RESUMO
Head Injury Transportation Straight to Neurosurgery was a cluster randomised trial studying suspected severe head injury treatment pathways conducted in the North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust and North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust between January 2012 and March 2013. This was the world's first large scale trial of any trauma bypass and was conducted as a feasibility study. This short report will describe some of the lessons learnt during this ground breaking and complex trial.
Assuntos
Traumatismos Craniocerebrais , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/organização & administração , Medicina de Emergência/educação , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/métodos , Projetos de Pesquisa , Inglaterra , Humanos , Medicina EstatalRESUMO
AIM: To assess the accuracy of visual estimation of external blood loss by UK pre-hospital clinicians and to comment on its value during handover. METHODS: A sample of 104 pre-hospital clinicians were shown eight staged scenarios showing varying amounts of blood loss and asked to estimate the amount of blood loss depicted. Participants included a range of pre-hospital clinicians from both NHS ambulance trusts and Helicopter Emergency Medical Services. RESULTS: A wide distribution of estimates and therefore percentage error was observed in our study. Pre-hospital clinicians are inaccurate when estimating external blood loss at scene, regardless of training and skill level. CONCLUSION: Visual estimation of blood loss is too inaccurate to be considered clinically worthwhile. Greater research focus is needed to investigate and validate better measures of blood loss that can be utilised in the pre-hospital and emergency medicine environment. Until evidence-based methods of estimation can be implemented, this information should not be included in hospital handovers.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: to describe the configuration of midwifery units, both alongside&free-standing, and obstetric units in England. DESIGN: national survey amongst Heads of Midwifery in English Maternity Services SETTING: National Health Service (NHS) in England PARTICIPANTS: English Maternity Services Measurements descriptive statistics of Alongside Midwifery Units and Free-standing Midwifery Units and Obstetric Units and their annual births/year in English Maternity Services FINDINGS: alongside midwifery units have nearly doubled since 2010 (n = 53-97); free-standing midwifery units have increased slightly (n = 58-61). There has been a significant reduction in maternity services without either an alongside or free-standing midwifery unit (75-32). The percentage of all births in midwifery units has trebled, now representing 14% of all births in England. This masks significant differences in percentage of all births in midwifery units between different maternity services with a spread of 4% to 31%. KEY CONCLUSIONS: In some areas of England, women have no access to a local midwifery unit, despite the National Institute for Health&Clinical Excellence (NICE) recommending them as an important place of birth option for low risk women. The numbers of midwifery units have increased significantly in England since 2010 but this growth is almost exclusively in alongside midwifery units. The percentage of women giving birth in midwifery units varies significantly between maternity services suggesting that many midwifery units are underutilised. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Both the availability and utilisation of midwifery units in England could be improved.
Assuntos
Centros de Assistência à Gravidez e ao Parto/organização & administração , Mapeamento Geográfico , Tocologia/organização & administração , Adulto , Centros de Assistência à Gravidez e ao Parto/estatística & dados numéricos , Inglaterra , Feminino , Humanos , Tocologia/estatística & dados numéricos , Enfermagem Obstétrica/estatística & dados numéricos , Gravidez , Medicina Estatal/organização & administração , Medicina Estatal/estatística & dados numéricos , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Reconfiguration of trauma services, with direct transport of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) to specialist neuroscience centres (SNCs)-bypassing non-specialist acute hospitals (NSAHs), could improve outcomes. However, delays in stabilisation of airway, breathing and circulation (ABC) may worsen outcomes when compared with selective secondary transfer from nearest NSAH to SNC. We conducted a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial to determine the feasibility and plausibility of bypassing suspected patients with TBI -directly into SNCs-producing a measurable effect. SETTING: Two English Ambulance Services. PARTICIPANTS: 74 clusters (ambulance stations) were randomised within pairs after matching for important characteristics. Clusters enrolled head-injured adults-injured nearest to an NSAH-with internationally accepted TBI risk factors and stable ABC. We excluded participants attended by Helicopter Emergency Medical Services or who were injured more than 1 hour by road from nearest SNC. INTERVENTIONS: Intervention cluster participants were transported directly to an SNC bypassing nearest NSAH; control cluster participants were transported to nearest NSAH with selective secondary transfer to SNC. OUTCOMES: Trial recruitment rate (target n=700 per annum) and percentage with TBI on CT scan (target 80%) were the primary feasibility outcomes. 30-day mortality, 6-month Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale and quality of life were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: 56 ambulance station clusters recruited 293 patients in 12 months. The trial arms were similar in terms of age, conscious level and injury severity. Less than 25% of recruited patients had TBI on CT (n=70) with 7% (n=20) requiring neurosurgery. Complete case analysis showed similar 30-day mortality in the two trial arms (control=8.8 (2.7-14.0)% vs intervention=9.4(2.3-14.0)%). CONCLUSION: Bypassing patients with suspected TBI to SNCs gives an overtriage (false positive) ratio of 13:1 for neurosurgical intervention and 4:1 for TBI. A measurable effect from a full trial of early neuroscience care following bypass is therefore unlikely. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN68087745.
