RESUMO
Aims: Ambulance pre-alerts are used to inform receiving emergency departments (EDs) of the arrival of critically unwell or rapidly deteriorating patients who need time-critical assessment or treatment immediately upon arrival. Inappropriate use of pre-alerts can lead to EDs diverting resources from other critically ill patients. However, there is limited guidance about how pre-alerts should be undertaken, delivered or communicated. We aimed to map existing pre-alert guidance from UK NHS ambulance services to explore consistency and accessibility of existing guidance. Methods: We contacted all UK ambulance services to request documentation containing guidance about pre-alerts. We reviewed and mapped all guidance to understand which conditions were recommended for a pre-alert and alignment with Association of Ambulance Chief Executives (AACE) and Royal College of Emergency Medicine (RCEM) pre-alert guidance. We reviewed the language and accessibility of guidance using the AGREE II tool. Results: We received responses from 15/19 UK ambulance services and 10 stated that they had specific pre-alert guidance. We identified noticeable variations in conditions declared suitable for pre-alerts in each service, with a lack of consistency within each ambulance service's own guidance, and a lack of alignment with the AACE/RCEM pre-alert guidance. Services listed between four and 45 different conditions suitable for pre-alert. There were differences in physiological thresholds and terminology, even for conditions with established care pathways (e.g. hyperacute stroke, ST segment elevation myocardial infarction). Pre-alert criteria were typically listed in several short sections in lengthy handover procedure policy documents. Documents appraised were of poor quality with low scores below 35% for applicability and overall. Implications: There is a clear need for ambulance services to have both policies and tools that complement each other and incorporate the same list of pre-alertable conditions. Clinicians need a single, easily accessible document to refer to in a time-critical situation to reduce the risk of making an incorrect pre-alert decision.
RESUMO
AIMS: Inhaled methoxyflurane, newly licensed in Europe for acute trauma pain in adults, has limited evidence of effectiveness in the pre-hospital setting. We aimed to investigate the clinical effectiveness and costs of methoxyflurane delivered when administered by ambulance staff compared with usual analgesic practice (UAP) for adults with trauma. METHODS: A non-randomised control group design was used to compare methoxyflurane versus Entonox® or parenteral analgesics. Verbal numerical pain scores (VNPS) were gathered over time in adults with moderate to severe trauma pain attended by ambulance staff trained in administering and supplied with methoxyflurane. Comparator VNPS were obtained from database records of UAP in similar patients. Clinical efficacy was tested using an Ordered Probit panel regression model of pain intensity linked by observational rules to VNPS. Scenario analyses were used to compare durations under analgesia spent in severe pain, and costs. RESULTS: Over the 12-month evaluation period, 96 trained paramedics and technicians prepared 510 doses of methoxyflurane for administration to a grand total of 483 patients. Thirty-two patients reported side effects, 19 of whom discontinued early. Thirteen patients, 10 aged over 75 years, were nonadherent to instructions given on inhaler use. Modelling results included demonstration of statistically significant clinical effectiveness of methoxyflurane over each comparator (all p-values <0.001). Methoxyflurane's time to achieve maximum pain relief was significantly faster (all p-values <0.001): 25.7 mins (95%CI 24.4-27.0) versus Entonox® 44.4 (39.5-49.3); 25.8 (24.5-27.1) versus IV paracetamol 40.7 (34.6-46.9); 25.7 (24.4-27.0) versus IV morphine sulfate 41.9 (38.9-44.8). Scenario analyses of time spent in severe pain (VNPS on administration just scoring 10 reducing to a score of 7) were significantly less for methoxyflurane (all difference p-values <0.001): 7.6 mins (95%CI 6.5-8.7) versus Entonox® 24.6 (20.1-29.0); 6.7 (5.6-7.7) versus IV paracetamol 23.0 (17.9-28.0); 6.9 (5.9-7.9) versus IV morphine sulfate 14.9 (13.3-16.6). Costing scenarios compared single-dose use of methoxyflurane versus Entonox® and versus parenteral analgesics (80-20% weighted episode mix of morphine sulfate and paracetamol). In both scenarios, the benefits of methoxyflurane were achieved at higher cost: the additional cost per treated patient was £8.77 versus Entonox® and £9.69 versus parenteral analgesics. The BNF list price for one vial containing a 3 mL dose of methoxyflurane for vaporisation in a Penthrox® inhaler is £17.89 per pack. CONCLUSION: Methoxyflurane administered by ambulance clinicians reduced moderate or severe pain due to trauma in adults more rapidly compared to Entonox® or parenteral drugs. Methoxyflurane provides a useful addition to pre-hospital analgesia.