Michael G. Millin

Association Between Helicopter vs Ground Emergency Medical Services and Survival for Adults With Major Trauma

CONTEXT Helicopter emergency medical services and their possible effect on outcomes for traumatically injured patients remain a subject of debate. Because helicopter services are a limited and expensive resource, a methodologically rigorous investigation of its effectiveness compared with ground emergency medical services is warranted. OBJECTIVE To assess the association between the use of helicopter vs ground services and survival among adults with serious traumatic injuries. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective cohort study involving 223,475 patients older than 15 years, having an injury severity score higher than 15, and sustaining blunt or penetrating trauma that required transport to US level I or II trauma centers and whose data were recorded in the 2007-2009 versions of the American College of Surgeons National Trauma Data Bank. INTERVENTIONS Transport by helicopter or ground emergency services to level I or level II trauma centers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Survival to hospital discharge and discharge disposition. RESULTS A total of 61,909 patients were transported by helicopter and 161,566 patients were transported by ground. Overall, 7813 patients (12.6%) transported by helicopter died compared with 17,775 patients (11%) transported by ground services. Before propensity score matching, patients transported by helicopter to level I and level II trauma centers had higher Injury Severity Scores. In the propensity score-matched multivariable regression model, for patients transported to level I trauma centers, helicopter transport was associated with an improved odds of survival compared with ground transport (odds ratio [OR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.14-1.17; P < .001; absolute risk reduction [ARR], 1.5%). For patients transported to level II trauma centers, helicopter transport was associated with an improved odds of survival (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.13-1.17; P < .001; ARR, 1.4%). A greater proportion (18.2%) of those transported to level I trauma centers by helicopter were discharged to rehabilitation compared with 12.7% transported by ground services (P < .001), and 9.3% transported by helicopter were discharged to intermediate facilities compared with 6.5% by ground services (P < .001). Fewer patients transported by helicopter left level II trauma centers against medical advice (0.5% vs 1.0%, P < .001). CONCLUSION Among patients with major trauma admitted to level I or level II trauma centers, transport by helicopter compared with ground services was associated with improved survival to hospital discharge after controlling for multiple known confounders.

Termination of Resuscitation of Nontraumatic Cardiopulmonary Arrest: Resource Document for the National Association of EMS Physicians Position Statement

Abstract In the development of an emergency medical services (EMS) system, medical directors should consider the implementation of protocols for the termination of resuscitation (TOR) of nontraumatic cardiopulmonary arrest. Such protocols have the potential to decrease unnecessary use of warning lights and sirens and save valuable public health resources. Termination-of-resuscitation protocols for nontraumatic cardiopulmonary arrest should be based on the determination that an EMS provider did not witness the arrest, there is no shockable rhythm identified, and there is no return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) prior to EMS transport. Further research is needed to determine the need for direct medical oversight in TOR protocols and the duration of resuscitation prior to EMS providers’ determining that ROSC will not be achieved. This paper is the resource document to the National Association of EMS Physicians position statement on the termination of resuscitation for nontraumatic cardiopulmonary arrest.

EMS Spinal Precautions and the Use of the Long Backboard –Resource Document to the Position Statement of the National Association of EMS Physicians and the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma

Abstract Field spinal immobilization using a backboard and cervical collar has been standard practice for patients with suspected spine injury since the 1960s. The backboard has been a component of field spinal immobilization despite lack of efficacy evidence. While the backboard is a useful spinal protection tool during extrication, use of backboards is not without risk, as they have been shown to cause respiratory compromise, pain, and pressure sores. Backboards also alter a patients physical exam, resulting in unnecessary radiographs. Because backboards present known risks, and their value in protecting the spinal cord of an injured patient remains unsubstantiated, they should only be used judiciously. The following provides a discussion of the elements of the National Association of EMS Physicians (NAEMSP) and American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS-COT) position statement on EMS spinal precautions and the use of the long backboard. This discussion includes items where there is supporting literature and items where additional science is needed.

