EMS Treatment Guidelines in Major Traumatic Brain Injury With Positive Pressure Ventilation.

Importance: The Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care (EPIC) study demonstrated improved survival in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) following implementation of the prehospital treatment guidelines. The impact of implementing these guidelines in the subgroup of patients who received positive pressure ventilation (PPV) is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the association of implementation of prehospital TBI evidence-based guidelines with survival among patients with prehospital PPV. Design, Setting, and Participants: The EPIC study was a multisystem, intention-to-treat study using a before/after controlled design. Evidence-based guidelines were implemented by emergency medical service agencies across Arizona. This subanalysis was planned a priori and included participants who received prehospital PPV. Outcomes were compared between the preimplementation and postimplementation cohorts using logistic regression, stratified by predetermined TBI severity categories (moderate, severe, or critical). Data were collected from January 2007 to June 2017, and data were analyzed from January to February 2023. Exposure: Implementation of the evidence-based guidelines for the prehospital care of patient with TBI. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge, and the secondary outcome was survival to admission. Results: Among the 21 852 participants in the main study, 5022 received prehospital PPV (preimplementation, 3531 participants; postimplementation, 1491 participants). Of 5022 included participants, 3720 (74.1%) were male, and the median (IQR) age was 36 (22-54) years. Across all severities combined, survival to admission improved (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.59; 95% CI, 1.28-1.97), while survival to discharge did not (aOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78-1.13). Within the cohort with severe TBI but not in the moderate or critical subgroups, survival to hospital admission increased (aOR, 6.44; 95% CI, 2.39-22.00), as did survival to discharge (aOR, 3.52; 95% CI, 1.96-6.34). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe TBI who received active airway interventions in the field, guideline implementation was independently associated with improved survival to hospital admission and discharge. This was true whether they received basic airway interventions or advanced airways. These findings support the current guideline recommendations for aggressive prevention/correction of hypoxia and hyperventilation in patients with severe TBI, regardless of which airway type is used.

Correlation between prehospital and in-hospital hypotension and outcomes after traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Hypotension has a powerful effect on patient outcome after traumatic brain injury (TBI). The relative impact of hypotension occurring in the field versus during early hospital resuscitation is unknown. We evaluated the association between hypotension and mortality and non-mortality outcomes in four cohorts defined by where the hypotension occurred [neither prehospital nor hospital, prehospital only, hospital only, both prehospital and hospital]. METHODS: Subjects ≥10 years with major TBI were included. Standard statistics were used for unadjusted analyses. We used logistic regression, controlling for significant confounders, to determine the adjusted odds (aOR) for outcomes in each of the three cohorts. RESULTS: Included were 12,582 subjects (69.8% male; median age 44 (IQR 26-61). Mortality by hypotension status: No hypotension: 9.2% (95%CI: 8.7-9.8%); EMS hypotension only: 27.8% (24.6-31.2%); hospital hypotension only: 45.6% (39.1-52.1%); combined EMS/hospital hypotension 57.6% (50.0-65.0%); (p < 0.0001). The aOR for death reflected the same progression: 1.0 (reference-no hypotension), 1.8 (1.39-2.33), 2.61 (1.73-3.94), and 4.36 (2.78-6.84), respectively. The proportion of subjects having hospital hypotension was 19.0% (16.5-21.7%) in those with EMS hypotension compared to 2.0% (1.8-2.3%) for those without (p < 0.0001). Additionally, the proportion of patients with TC hypotension was increased even with EMS "near hypotension" up to an SBP of 120 mmHg [(aOR 3.78 (2.97, 4.82)]. CONCLUSION: While patients with hypotension in the field or on arrival at the trauma center had markedly increased risk of death compared to those with no hypotension, those with prehospital hypotension that was not resolved before hospital arrival had, by far, the highest odds of death. Furthermore, TBI patients who had prehospital hypotension were five times more likely to arrive hypotensive at the trauma center than those who did not. Finally, even "near-hypotension" in the field was strongly and independently associated the risk of a hypotensive hospital arrival (<90 mmHg). These findings are supportive of the prehospital guidelines that recommend aggressive prevention and treatment of hypotension in major TBI.

