Provision of immobilization or ice by paramedics in Southwestern Ontario.

OBJECTIVES: Pain is the most common reason for prehospital transport. As emergency wait times increase, timely pain management is essential. In children, there is abundant evidence that prehospital pharmacologic analgesia is suboptimal, but little is known about non-pharmacologic therapies. We sought to characterize documentation by paramedics of non-pharmacologic (immobilization and ice) and pharmacologic analgesia in children with musculoskeletal injuries. METHODS: We reviewed all ambulance call reports for children 0-17 years transported to Southwestern Ontario regional hospitals from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2019, with a musculoskeletal injury (Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care problem codes 66 and 67). Primary and secondary outcomes were documented immobilization or ice and pharmacologic analgesia, respectively. In a multivariable analysis, we explored the relationship between immobilization or ice and the following a priori covariates: age, sex, visible deformity, crew type, pain severity, and analgesia. RESULTS: Of 40,692 ambulance call reports reviewed, 4445 met inclusion criteria. There were 2584/4441 (58.2%) males, with a median (IQR) age of 14 (10, 16) years. In ambulance call reports with documented pain scores, 2106/3048 (69.1%) ambulance call reports reported "moderate or severe" pain. Immobilization or ice were documented in 1605/4445 (36.1%) and 385/4445 (8.7%) of ambulance call reports. Pharmacologic analgesia was documented in 275/1983 (13.9%) and 125/991 (12.6%) of ambulance call reports for primary care paramedics and advanced care paramedics, respectively. An increased odds of documented immobilization or ice was associated with moderate or severe pain [OR: 2.4; 95% CI 1.84-3.17; p < 0.01] and visible deformity [OR: 2.5; 95% CI 1.97-3.12; p < 0.01]. CONCLUSIONS: Documented immobilization and ice and pharmacologic analgesia to children by paramedics is suboptimal. Our findings underscore an important need for enhanced education surrounding the benefits of non-pharmacologic options for children with musculoskeletal injuries.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: La douleur est le motif le plus fréquent de transport préhospitalier. À mesure que les temps d'attente aux urgences augmentent, la gestion de la douleur en temps opportun est essentielle. Chez les enfants, il existe de nombreuses preuves que l'analgésie pharmacologique préhospitalière est sous-optimale, mais on sait peu de choses sur les thérapies non pharmacologiques. Nous avons cherché à caractériser la documentation par les ambulanciers paramédicaux de l'analgésie non pharmacologique (immobilisation et glace) et pharmacologique chez les enfants souffrant de lésions musculo-squelettiques. MéTHODES: Nous avons examiné tous les rapports d'appels d'ambulance pour les enfants de 0 à 17 ans transportés vers les hôpitaux régionaux du Sud-Ouest de l'Ontario du 1er janvier 2017 au 31 décembre 2019, avec une blessure musculo-squelettique (codes de problèmes 66 et 67 du ministère de la Santé et des Soins de longue durée de l'Ontario). Les résultats primaires et secondaires étaient l'immobilisation documentée ou la glace et l'analgésie pharmacologique, respectivement. Dans une analyse multivariable, nous avons exploré la relation entre l'immobilisation ou la glace et les covariables a priori suivantes: âge, sexe, déformation visible, type d'équipage, intensité de la douleur et analgésie. RéSULTATS: Sur les 40 692 rapports d'appels d'ambulance examinés, 4 445 répondaient aux critères d'inclusion. Il y avait 2584/4441 (58,2 %) hommes, avec un âge médian (IQR) de 14 (10,16) ans. Dans les rapports d'appel d'ambulance avec des scores de douleur documentés, 2106/3048 (69,1 %) rapports d'appel d'ambulance ont signalé une douleur "modérée ou sévère". L'immobilisation ou la glace ont été documentées dans 1605/4445 (36,1 %) et 385/4445 (8,7 %) des rapports d'appel d'ambulance. L'analgésie pharmacologique a été documentée dans 275/1983 (13,9 %) et 125/991 (12,6 %) des rapports d'appel d'ambulance pour les ambulanciers de soins primaires et les ambulanciers de soins avancés, respectivement. Une probabilité accrue d'immobilisation documentée ou de glace était associée à une douleur modérée ou intense [OR: 2,4; IC à 95 %: 1,84-3,17; p < 0,01] et déformation visible [OR: 2,5; IC à 95 %: 1,97-3,12; p < 0,01]. CONCLUSIONS: L'immobilisation documentée et l'administration de glace et d'analgésie pharmacologique aux enfants par les ambulanciers est sous-optimale. Nos résultats soulignent le besoin important de renforcer l'éducation concernant les avantages des options non pharmacologiques pour les enfants souffrant de blessures musculo-squelettiques.

Evaluation of the Uptake of a Prehospital Cardiac Arrest Termination of Resuscitation Rule.

BACKGROUND: Previous research has focused on creation and validation of a basic life support rule for termination of resuscitation (TOR) in nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) to identify patients who will not be successfully resuscitated or will not have a favorable outcome. Although now widely implemented, translational research regarding in-field compliance with TOR criteria and barriers to use is scarce. OBJECTIVES: This project aimed to assess compliance rates, barriers to use, and effect on ambulance transport rates after implementing TOR criteria for OHCA. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients ≥ 18 years with OHCA. Data from regional Emergency Medical Services agencies were collected to determine TOR rule compliance for patients meeting criteria, barriers to use, and effect of a TOR rule on ambulance transport. RESULTS: There were 552 patients with OHCAs identified. Ninety-one patients met TOR criteria, with paramedics requesting TOR in 81 (89%) cases and physicians granting requests in 65 (80.2%) cases. Perceived barriers to TOR compliance included distraught families, nearby advanced-care paramedics, and unusual circumstances. Reasons for physician refusal of TOR requests included hospital proximity, patient not receiving epinephrine, and poor communication connection to paramedics. Total high priority transports decreased 15.6% after implementation of a TOR rule. CONCLUSIONS: The study found high compliance after implementation of a TOR rule and identified potentially addressable barriers to TOR use. Appropriate application of a TOR rule led to reduction in high-priority ambulance transports, potentially reducing futile use of health care resources and risk of ambulance motor vehicle collisions.

