Paramedic rapid sequence intubation for severe traumatic brain injury: perspectives from an expert panel.

Although early intubation has become standard practice in the prehospital management of severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), many patients cannot be intubated without neuromuscular blockade. Several emergency medical services (EMS) systems have implemented paramedic rapid sequence intubation (RSI) protocols, with published reports documenting apparently conflicting outcomes effects. In response, the Brain Trauma Foundation assembled a panel of experts to interpret the existing literature regarding paramedic RSI for severe TBI and offer guidance for EMS systems considering adding this skill to the paramedic scope of practice. The interpretation of this panel can be summarized as follows: (1) the existing literature regarding paramedic RSI is inconclusive, and apparent differences in outcome can be explained by use of different methodologies and variability in comparison groups; (2) the use of Glasgow Coma Scale score alone to identify TBI patients requiring RSI is limited, with additional research needed to refine our screening criteria; (3) suboptimal RSI technique as well as subsequent hyperventilation may account for some of the mortality increase reported with the procedure; (4) initial and ongoing training as well as experience with RSI appear to affect performance; and (5) the success of a paramedic RSI program is dependent on particular EMS and trauma system characteristics.

An evaluation of the use of guidelines in prehospital management of brain injury.

OBJECTIVES: The Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) Guidelines for Prehospital Management of Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) are intended to standardize treatment and improve outcomes in severe TBI patients. The key guideline components focus on airway management, blood pressure support, Glasgow Coma Score assessment, and transport. The purposes of this study were to determine if providers could learn and retain the guidelines (education), assess if providers would use the guidelines in practice (implementation), and evaluate the effect of guideline implementation on patients (outcomes). METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on all trauma patients for five months. Providers were then educated on the TBI guidelines over two months, and five additional months of data were collected. A knowledge test was given before and after the course and three months later to assess education. To assess implementation, data were analyzed to determine whether providers were using the key interventions more consistently after education. The clinical courses of TBI patients before and after guideline implementation were measured to assess outcomes. RESULTS: Knowledge of TBI care improved significantly after education and remained elevated at three months (62% vs. 82% vs. 79%, p < 0.001). For the 1,044 patients seen, providers demonstrated higher rates of appropriate care, resulting in lower rates of hypoxia (2.8% vs. 1.1%, p=0.010) and hypotension (4.8% vs. 2.0%, p=0.018). Mortality was significantly decreased (34.6% vs. 17.0%, p=0.039), and rates of patients with maximum functional scores at 14 days significantly increased (Glasgow Outcome Score 44.2% vs. 66.0%, p=0.025; Rancho Los Amigos Scale 55.9% vs. 77.3%, p=0.045). CONCLUSION: Providers were able to learn and implement the BTF guidelines, and outcomes in TBI patients were significantly improved. All emergency medical services providers should be trained in these potentially lifesaving guidelines.

Management of brain-injured patients by an evidence-based medicine protocol improves outcomes and decreases hospital charges.

OBJECTIVE: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the leading cause of death from blunt trauma, with an estimated cost to society of over dollar 40 billion annually. Evidence-based guidelines for TBI care have been widely discussed, but in-hospital treatment of these patients has been highly variable. The purpose of this study was to determine whether management of TBI patients according to a protocol based on the Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guidelines would reduce mortality, length of stay, charges, and disability. METHODS: In 1995, a protocol following the BTF guidelines was developed by members of the Level I trauma center's interdisciplinary neurotrauma task force. Inclusion criteria for the protocol were blunt head injury, age > 14 years, and Glasgow Coma Scale score < or = 8. An extensive educational process was conducted to develop compliance among all disciplines for this new management strategy. A historical control group of patients eligible for the protocol was identified by retrospective analysis of trauma registry data for 1991 to 1994. Mortality, intensive care unit days, total hospital days, total charges, Rancho Los Amigos Scores, and Glasgow Outcome Scale scores were compared. RESULTS: Between 1991 and 2000, over 7,000 blunt TBI patients were managed by the Trauma Service. Of these, 830 met the inclusion criteria for the TBI protocol and lived > 48 hours. After implementation, initial analysis of the 1995-96 cohort indicated only 50% compliance with the protocol. By 1997, compliance had risen to 88%. Patients were therefore compared as three groups: before the protocol (1991-94, n = 219), during low compliance (1995-96, n = 188), and during high compliance (1997-2000, n = 423). Groups did not differ significantly on Injury Severity Score, head Abbreviated Injury Scale score, or age (p > 0.05). Admission Glasgow Coma Scale score was slightly higher in the 1991-94 cohort (4.0 vs. 3.5, p = 0.001). From 1991-94 to 1997-2000, intensive care unit stay was reduced by 1.8 days (p = 0.021) and total hospital stay was reduced by 5.4 days (p < 0.001). The charge reduction (calculated in 1997 dollars) per patient for the length of stay decrease was dollar 6,577 in 1995-96 and dollar 8,266 in 1997-2000 (p = 0.002). This represents a total reduction over 6 years of dollar 4.7 million in charges. In addition, the overall mortality rate showed a reduction of 4.0% from 1991-94 to 1997-2000 (17.8% vs. 13.8%), although this was not statistically significant. On the basis of the Glasgow Outcome Scale score, in 1997-2000, 61.5% of the patients had either a "good recovery" or only "moderate disability," compared with 503% in 1995-96 and 43.3% in 1991-94 (p < 0.001). The Rancho Los Amigos Scores showed a similar trend, with 56.6% of the 1997-2000 patients having appropriate responses at 10 to 14 days, compared with only 44.0% of the 1995-96 patients and 43.9% of the 1991-94 patients (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Adherence to a protocol based on the BTF guidelines can result in a significant decrease in hospital days and charges for TBI patients who live > 48 hours. In addition, mortality and outcome may be significantly affected. This analysis suggests that increased efforts to improve adherence to national guidelines may have a significant impact on head injury care outcomes and could dramatically reduce the substantial financial resources that are currently consumed in the acute care phases for this injury.

International trauma care: a comparison between Jerusalem, Israel, and Fairfax County, Virginia, USA.

BACKGROUND: Trauma is viewed by many as a global problem. The phenomenon of similar outcomes within differing healthcare delivery systems can illuminate the strengths and weaknesses of various trauma systems as well as the effects of these characteristics on patient outcome. OBJECTIVES: To compare and contrast demographic and injury characteristics as well as patient outcomes of two urban/suburban trauma centers, one in Israel and the other in the United States. METHODS: Study data were obtained from the trauma registries of two trauma centers. Demographic variables, injury characteristics and outcomes were compared statistically between registries. RESULTS: Significant differences between the registries were found in demographic variables (age), injury characteristics (Injury Severity Score and mechanism of injury), and outcome (mortality and length of stay). Age and Injury Severity Score were found to be significant predictors of outcome in both registries. The Glasgow Coma Score was found to contribute to patient outcomes more than the ISS. Differences were found in the relative impact of injury and demographic factors on outcomes between the registries. After including the influence of these factors on patient outcomes, significant differences still remained between the outcomes of the trauma centers. CONCLUSIONS: Despite possible explanations for these differences, true comparisons between centers are problematic.