Optimal Out-of-Hospital Blood Pressure in Major Traumatic Brain Injury: A Challenge to the Current Understanding of Hypotension.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the out-of-hospital blood pressure ranges associated with optimal outcomes in traumatic brain injuries (TBI). Our objective was to evaluate the associations between out-of-hospital systolic blood pressure (SBP) and multiple hospital outcomes without assuming any predefined thresholds for hypotension, normotension, or hypertension. METHODS: This was a preplanned secondary analysis from the Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care (EPIC) TBI study. Among patients (age ≥10 years) with major TBIs (Barell Matrix type 1 and/or Abbreviated Injury Scale-head severity ≥3) and lowest out-of-hospital SBPs of 40 to 299 mmHg, we utilized generalized additive models to summarize the distributions of various outcomes as smoothed functions of SBP, adjusting for important and significant confounders. The subjects who were enrolled in the study phase after the out-of-hospital TBI guideline implementation were used to validate the models developed from the preimplementation cohort. RESULTS: Among 12,169 included cases, the mortality model revealed 3 distinct ranges: (1) a monotonically decreasing relationship between SBP and the adjusted probability of death from 40 to 130 mmHg, (2) lowest adjusted mortality from 130 to 180 mmHg, and (3) rapidly increasing mortality above 180 mmHg. A subanalysis of the cohorts with isolated TBIs and multisystem injuries with TBIs revealed SBP mortality patterns that were similar to each other and to that of the main analysis. While the specific SBP ranges varied somewhat for the nonmortality outcomes (hospital length of stay, ICU length of stay, discharge to skilled nursing/inpatient rehabilitation, and hospital charges), the patterns were very similar to that of mortality. In each model, validation was confirmed utilizing the postimplementation cohort. CONCLUSION: Optimal adjusted mortality was associated with a surprisingly high SBP range (130 to 180 mmHg). Below this level, there was no point or range of inflection that would indicate a physiologically meaningful threshold for defining hypotension. Nonmortality outcomes showed very similar patterns. These findings highlight how sensitive the injured brain is to compromised perfusion at SBP levels that, heretofore, have been considered adequate or even normal. While the study design does did not allow us to conclude that the currently recommended treatment threshold (<90 mmHg) should be increased, the findings imply that the definition of hypotension in the setting of TBI is too low. Randomized trials evaluating treatment levels significantly higher than 90 mmHg are needed.

Effect of Implementing the Out-of-Hospital Traumatic Brain Injury Treatment Guidelines: The Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care for Children Study (EPIC4Kids).

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We evaluate the effect of implementing the out-of-hospital pediatric traumatic brain injury guidelines on outcomes in children with major traumatic brain injury. METHODS: The Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care for Children study is the preplanned secondary analysis of the Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care study, a multisystem, intention-to-treat study using a before-after controlled design. This subanalysis included children younger than 18 years who were transported to Level I trauma centers by participating out-of-hospital agencies between January 1, 2007, and June 30, 2015, throughout Arizona. The primary and secondary outcomes were survival to hospital discharge or admission for children with major traumatic brain injury and in 3 subgroups, defined a priori as those with moderate, severe, and critical traumatic brain injury. Outcomes in the preimplementation and postimplementation cohorts were compared with logistic regression, adjusting for risk factors and confounders. RESULTS: There were 2,801 subjects, 2,041 in preimplementation and 760 in postimplementation. The primary analysis (postimplementation versus preimplementation) yielded an adjusted odds ratio of 1.16 (95% confidence interval 0.70 to 1.92) for survival to hospital discharge and 2.41 (95% confidence interval 1.17 to 5.21) for survival to hospital admission. In the severe traumatic brain injury cohort (Regional Severity Score-Head 3 or 4), but not the moderate or critical subgroups, survival to discharge significantly improved after guideline implementation (adjusted odds ratio = 8.42; 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 100+). The improvement in survival to discharge among patients with severe traumatic brain injury who received positive-pressure ventilation did not reach significance (adjusted odds ratio = 9.13; 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 100+). CONCLUSION: Implementation of the pediatric out-of-hospital traumatic brain injury guidelines was not associated with improved survival when the entire spectrum of severity was analyzed as a whole (moderate, severe, and critical). However, both adjusted survival to hospital admission and discharge improved in children with severe traumatic brain injury, indicating a potential severity-based interventional opportunity for guideline effectiveness. These findings support the widespread implementation of the out-of-hospital pediatric traumatic brain injury guidelines.