A Comparative Analysis of Two External Health Care Disaster Responses Following Hurricane Katrina

Objective. Hurricane Katrina severely disrupted the health services in the U.S. Gulf Coast, necessitating an external health care response. The types andneeds of patients following such an extensive event have not been well described. The objective of this study was to analyze the types of patients treated in two temporary clinics andto identify differences between them. Methods. Two temporary sites were established: a disaster medical assistance team–based site in Mississippi anda volunteer-based site near New Orleans. Data were abstracted from patient charts for the two days of simultaneous operation: September 11 and12, 2005. Each patients age group, disposition, andprimary discharge diagnosis was categorized andanalyzed with descriptive andcomparative statistics. Results. There were a total of 501 patient encounters. The most common presentation overall was for chronic health conditions such as medication refills (20.6%), immunizations (11.0%), obtaining community resources (6.0%). andmanagement of acute exacerbation of chronic hypertension (4.6%). There were important differences; the Mississippi site treated more acute conditions than the Louisiana site, including lacerations (13.7% vs. 0%; p < 0.001), musculosketal injuries (9.4% vs. 2.6%; p < 0.001), andother nonspecified injuries (3.0% vs. 0.4%; p = 0.020). Conclusions. With extensive damage to a health care system, these temporary clinics staffed by out-of-state volunteers provided needed health care. The most common health problems were related to chronic disease, primary health care, androutine emergency care, not to the direct impact of the hurricane. In addition to treating minor injuries, disaster planners should prepare to provide primary health care, administer vaccinations, andprovide missing long-term medications. Key words: disaster medicine; emergency medicine; emergency medical services; public health.

Withholding and termination of resuscitation of adult cardiopulmonary arrest secondary to trauma: resource document to the joint NAEMSP-ACSCOT position statements.

ABSTRACT In the setting of traumatic cardiopulmonary arrest, protocols that direct emergency medical service (EMS) providers to withhold or terminate resuscitation, when clinically indicated, have the potential to decrease unnecessary use of warning lights and sirens and save valuable public health resources. Protocols to withhold resuscitation should be based on the determination that there are no obvious signs of life, the injuries are obviously incompatible with life, there is evidence of prolonged arrest, and there is a lack of organized electrocardiographic activity. Termination of resuscitation is indicated when there are no signs of life and no return of spontaneous circulation despite appropriate field EMS treatment that includes minimally interrupted cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Further research is needed to determine the appropriate duration of cardiopulmonary resuscitation before termination of resuscitation and the proper role of direct medical oversight in termination of resuscitation protocols. This article is the resource document to the position statements, jointly endorsed by the National Association of EMS Physicians and the American College of Surgeons’ Committee on Trauma, on withholding and termination of resuscitation in traumatic cardiopulmonary arrest.

Ambulance diversion and emergency department offload delay: resource document for the National Association of EMS Physicians position statement.

Abstract The emergency medical services (EMS) system is a component of a larger health care safety net and a key component of an integrated emergency health care system. EMS systems, and their patients, are significantly impacted by emergency department (ED) crowding. While protocols designed to limit ambulance diversion may be effective at limiting time on divert status, without correcting overall hospital throughput these protocols may have a negative effect on ED crowding and the EMS system. Ambulance offload delay, the time it takes to transfer a patient to an ED stretcher and for the ED staff to assume the responsibility of the care of the patient, may have more impact on ambulance turnaround time than ambulance diversion. EMS administrators and medical directors should work with hospital administrators, ED staff, and ED administrators to improve the overall efficiency of the system, focusing on the time it takes to get ambulances back into service, and therefore must monitor and address both ambulance diversions and ambulance offload delay. This paper is the resource document for the National Association of EMS Physicians position statement on ambulance diversion and ED offload time. Key words: ambulance; EMS; diversion; bypass; offload; delay

Appropriate and Safe Utilization of Helicopter Emergency Medical Services: A Joint Position Statement with Resource Document

