Prehospital Lactate Measurement by Emergency Medical Services in Patients Meeting Sepsis Criteria.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to pilot test the delivery of sepsis education to emergency medical services (EMS) providers and the feasibility of equipping them with temporal artery thermometers (TATs) and handheld lactate meters to aid in the prehospital recognition of sepsis. METHODS: This study used a convenience sample of prehospital patients meeting established criteria for sepsis. Paramedics received education on systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, were trained in the use of TATs and hand-held lactate meters, and enrolled patients who had a recent history of infection, met ≥ 2 SIRS criteria, and were being transported to a participating hospital. Blood lactate was measured by paramedics in the prehospital setting and again in the emergency department (ED) via usual care. Paramedics entered data using an online database accessible at the point of care. RESULTS: Prehospital lactate values obtained by paramedics ranged from 0.8 to 9.8 mmol/L, and an elevated lactate (i.e. ≥ 4.0) was documented in 13 of 112 enrolled patients (12%). The unadjusted correlation of prehospital and ED lactate values was 0.57 (p< 0.001). The median interval between paramedic assessment of blood lactate and the electronic posting of the ED-measured lactate value in the hospital record was 111 minutes. Overall, 91 patients (81%) were hospitalized after ED evaluation, 27 (24%) were ultimately diagnosed with sepsis, and 3 (3%) died during hospitalization. Subjects with elevated prehospital lactate were somewhat more likely to have been admitted to the intensive care unit (23% vs 15%) and to have been diagnosed with sepsis (38% vs 22%) than those with normal lactate levels, but these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: In this pilot, EMS use of a combination of objective SIRS criteria, subjective assessment of infection, and blood lactate measurements did not achieve a level of diagnostic accuracy for sepsis that would warrant hospital prenotification and committed resources at a receiving hospital based on EMS assessment alone. Nevertheless, this work provides an early model for increasing EMS awareness and the implementation of novel devices that may enhance the prehospital assessment for sepsis. Additional translational research studies with larger numbers of patients and more robust methods are needed.

Advanced Clinical Interventions Performed by Emergency Medical Responder Firefighters prior to Ambulance Arrival.

Abstract Introduction. Data on the clinical interventions performed by emergency medical responder firefighters (EMRFs) are limited outside the context of cardiac arrest. We sought to understand the broader medical role of firefighters by examining fire-ambulance arrival order and documenting specific interventions provided by firefighters with advanced EMR training. Methods. A secondary analysis was conducted using electronic patient care records from a single ambulance service and two municipal fire departments that partner to provide emergency response in two suburbs of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Firefighters in both municipalities are dispatched to all medical calls, regardless of severity, and receive training in the following advanced EMR skills: intravenous line placement, administration of oral nitroglycerin and aspirin, placement of supraglottic airways, administration of albuterol via nebulizer, and injections of intramuscular glucagon and epinephrine. Time stamps for unit arrival on scene were used to determine arrival order and to quantify fire lead time (i.e., the interval EMRFs were on scene before paramedics). Results. Fire and ambulance records were linked for 10,403 patient encounters that occurred over 2.5 years. EMRFs arrived first in 9,001 calls (88%) with an average fire lead time of 4.5 minutes. In the two communities, firefighters performed at least one of the six advanced training interventions in 688 patient encounters (7.6%) when they reached the patient first, the most frequent being intravenous line placement (n = 340; 3.8%) and administration of oral nitroglycerin or aspirin (n = 303; 3.4%). EMRFs arrived first to 96 cases of cardiac arrest and performed chest compressions in 78%, automated external defibrillator use in 44%, supraglottic airway placement in 32%, and intravenous line starts in 18%. A modest positive association was observed between increasing fire lead time and use of cardiac arrest interventions by EMRFs. Conclusions. EMRFs performed advanced EMR training interventions in a small fraction of the patients they were able to reach before paramedics, and further study of the clinical significance of these interventions in the hands of this responder group is needed. EMRF training in these communities should continue to emphasize the fervent and consistent application of BLS resuscitation interventions in victims of cardiac arrest.