Association of Statewide Implementation of the Prehospital Traumatic Brain Injury Treatment Guidelines With Patient Survival Following Traumatic Brain Injury: The Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care (EPIC) Study.

Importance: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a massive public health problem. While evidence-based guidelines directing the prehospital treatment of TBI have been promulgated, to our knowledge, no studies have assessed their association with survival. Objective: To evaluate the association of implementing the nationally vetted, evidence-based, prehospital treatment guidelines with outcomes in moderate, severe, and critical TBI. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care (EPIC) Study included more than 130 emergency medical services systems/agencies throughout Arizona. This was a statewide, multisystem, intention-to-treat study using a before/after controlled design with patients with moderate to critically severe TBI (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Barell Matrix-Type 1 and/or Abbreviated Injury Scale Head region severity ≥3) transported to trauma centers between January 1, 2007, and June 30, 2015. Data were analyzed between October 25, 2017, and February 22, 2019. Interventions: Implementation of the prehospital TBI guidelines emphasizing avoidance/treatment of hypoxia, prevention/correction of hyperventilation, and avoidance/treatment of hypotension. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary: survival to hospital discharge; secondary: survival to hospital admission. Results: Of the included patients, the median age was 45 years, 14 666 (67.1%) were men, 7181 (32.9%) were women; 16 408 (75.1% ) were white, 1400 (6.4%) were Native American, 743 (3.4% ) were Black, 237 (1.1%) were Asian, and 2791 (12.8%) were other race/ethnicity. Of the included patients, 21 852 met inclusion criteria for analysis (preimplementation phase [P1]: 15 228; postimplementation [P3]: 6624). The primary analysis (P3 vs P1) revealed an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.06 (95% CI, 0.93-1.21; P = .40) for survival to hospital discharge. The aOR was 1.70 (95% CI, 1.38-2.09; P < .001) for survival to hospital admission. Among the severe injury cohorts (but not moderate or critical), guideline implementation was significantly associated with survival to discharge (Regional Severity Score-Head 3-4: aOR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.52-2.72; P < .001; Injury Severity Score 16-24: aOR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.07-2.48; P = .02). This was also true for survival to discharge among the severe, intubated subgroups (Regional Severity Score-Head 3-4: aOR, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.65-5.98; P < .001; Injury Severity Score 16-24: aOR, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.19-11.34; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: Statewide implementation of the prehospital TBI guidelines was not associated with significant improvement in overall survival to hospital discharge (across the entire, combined moderate to critical injury spectrum). However, adjusted survival doubled among patients with severe TBI and tripled in the severe, intubated cohort. Furthermore, guideline implementation was significantly associated with survival to hospital admission. These findings support the widespread implementation of the prehospital TBI treatment guidelines. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01339702.

2018 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference: A Workforce Development Research Agenda for Pediatric Care in the Emergency Department.

Each year, more than 30 million children visit U.S. emergency departments (EDs). Although the number of pediatric emergency medicine specialists continues to rise, the vast majority of children are cared for in general EDs outside of children's hospitals. The diverse workforce of care providers for children must possess the knowledge, experience, skills, and systemic support necessary to deliver excellent pediatric emergency care. There is a crucial need to understand the factors that drive the professional development and support systems of this diverse workforce. Through the iterative process culminating with the 2018 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference, we have identified five key research themes and prioritized a specific research agenda. These themes represent critical gaps in our understanding of the development and maintenance of the pediatric emergency care workforce and allow for a prioritization of future research efforts. Only by more fully understanding the gaps in workforce needs, and the necessary steps to address these gaps, can outcomes be optimized for children in need of emergency care.

Executive Summary: The 2018 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference: Aligning the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Research Agenda to Reduce Health Outcome Gaps.

