ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To describe our institutional experience with post-mortem computed tomography (PMCT) and its impact on decedent injury severity score (ISS) and to assess the adequacy of emergently placed support medical devices. METHODS: Over a 5-year period, patients who died at or soon after arrival and have physical exam findings inconsistent with death were candidates for inclusion. Whole body CT was performed without contrast with support medical devices left in place. ISS was calculated with and without the PMCT findings. PMCT results were compared to autopsy findings, if performed. The location of support medical devices was documented. RESULTS: A total of 38 decedents underwent PMCT, including 53.1% males and a mean age of 42.0 years. Pre-PMCT ISS based on physical exam findings alone was 5.2 (range 0-25), including 16 with ISS = 0. Post-PMCT ISS using the additional imaging data was 50.3 (range 21-75), including 15 with ISS = 50 or greater. Nearly half (47.4%) had at least one support medical device that was either malpositioned or suboptimally positioned, including 26.3% with malpositioned airway devices, 10.3% with malpositioned intra-osseous catheters, and 100% with malpositioned decompressive needle thoracotomies. CONCLUSIONS: PMCT adds value in identifying injuries that otherwise may have gone undetected in lieu of a formal autopsy, thus creating a more complete trauma registry. The identification of malpositioned support lines and tubes allows for educational feedback to the first responders and trainees. Institutions with a low formal autopsy rate for trauma victims may benefit from developing a PMCT program.
Subject(s)
Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Wounds and Injuries/diagnostic imaging , Wounds and Injuries/mortality , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Autopsy , Cause of Death , Female , Humans , Injury Severity Score , Male , Middle Aged , RegistriesABSTRACT
Family presence during resuscitation or invasive procedures is controversial, but research suggests multiple benefits. Professional organizations recommend developing family presence protocols; however, few hospitals have them. This integrative review examined research evidence regarding implemented family presence protocols for adults in the hospital setting-specifically, the use of protocols and providers' feedback. Four key findings include a positive trend in family presence practice, varying provider attitudes, problems with family facilitators, and factors inhibiting or facilitating protocol implementation.
Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/nursing , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/psychology , Family/psychology , Organizational Policy , Professional-Family Relations , Visitors to Patients/psychology , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Use of an electromagnetic placement device (EMPD) facilitates placement of feeding tubes at the bedside. Standard practice for verification of feeding tube placement is via radiographic confirmation. The purpose of this research study was to assess the accuracy of placement of small-bore feeding tubes (SBFTs) as determined by EMPD interpretation compared with that of abdominal radiograph verification by a radiologist. METHODS: This multicenter prospective study enrolled patients requiring bedside feeding tube placement. SBFTs were placed by an experienced investigator using the EMPD. Two abdominal radiographs were then obtained: one after initial SBFT placement and an additional radiograph after injection of contrast. Documentation of location based on clinician interpretation using the EMPD was then compared with radiologist interpretation. RESULTS: The final sample size was 194 patients, including 18 pediatric patients. Patient age ranged from 12 days to 102 years. Median time for tube placement was 12 minutes. Of the 194 patients, only 1 patient had data showing discrepancies between the original EMPD verification and the final abdominal radiograph interpretation, providing a 99.5% agreement. No patient experienced complications during SBFT placement, and 15 patients had inadvertent airway placement that was avoided with the use of the EMPD. CONCLUSIONS: There was a high percentage of agreement between EMPD and radiologic interpretation after contrast injection. The EMPD aided in avoiding inadvertent airway placement, with no patient complications. This device can be used safely at the bedside to facilitate placement of feeding tubes, leading to the delivery of early enteral nutrition.
