Out-of-hospital hypertonic resuscitation following severe traumatic brain injury: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Hypertonic fluids restore cerebral perfusion with reduced cerebral edema and modulate inflammatory response to reduce subsequent neuronal injury and thus have potential benefit in resuscitation of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether out-of-hospital administration of hypertonic fluids improves neurologic outcome following severe TBI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial involving 114 North American emergency medical services agencies within the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium, conducted between May 2006 and May 2009 among patients 15 years or older with blunt trauma and a prehospital Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or less who did not meet criteria for hypovolemic shock. Planned enrollment was 2122 patients. INTERVENTION: A single 250-mL bolus of 7.5% saline/6% dextran 70 (hypertonic saline/dextran), 7.5% saline (hypertonic saline), or 0.9% saline (normal saline) initiated in the out-of-hospital setting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Six-month neurologic outcome based on the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) (dichotomized as >4 or ≤4). RESULTS: The study was terminated by the data and safety monitoring board after randomization of 1331 patients, having met prespecified futility criteria. Among the 1282 patients enrolled, 6-month outcomes data were available for 1087 (85%). Baseline characteristics of the groups were equivalent. There was no difference in 6-month neurologic outcome among groups with regard to proportions of patients with severe TBI (GOSE ≤4) (hypertonic saline/dextran vs normal saline: 53.7% vs 51.5%; difference, 2.2% [95% CI, -4.5% to 9.0%]; hypertonic saline vs normal saline: 54.3% vs 51.5%; difference, 2.9% [95% CI, -4.0% to 9.7%]; P = .67). There were no statistically significant differences in distribution of GOSE category or Disability Rating Score by treatment group. Survival at 28 days was 74.3% with hypertonic saline/dextran, 75.7% with hypertonic saline, and 75.1% with normal saline (P = .88). CONCLUSION: Among patients with severe TBI not in hypovolemic shock, initial resuscitation with either hypertonic saline or hypertonic saline/dextran, compared with normal saline, did not result in superior 6-month neurologic outcome or survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00316004.

A critical assessment of the out-of-hospital trauma triage guidelines for physiologic abnormality.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACSCOT) "step 1" field physiologic criteria could be further restricted without substantially sacrificing sensitivity. We assessed whether more restrictive physiologic criteria would improve the specificity of this triage step without missing high-risk patients. METHODS: We analyzed an out-of-hospital, consecutive patient, prospective cohort of injured adults >or=15 years collected from December 1, 2005, to February 28, 2007, by 237 emergency medical service agencies transporting to 207 acute care hospitals in 11 sites across the United States and Canada. Patients were included based on ACSCOT field decision scheme physiologic criteria systolic blood pressure 29 breaths/min, Glasgow Coma Scale score 2 days. RESULTS: Of 7,127 injured persons, 6,259 had complete outcome information and were included in the analysis. There were 3,631 (58.0%) persons with death or LOS >2 days. Using only physiologic measures, the derived rule included advanced airway intervention, shock index >1.4, Glasgow Coma Scale <11, and pulse oximetry <93%. Rule validation demonstrated sensitivity 72% (95% confidence interval: 70%-74%) and specificity 69% (95% confidence interval: 67%-72%). Inclusion of demographic and mechanism variables did not significantly improve performance measures. CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to omit or further restrict any ACSCOT step 1 physiologic measures in a decision rule practical for field use without missing high-risk trauma patients.

Emergency medical services intervals and survival in trauma: assessment of the "golden hour" in a North American prospective cohort.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The first hour after the onset of out-of-hospital traumatic injury is referred to as the "golden hour," yet the relationship between time and outcome remains unclear. We evaluate the association between emergency medical services (EMS) intervals and mortality among trauma patients with field-based physiologic abnormality. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of an out-of-hospital, prospective cohort registry of adult (aged > or =15 years) trauma patients transported by 146 EMS agencies to 51 Level I and II trauma hospitals in 10 sites across North America from December 1, 2005, through March 31, 2007. Inclusion criteria were systolic blood pressure less than or equal to 90 mm Hg, respiratory rate less than 10 or greater than 29 breaths/min, Glasgow Coma Scale score less than or equal to 12, or advanced airway intervention. The outcome was in-hospital mortality. We evaluated EMS intervals (activation, response, on-scene, transport, and total time) with logistic regression and 2-step instrumental variable models, adjusted for field-based confounders. RESULTS: There were 3,656 trauma patients available for analysis, of whom 806 (22.0%) died. In multivariable analyses, there was no significant association between time and mortality for any EMS interval: activation (odds ratio [OR] 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95 to 1.05), response (OR 1.00; 95% CI 9.97 to 1.04), on-scene (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.01), transport (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01), or total EMS time (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.01). Subgroup and instrumental variable analyses did not qualitatively change these findings. CONCLUSION: In this North American sample, there was no association between EMS intervals and mortality among injured patients with physiologic abnormality in the field.

The random dialing survey as a tool for community consultation for research involving the emergency medicine exception from informed consent.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: In 1996, the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services enacted rules allowing a narrow exception from informed consent for critically ill patients enrolled in emergency research. These include requirements for community consultation prior to trial implementation. Previous studies have noted difficulty in engaging the community. We seek to describe the experience with random dialing surveys as a tool for community consultation across 5 metropolitan regions in the United States. METHODS: Random dialing surveys were used as part of the community consultation for an out-of-hospital clinical trial sponsored by the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium. The survey method was designed to obtain a representative sample of the community according to population demographics and geography. Logistics of survey administration, role of the survey in community consultation, and survey results by population demographics are discussed. RESULTS: Random dialing surveys were conducted in 5 of 8 US Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium sites. Overall, 70% to 79% of respondents indicated they would be willing to be enrolled in this study. Support for the inclusion of children (aged 15 to 18 years) ranged from 52% to 71%. Respondents aged 18 to 34 years were more willing to participate in the trial than older age groups. Women and racial minorities were less likely to favor the inclusion of minors. CONCLUSION: Random dialing surveys provide an additional tool to engage the community and obtain a sample of the opinion of the population about research conducted under the emergency exception from informed consent regulations. Similar results were obtained across 5 diverse communities in the United States.