Emergency care providers share a compelling interest in developing an effective patient-centered, outcomes-based research agenda that can decrease variability in pediatric outcomes. The 2018 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference "Aligning the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Research Agenda to Reduce Health Outcome Gaps (AEMCC)" aimed to fulfill this role. This conference convened major thought leaders and stakeholders to introduce a research, scholarship, and innovation agenda for pediatric emergency care specifically to reduce health outcome gaps. Planning committee and conference participants included emergency physicians, pediatric emergency physicians, pediatricians, and researchers with expertise in research dissemination and translation, as well as comparative effectiveness, in collaboration with patients, patient and family advocates from national advocacy organizations, and trainees. Topics that were explored and deliberated through subcommittee breakout sessions led by content experts included 1) pediatric emergency medical services research, 2) pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) research network collaboration, 3) PEM education for emergency medicine providers, 4) workforce development for PEM, and 5) enhancing collaboration across emergency departments (PEM practice in non-children's hospitals). The work product of this conference is a research agenda that aims to identify areas of future research, innovation, and scholarship in PEM.

A Research Agenda to Advance Pediatric Emergency Care Through Enhanced Collaboration Across Emergency Departments.

In 2018, the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine and the journal Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) convened a consensus conference entitled, "Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference: Aligning the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Research Agenda to Reduce Health Outcome Gaps." This article is the product of the breakout session, "Emergency Department Collaboration-Pediatric Emergency Medicine in Non-Children's Hospital"). This subcommittee consisting of emergency medicine, pediatric emergency medicine, and quality improvement (QI) experts, as well as a patient advocate, identified main outcome gaps in the care of children in the emergency departments (EDs) in the following areas: variations in pediatric care and outcomes, pediatric readiness, and gaps in knowledge translation. The goal for this session was to create a research agenda that facilitates collaboration and partnering of diverse stakeholders to develop a system of care across all ED settings with the aim of improving quality and increasing safe medical care for children. The following recommended research strategies emerged: explore the use of technology as well as collaborative networks for education, research, and advocacy to develop and implement patient care guidelines, pediatric knowledge generation and dissemination, and pediatric QI and prepare all EDs to care for the acutely ill and injured pediatric patients. In conclusion, collaboration between general EDs and academic pediatric centers on research, dissemination, and implementation of evidence into clinical practice is a solution to improving the quality of pediatric care across the continuum.

Association of Out-of-Hospital Hypotension Depth and Duration With Traumatic Brain Injury Mortality.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Out-of-hospital hypotension has been associated with increased mortality in traumatic brain injury. The association of traumatic brain injury mortality with the depth or duration of out-of-hospital hypotension is unknown. We evaluated the relationship between the depth and duration of out-of-hospital hypotension and mortality in major traumatic brain injury. METHODS: We evaluated adults and older children with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury in the preimplementation cohort of Arizona's statewide Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care study. We used logistic regression to determine the association between the depth-duration dose of hypotension (depth of systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg integrated over duration [minutes] of hypotension) and odds of inhospital death, controlling for significant confounders. RESULTS: There were 7,521 traumatic brain injury cases included (70.6% male patients; median age 40 years [interquartile range 24 to 58]). Mortality was 7.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.2% to 8.5%) among the 6,982 patients without hypotension (systolic blood pressure ≥90 mm Hg) and 33.4% (95% CI 29.4% to 37.6%) among the 539 hypotensive patients (systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg). Mortality was higher with increased hypotension dose: 0.01 to 14.99 mm Hg-minutes 16.3%; 15 to 49.99 mm Hg-minutes 28.1%; 50 to 141.99 mm Hg-minutes 38.8%; and greater than or equal to 142 mm Hg-minutes 50.4%. Log2 (the logarithm in base 2) of hypotension dose was associated with traumatic brain injury mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.19 [95% CI 1.14 to 1.25] per 2-fold increase of dose). CONCLUSION: In this study, the depth and duration of out-of-hospital hypotension were associated with increased traumatic brain injury mortality. Assessments linking out-of-hospital blood pressure with traumatic brain injury outcomes should consider both depth and duration of hypotension.