Abstract This position statement with accompanying resource document is the result of a collaborative effort of a writing group comprised of members of the Air Medical Physician Association (AMPA), the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), the National Association of EMS Physicians (NAEMSP), and the American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM). This document has been jointly approved by the boards of all four organizations. Patients benefit from the appropriate utilization of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS). EMS and regional health care systems must have and follow guidelines for HEMS utilization to facilitate proper patient selection and ensure clinical benefit. Clinical benefit can be provided by Meaningfully shortening the time to delivery of definitive care to patients with time-sensitive medical conditions Providing necessary specialized medical expertise or equipment to patients before and/or during transport Providing transport to patients inaccessible by other means of transport The decision to use HEMS is a medical decision, separate from the aviation determination whether a transport can be completed safely. Physicians with specialized training and experience in EMS and air medical transport must be integral to HEMS utilization decisions, including guideline development and quality improvement activities. Safety management systems must be developed, adopted, and adhered to by air medical operators when making decisions to accept and continue every HEMS transport. HEMS must be fully integrated within the local, regional, and state emergency health care systems. HEMS programs cannot operate independently of the surrounding health care environment. The EMS and health care systems must be involved in the determination of the number of HEMS assets necessary to provide appropriate coverage for their region. Excessive resources may lead to competitive practices that can affect utilization and negatively impact safety. Inadequate resources will delay receipt of definitive care. National guidelines for appropriate utilization of HEMS must be developed. These guidelines should be national in scope yet allow local, regional, and state implementation. A National HEMS Agenda for the Future should be developed to address HEMS utilization and availability and to identify and support a research strategy for ongoing, evidence-based refinement of utilization guidelines. Key words: appropriateness; helicopter; HEMS; safety; utilization

Role of Emergency Medical Services in Disaster Response: Resource Document for the National Association of EMS Physicians Position Statement

Abstract The National Association of EMS Physicians (NAEMSP) advocates for a strong emergency medical services (EMS) role in all phases of disaster management—preparedness, response, and recovery. Emergency medical services administrators and medical directors should play a leadership role in preparedness activities such as training and education, development of performance metrics, establishment of memoranda of understanding (MOUs), and planning for licensure and liability issues. During both the planning and response phases, EMS leadership should advocate for participation in unified command, modified scope of practice appropriate for providers and the event, and expanded roles in community and federal response efforts. To enhance recovery, EMS leadership should strongly advocate for national recognition for EMS efforts and further research into strategies that foster healthy coping techniques and resiliency in the EMS workforce. This resource document will outline the basis for the corresponding NAEMSP position statement on the role of EMS in disaster management.

Patients without ST elevation after return of spontaneous circulation may benefit from emergent percutaneous intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION The American Heart Association recommends that post-arrest patients with evidence of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) on electrocardiogram (ECG) be emergently taken to the catheterization lab for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, recommendations regarding the utility of emergent PCI for patients without ST elevation are less specific. This review examined the literature on the utility of PCI in post-arrest patients without ST elevation compared to patients with STEMI. METHODS A systematic review of the English language literature was performed for all years to March 1, 2015 to examine the hypothesis that a percentage of post-cardiac arrest patients without ST elevation will benefit from emergent PCI as defined by evidence of an acute culprit coronary lesion. RESULTS Out of 1067 articles reviewed, 11 articles were identified that allowed for analysis of data to examine our study hypothesis. These studies show that patients presenting post cardiac arrest with STEMI are thirteen times more likely to be emergently taken to the catheterization lab than patients without STEMI; OR 13.8 (95% CI 4.9-39.0). Most importantly, the cumulative data show that when taken to the catheterization lab as much as 32.2% of patients without ST elevation had an acute culprit lesion requiring intervention, compared to 71.9% of patients with STEMI; OR 0.15 (95% CI 0.06-0.34). CONCLUSION The results of this systematic review demonstrate that nearly one third of patients who have been successfully resuscitated from cardiopulmonary arrest without ST elevation on ECG have an acute lesion that would benefit from emergent percutaneous coronary intervention.

A poor association between out-of-hospital cardiac arrest location and public automated external defibrillator placement.

INTRODUCTION Much attention has been given to the strategic placement of automated external defibrillators (AEDs). The purpose of this study was to examine the correlation of strategically placed AEDs and the actual location of cardiac arrests. METHODS A retrospective review of data maintained by the Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services Systems (MIEMSS), specifically, the Maryland Cardiac Arrest Database and the Maryland AED Registry, was conducted. Location types for AEDs were compared with the locations of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in Howard County, Maryland. The respective locations were compared using scatter diagrams and r2 statistics. RESULTS The r2 statistics for AED location compared with witnessed cardiac arrest and total cardiac arrests were 0.054 and 0.051 respectively, indicating a weak relationship between the two variables in each case. No AEDs were registered in the three most frequently occurring locations for cardiac arrests (private homes, skilled nursing facilities, assisted living facilities) and no cardiac arrests occurred at the locations where AEDs were most commonly placed (community pools, nongovernment public buildings, schools/educational facilities). CONCLUSION A poor association exists between the location of cardiac arrests and the location of AEDs.