation, (ii) published studies generally lack detailed implementation methods, (iii) EBG implementation takes longer than planned (mostly for EMS education), (iv) EMS systems' heterogeneity affects EBG implementation, and (v) multiple barriers limit successful implementation (e.g., financial constraints, equipment purchasing, coordination with hospitals, and regulatory agencies). This review found no direct evidence for best prehospital EBG implementation practices. There were no studies comparing implementation methods or implementation in different prehospital settings (e.g., urban vs. rural, advanced vs. basic life support). CONCLUSIONS: While prehospital EBG implementation barriers are well described, there is a paucity of evidence for optimal implementation methods. For scientific advances to reach prehospital patients, EBG development efforts must translate into EMS practice. Future research should consider comparing implementation methodologies in different prehospital settings, with a goal of defining detailed, reproducible best practices.

Mass casualty triage: an evaluation of the data and development of a proposed national guideline.

Mass casualty triage is a critical skill. Although many systems exist to guide providers in making triage decisions, there is little scientific evidence available to demonstrate that any of the available systems have been validated. Furthermore, in the United States there is little consistency from one jurisdiction to the next in the application of mass casualty triage methodology. There are no nationally agreed upon categories or color designations. This review reports on a consensus committee process used to evaluate and compare commonly used triage systems, and to develop a proposed national mass casualty triage guideline. The proposed guideline, entitled SALT (sort, assess, life-saving interventions, treatment and/or transport) triage, was developed based on the best available science and consensus opinion. It incorporates aspects from all of the existing triage systems to create a single overarching guide for unifying the mass casualty triage process across the United States.