Prehospital Intubation is Associated with Favorable Outcomes and Lower Mortality in ProTECT III.

OBJECTIVE: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes more than 2.5 million emergency department visits, hospitalizations, or deaths annually. Prehospital endotracheal intubation has been associated with poor outcomes in patients with TBI in several retrospective observational studies. We evaluated the relationship between prehospital intubation, functional outcomes, and mortality using high quality data on clinical practice collected prospectively during a randomized multicenter clinical trial. METHODS: ProTECT III was a multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of early administration of progesterone in 882 patients with acute moderate to severe nonpenetrating TBI. Patients were excluded if they had an index GCS of 3 and nonreactive pupils, those with withdrawal of life support on arrival, and if they had documented prolonged hypotension and/or hypoxia. Prehospital intubation was performed as per local clinical protocol in each participating EMS system. Models for favorable outcome and mortality included prehospital intubation, method of transport, index GCS, age, race, and ethnicity as independent variables. Significance was set at α = 0.05. Favorable outcome was defined by a stratified dichotomy of the GOS-E scores in which the definition of favorable outcome depended on the severity of the initial injury. RESULTS: Favorable outcome was more frequent in the 349 subjects with prehospital intubation (57.3%) than in the other 533 patients (46.0%, p = 0.003). Mortality was also lower in the prehospital intubation group (13.8% v. 19.5%, p = 0.03). Logistic regression analysis of prehospital intubation and mortality, adjusted for index GCS, showed that odds of dying for those with prehospital intubation were 47% lower than for those that were not intubated (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.36-0.78). 279 patients with prehospital intubation were transported by air. Modeling transport method and mortality, adjusted for index GCS, showed increased odds of dying in those transported by ground compared to those transported by air (OR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.40-3.15). Decreased odds of dying trended among those with prehospital intubation adjusted for transport method, index GCS score at randomization, age, and race/ethnicity (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.37-1.31). CONCLUSIONS: In this study that excluded moribund patients, prehospital intubation was performed primarily in patients transported by air. Prehospital intubation and air medical transport together were associated with favorable outcomes and lower mortality. Prehospital intubation was not associated with increased morbidity or mortality regardless of transport method or severity of injury.

Mortality and Prehospital Blood Pressure in Patients With Major Traumatic Brain Injury: Implications for the Hypotension Threshold.

IMPORTANCE: Current prehospital traumatic brain injury guidelines use a systolic blood pressure threshold of less than 90 mm Hg for treating hypotension for individuals 10 years and older based on studies showing higher mortality when blood pressure drops below this level. However, the guidelines also acknowledge the weakness of the supporting evidence. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether any statistically supportable threshold between systolic pressure and mortality emerges from the data a priori, without assuming that a cut point exists. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational evaluation of a large prehospital database established as a part of the Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care Traumatic Brain Injury Study. Patients from the preimplementation cohort (January 2007 to March 2014) 10 years and older with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (Barell Matrix Type 1 classification, International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision head region severity score of 3 or greater, and/or Abbreviated Injury Scale head-region severity score of 3 or greater) and a prehospital systolic pressure between 40 and 119 mm Hg were included. The generalized additive model and logistic regression were used to determine the association between systolic pressure and probability of death, adjusting for significant/important confounders. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The main outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Among the 3844 included patients, 2565 (66.7%) were male, and the median (range) age was 35 (10-99) years. The model revealed a monotonically decreasing association between systolic pressure and adjusted probability of death across the entire range (ie, from 40 to 119 mm Hg). Each 10-point increase of systolic pressure was associated with a decrease in the adjusted odds of death of 18.8% (adjusted odds ratio, 0.812; 95% CI, 0.748-0.883). Thus, the adjusted odds of mortality increased as much for a drop from 110 to 100 mm Hg as for a drop from 90 to 80 mm Hg, and so on throughout the range. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We found a linear association between lowest prehospital systolic blood pressure and severity-adjusted probability of mortality across an exceptionally wide range. There is no identifiable threshold or inflection point between 40 and 119 mm Hg. Thus, in patients with traumatic brain injury, the concept that 90 mm Hg represents a unique or important physiological cut point may be wrong. Furthermore, clinically meaningful hypotension may not be as low as current guidelines suggest. Randomized trials evaluating treatment levels significantly above 90 mm Hg are needed.