Assuntos
Lesões Encefálicas Traumáticas/cirurgia , Hospitais Especializados/estatística & dados numéricos , Transporte de Pacientes , Centros de Traumatologia , Adulto , Idoso , Ambulâncias , Serviços Médicos de Emergência , Reações Falso-Positivas , Feminino , Escala de Resultado de Glasgow , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Procedimentos Neurocirúrgicos , Projetos Piloto , Qualidade de Vida , Viagem , Reino UnidoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Reconfiguration of trauma services, with direct transport of traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients to neuroscience centres (NCs), bypassing non-specialist acute hospitals (NSAHs), could potentially improve outcomes. However, delays in stabilisation of airway, breathing and circulation (ABC) and the difficulties in reliably identifying TBI at scene may make this practice deleterious compared with selective secondary transfer from nearest NSAH to NC. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance and systematic reviews suggested equipoise and poor-quality evidence - with regard to 'early neurosurgery' in this cohort - which we sought to address. METHODS: Pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of bypass to NC conducted in two ambulance services with the ambulance station (n = 74) as unit of cluster [Lancashire/Cumbria in the North West Ambulance Service (NWAS) and the North East Ambulance Service (NEAS)]. Adult patients with signs of isolated TBI [Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of < 13 in NWAS, GCS score of < 14 in NEAS] and stable ABC, injured nearest to a NSAH were transported either to that hospital (control clusters) or bypassed to the nearest NC (intervention clusters). PRIMARY OUTCOMES: recruitment rate, protocol compliance, selection bias as a result of non-compliance, accuracy of paramedic TBI identification (overtriage of study inclusion criteria) and pathway acceptability to patients, families and staff. 'Open-label' secondary outcomes: 30-day mortality, 6-month Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions. RESULTS: Overall, 56 clusters recruited 293 (169 intervention, 124 control) patients in 12 months, demonstrating cluster randomised pre-hospital trials as viable for heath service evaluations. Overall compliance was 62%, but 90% was achieved in the control arm and when face-to-face paramedic training was possible. Non-compliance appeared to be driven by proximity of the nearest hospital and perceptions of injury severity and so occurred more frequently in the intervention arm, in which the perceived time to the NC was greater and severity of injury was lower. Fewer than 25% of recruited patients had TBI on computed tomography scan (n = 70), with 7% (n = 20) requiring neurosurgery (craniotomy, craniectomy or intracranial pressure monitoring) but a further 18 requiring admission to an intensive care unit. An intention-to-treat analysis revealed the two trial arms to be equivalent in terms of age, GCS and severity of injury. No significant 30-day mortality differences were found (8.8% vs. 9.1/%; p > 0.05) in the 273 (159/113) patients with data available. There were no apparent differences in staff and patient preferences for either pathway, with satisfaction high with both. Very low responses to invitations to consent for follow-up in the large number of mild head injury-enrolled patients meant that only 20% of patients had 6-month outcomes. The trial-based economic evaluation could not focus on early neurosurgery because of these low numbers but instead investigated the comparative cost-effectiveness of bypass compared with selective secondary transfer for eligible patients at the scene of injury. CONCLUSIONS: Current NHS England practice of bypassing patients with suspected TBI to neuroscience centres gives overtriage ratios of 13 : 1 for neurosurgery and 4 : 1 for TBI. This important finding makes studying the impact of bypass to facilitate early neurosurgery not plausible using this study design. Future research should explore an efficient comparative effectiveness design for evaluating 'early neurosurgery through bypass' and address the challenge of reliable TBI diagnosis at the scene of injury. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN68087745. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 1. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Assuntos
Desvio de Ambulâncias/economia , Lesões Encefálicas , Neurocirurgia/economia , Triagem/economia , Adulto , Pessoal Técnico de Saúde , Ambulâncias , Lesões Encefálicas/economia , Lesões Encefálicas/cirurgia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Inglaterra , Estudos de Viabilidade , Escala de Coma de Glasgow , Hospitais , Humanos , Satisfação do Paciente , Projetos de Pesquisa , Avaliação da Tecnologia BiomédicaRESUMO
Despite its use since the 1960s, the safety or effectiveness of adrenaline as a treatment for cardiac arrest has never been comprehensively evaluated in a clinical trial. Although most studies have found that adrenaline increases the chance of return of spontaneous circulation for short periods, many studies found harmful effects on the brain and raise concern that adrenaline may reduce overall survival and/or good neurological outcome. The PARAMEDIC-2 trial seeks to determine if adrenaline is safe and effective in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. This is a pragmatic, individually randomised, double blind, controlled trial with a parallel economic evaluation. Participants will be eligible if they are in cardiac arrest in the out-of-hospital environment and advanced life support is initiated. Exclusions are cardiac arrest as a result of anaphylaxis or life threatening asthma, and patient known or appearing to be under 16 or pregnant. 8000 participants treated by 5 UK ambulance services will be randomised between December 2014 and August 2017 to adrenaline (intervention) or placebo (control) through opening pre-randomised drug packs. Clinical outcomes are survival to 30 days (primary outcome), hospital discharge, 3, 6 and 12 months, health related quality of life, and neurological and cognitive outcomes (secondary outcomes). Trial registration (ISRCTN73485024).