Impact of Obesity on Noninvasive Cardiac Hemodynamic Measurement by Electrical Cardiometry in Adults With Aortic Stenosis.

OBJECTIVES: There are substantial potential benefits to noninvasive cardiac monitoring methods, such as electrical cardiometry (EC), over more invasive methods, including significantly reduced risk of complications, lower up-front and operational costs, ease of use, and continuous monitoring. To take advantage of these technologies, clinical equivalence to currently established methods must be determined. The authors sought to determine if the noninvasive measurement of cardiac index (CI) by EC was clinically equivalent to thermodilution (TD) in adult patients with aortic stenosis (AS). DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional study comparing measurement devices in a single patient group. SETTING: Single-center, university teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: The study included 52 adult patients with aortic stenosis undergoing right heart catheterization. INTERVENTIONS: Cardiac output (CO) was measured concurrently using EC with an ICON device and TD in 52 participants with AS. CI values were to determine the accuracy and precision of EC in reference to TD. Percentage error (PE) was used to assess their clinical equivalence. The participants were divided further into groups (normal and overweight/obese) based on body mass index and the analysis was repeated. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: CO measurement made by EC in adult patients with obesity or overweight was reduced significantly relative to TD. This was not observed in normal-weight adult AS patients. EC provided clinically equivalent measurements to TD for measuring CI in normal-weight adult AS patients (PE = 25.0%), but not for those adult AS patients with overweight or obesity (PE = 42.3%). CONCLUSION: Overall, the ICON device produced lower CO and index measurements relative to TD in adult patients with AS. Overweight and obesity also significantly affected the relative precision and accuracy of the ICON electrical cardiometric device to measure CI in these patients.

Intraurethral Lidocaine for Urethral Catheterization in Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether lidocaine is superior to nonanesthetic lubricant (NAL) for relieving pain in children undergoing urethral catheterization (UC). METHODS: Children 0 to 24 months requiring UC were randomized to NAL or topical and intraurethral 2% lidocaine gel. Primary outcome was facial grimacing in the pre to during drug administration and catheterization phases. Secondary outcome was caregiver satisfaction by using a Visual Analog Scale. RESULTS: There were 133 participants (n = 68 lidocaine, n = 65 NAL). There were no significant differences in mean (SD) scores during UC between lidocaine and NAL (86.4% [121.5%] vs 85.2% [126.6%]), respectively (Δ [confidence interval (CI)] = -1.2 [-21.0 to 49.0], P = .4). There was a significantly greater difference in mean (SD) scores during instillation of lidocaine versus NAL (61.8% [105.6%] vs 3.2% [84.9%]), respectively (Δ [CI] -58.6 [-95.0 to -32.0], P < .001). There were no significant differences in mean (SD) parental satisfaction scores between lidocaine and NAL (4.8 [3.2] vs 5.9 [2.9]), respectively (CI-0.1 to 2.2; P = .06). In the subgroup analysis, age, gender, and positive urine culture did not significantly influence between-group differences in facial grimacing. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with NAL, topical and intraurethral lidocaine is not associated with significant pain reduction during UC, but significantly greater pain during instillation. Therefore, clinicians may consider using noninvasive pain-reducing strategies for young children who require UC.

Oral administration of morphine versus ibuprofen to manage postfracture pain in children: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent warnings from Health Canada regarding codeine for children have led to increased use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and morphine for common injuries such as fractures. Our objective was to determine whether morphine administered orally has superior efficacy to ibuprofen in fracture-related pain. METHODS: We used a parallel group, randomized, blinded superiority design. Children who presented to the emergency department with an uncomplicated extremity fracture were randomly assigned to receive either morphine (0.5 mg/kg orally) or ibuprofen (10 mg/kg) for 24 hours after discharge. Our primary outcome was the change in pain score using the Faces Pain Scale - Revised (FPS-R). Participants were asked to record pain scores immediately before and 30 minutes after receiving each dose. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 66 participants in the morphine group and 68 participants in the ibuprofen group. For both morphine and ibuprofen, we found a reduction in pain scores (mean pre-post difference ± standard deviation for dose 1: morphine 1.5 ± 1.2, ibuprofen 1.3 ± 1.0, between-group difference [δ] 0.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.2 to 0.6]; dose 2: morphine 1.3 ± 1.3, ibuprofen 1.3 ± 0.9, δ 0 [95% CI -0.4 to 0.4]; dose 3: morphine 1.3 ± 1.4, ibuprofen 1.4 ± 1.1, δ -0.1 [95% CI -0.7 to 0.4]; and dose 4: morphine 1.5 ± 1.4, ibuprofen 1.1 ± 1.2, δ 0.4 [95% CI -0.2 to 1.1]). We found no significant differences in the change in pain scores between morphine and ibuprofen between groups at any of the 4 time points (p = 0.6). Participants in the morphine group had significantly more adverse effects than those in the ibuprofen group (56.1% v. 30.9%, p < 0.01). INTERPRETATION: We found no significant difference in analgesic efficacy between orally administered morphine and ibuprofen. However, morphine was associated with a significantly greater number of adverse effects. Our results suggest that ibuprofen remains safe and effective for outpatient pain management in children with uncomplicated fractures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01690780.