The Effect of Combined Out-of-Hospital Hypotension and Hypoxia on Mortality in Major Traumatic Brain Injury.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Survival is significantly reduced by either hypotension or hypoxia during the out-of-hospital management of major traumatic brain injury. However, only a handful of small studies have investigated the influence of the combination of both hypotension and hypoxia occurring together. In patients with major traumatic brain injury, we evaluate the associations between mortality and out-of-hospital hypotension and hypoxia separately and in combination. METHODS: All moderate or severe traumatic brain injury cases in the preimplementation cohort of the Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care study (a statewide, before/after, controlled study of the effect of implementing the out-of-hospital traumatic brain injury treatment guidelines) from January 1, 2007, to March 31, 2014, were evaluated (exclusions: <10 years, out-of-hospital oxygen saturation ≤10%, and out-of-hospital systolic blood pressure <40 or >200 mm Hg). The relationship between mortality and hypotension (systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg) or hypoxia (saturation <90%) was assessed with multivariable logistic regression, controlling for Injury Severity Score, head region severity, injury type (blunt versus penetrating), age, sex, race, ethnicity, payer, interhospital transfer, and trauma center. RESULTS: Among the 13,151 patients who met inclusion criteria (median age 45 years; 68.6% men), 11,545 (87.8%) had neither hypotension nor hypoxia, 604 (4.6%) had hypotension only, 790 (6.0%) had hypoxia only, and 212 (1.6%) had both hypotension and hypoxia. Mortality for the 4 study cohorts was 5.6%, 20.7%, 28.1%, and 43.9%, respectively. The crude and adjusted odds ratios for death within the cohorts, using the patients with neither hypotension nor hypoxia as the reference, were 4.4 and 2.5, 6.6 and 3.0, and 13.2 and 6.1, respectively. Evaluation for an interaction between hypotension and hypoxia revealed that the effects were additive on the log odds of death. CONCLUSION: In this statewide analysis of major traumatic brain injury, combined out-of-hospital hypotension and hypoxia were associated with significantly increased mortality. This effect on survival persisted even after controlling for multiple potential confounders. In fact, the adjusted odds of death for patients with both hypotension and hypoxia were more than 2 times greater than for those with either hypotension or hypoxia alone. These findings seem supportive of the emphasis on aggressive prevention and treatment of hypotension and hypoxia reflected in the current emergency medical services traumatic brain injury treatment guidelines but clearly reveal the need for further study to determine their influence on outcome.

Impact and feasibility of an emergency department-based ventilator-associated pneumonia bundle for patients intubated in an academic emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) has been linked to emergency department (ED) intubation and length of stay (LOS). We assessed VAP prevalence in ED intubated patients, feasibility of ED VAP prevention, and effect on VAP rates. METHODS: This was a quality improvement initiative using a pre/post design. Phase 1 (PRE1) comprised patients before intensive care unit (ICU) bundle deployment. Phase 2 (PRE2) occurred after ICU but before ED deployment. Phase 3 (POST) included patients received VAP prevention starting at ED intubation. Log-rank test for equality and Cox regression using a Breslow method for ties were performed. Bundle compliance was reported as percentages. Number needed to treat (NNT) was calculated by ventilator day. RESULTS: PRE1, PRE2, and POST groups were composed of 195, 192, and 153 patients, respectively, with VAP rates of 22 (11.3%), 11 (5.7%), and 6 (3.9%). Log-rank test showed significant reduction in VAP (χ2 = 9.16, P = .0103). The Cox regression hazard ratio was 1.38 for the Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score (P = .001), and the hazard ratio was 0.26 for the VAP bundle (P = .005). Bundle compliance >50% for head-of-bed elevation, oral care, subglottic suctioning, and titrated sedation improved significantly with introduction of a registered nurse champion. NNT varied from 7 to 11. CONCLUSIONS: VAP was common for ED intubated patients. ED-based VAP prevention is feasible. We demonstrate significant reduction in VAP rates, which should be replicated in a multicenter study.

Physician documentation of sepsis syndrome is associated with more aggressive treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Timely recognition and treatment of sepsis improves survival. The objective is to examine the association between recognition of sepsis and timeliness of treatments. METHODS: We identified a retrospective cohort of emergency department (ED) patients with positive blood cultures from May 2007 to January 2009, and reviewed vital signs, imaging, laboratory data, and physician/nursing charts. Patients who met systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria and had evidence of infection available to the treating clinician at the time of the encounter were classified as having sepsis. Patients were dichotomized as RECOGNIZED if sepsis was explicitly articulated in the patient record or if a sepsis order set was launched, or as UNRECOGNIZED if neither of these two criteria were met. We used median regression to compare time to antibiotic administration and total volume of fluid resuscitation between groups, controlling for age, sex, and sepsis severity. RESULTS: SIRS criteria were present in 228/315 (72.4%) cases. Our record review identified sepsis syndromes in 214 (67.9%) cases of which 118 (55.1%) had sepsis, 64 (29.9%) had severe sepsis, and 32 (15.0%) had septic shock. The treating team contemplated sepsis (RECOGNIZED) in 123 (57.6%) patients. Compared to the UNRECOGNIZED group, the RECOGNIZED group had a higher use of antibiotics in the ED (91.9 vs.75.8%, p=0.002), more patients aged 60 years or older (56.9 vs. 33.0%, p=0.001), and more severe cases (septic shock: 18.7 vs. 9.9%, severe sepsis: 39.0 vs.17.6%, sepsis: 42.3 vs.72.5%; p<0.001). The median time to antibiotic (minutes) was lower in the RECOGNIZED (142) versus UNRECOGNIZED (229) group, with an adjusted median difference of -74 minutes (95% CI [-128 to -19]). The median total volume of fluid resuscitation (mL) was higher in the RECOGNIZED (1,600 mL) compared to the UNRECOGNIZED (1,000 mL) group. However, the adjusted median difference was not statistically significant: 262 mL (95% CI [ -171 to 694 mL]). CONCLUSION: Patients whose emergency physicians articulated sepsis syndrome in their documentation or who launched the sepsis order set received antibiotics sooner and received more total volume of fluid. Age <60 and absence of fever are factors associated with lack of recognition of sepsis cases.

Evaluation of the impact of implementing the emergency medical services traumatic brain injury guidelines in Arizona: the Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care (EPIC) study methodology.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) exacts a great toll on society. Fortunately, there is growing evidence that the management of TBI in the early minutes after injury may significantly reduce morbidity and mortality. In response, evidence-based prehospital and in-hospital TBI treatment guidelines have been established by authoritative bodies. However, no large studies have yet evaluated the effectiveness of implementing these guidelines in the prehospital setting. This article describes the background, design, implementation, emergency medical services (EMS) treatment protocols, and statistical analysis of a prospective, controlled (before/after), statewide study designed to evaluate the effect of implementing the EMS TBI guidelines-the Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care (EPIC) study (NIH/NINDS R01NS071049, "EPIC"; and 3R01NS071049-S1, "EPIC4Kids"). The specific aim of the study is to test the hypothesis that statewide implementation of the international adult and pediatric EMS TBI guidelines will significantly reduce mortality and improve nonmortality outcomes in patients with moderate or severe TBI. Furthermore, it will specifically evaluate the effect of guideline implementation on outcomes in the subgroup of patients who are intubated in the field. Over the course of the entire study (~9 years), it is estimated that approximately 25,000 patients will be enrolled.

An innovative longitudinal curriculum to increase emergency medicine residents' exposure to rarely encountered and technically challenging procedures.

BACKGROUND: Procedural skills have historically been taught at the bedside. In this study, we aimed to increase resident knowledge of uncommon emergency medical procedures to increase residents' procedural skills in common and uncommon emergency medical procedures and to integrate cognitive training with hands-on procedural instruction using high- and low-fidelity simulation. METHODS: We developed 13 anatomically/physiologically-based procedure modules focusing on uncommon clinical procedures and/or those requiring higher levels of technical skills. A departmental expert directed each session with collaboration from colleagues in related subspecialties. Sessions were developed based on Manthey and Fitch's stages of procedural competency including 1) knowledge acquisition, 2) experience/technical skill development, and 3) competency evaluation. We then distributed a brief, 10-question, online survey to our residents in order to solicit feedback regarding their perceptions of increased knowledge and ability in uncommon and common emergency medical procedures, and their perception of the effectiveness of integrated cognitive training with hands-on instruction through high- and low-fidelity simulation. RESULTS: Fifty percent of our residents (11/22) responded to our survey. Responses indicated the procedure series helped with understanding of both uncommon (65% strongly agreed [SA], 35% agreed [A]) and common (55% SA, 45% A) emergency medicine procedures and increased residents' ability to perform uncommon (55% SA, 45% A) and common (45% SA, 55% A) emergency medical procedures. In addition, survey results indicated that the residents were able to reach their goal numbers. CONCLUSION: Based on survey results, the procedure series improved our residents' perceived understanding of and perceived ability to perform uncommon and more technically challenging procedures. Further, results suggest that the use of a cognitive curriculum model as developed by Manthey and Fitch is adaptable and could be modified to fit the needs of other medical specialties.

Scholar quest: a residency research program aligned with faculty goals.

INTRODUCTION: The ACGME requires that residents perform scholarly activities prior to graduation, but this is difficult to complete and challenging to support. We describe a residency research program, taking advantage of environmental change aligning resident and faculty goals, to become a contributor to departmental cultural change and research development. METHODS: A research program, Scholar Quest (SQ), was developed as a part of an Information Mastery program. The goal of SQ is for residents to gain understanding of scholarly activity through a mentor-directed experience in original research. This curriculum is facilitated by providing residents protected time for didactics, seed grants and statistical/staff support. We evaluated total scholarly activity and resident/faculty involvement before and after implementation (PRE-SQ; 2003-2005 and POST-SQ; 2007-2009). RESULTS: Scholarly activity was greater POST-SQ versus PRE-SQ (123 versus 27) (p<0.05) with an incidence rate ratio (IRR)=2.35. Resident and faculty involvement in scholarly activity also increased PRE-SQ to POST-SQ (22 to 98 residents; 10 to 39 faculty, p<0.05) with an IRR=2.87 and 2.69, respectively. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a program using department environmental change promoting a resident longitudinal research curriculum yielded increased resident and faculty scholarly involvement, as well as an increase in total scholarly activity. [West J Emerg Med. 2014;15(3):299-305.].

Alternative methods to central venous pressure for assessing volume status in critically ill patients.

INTRODUCTION: Early goal-directed therapy increases survival in persons with sepsis but requires placement of a central line. We evaluate alternative methods to measuring central venous pressure (CVP) to assess volume status, including peripheral venous pressure (PVP) and stroke volume variation (SVV), which may facilitate nurse-driven resuscitation protocols. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in the emergency department or ICU of an academic medical center. Measurements of CVP, PVP, SVV, shoulder and elbow position, and dichotomous variables Awake, Movement, and Vented were measured and recorded 7 times during a 1-hour period. Regression analysis was used to predict CVP from PVP and/or SVV, shoulder/elbow position, and dichotomous variables. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled, of which 20 had PVP measurements and 11 also had SVV measurements. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated significant predictive relationships for CVP using PVP (CVP = 6.7701 + 0.2312 × PVP - 0.1288 × Shoulder + 12.127 × Movement - 4.4805 × Neck line), SVV (CVP = 14.578 - 0.3951 × SVV + 18.113 × Movement), and SVV and PVP (CVP = 4.2997 - 1.1675 × SVV + 0.3866 × PVP + 18.246 × Awake + 0.1467 × Shoulder = 0.4525 × Elbow + 15.472 × Foot line + 10.202 × Arm line). DISCUSSION: PVP and SVV are moderately good predictors of CVP. Combining PVP and SVV and adding variables related to body position, movement, ventilation, and sleep/wake state further improves the predictive value of the model. The models illustrate the importance of standardizing patient position, minimizing movement, and placing intravenous lines proximally in the upper extremity or neck.