Department of research and development, Norwegian Air Ambulance Foundation, P,O, Pox 94, 1441 Drøbak, Norway.
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013 Oct 25;21:75. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-21-75.
We report prospectively recorded observational data from consecutive cases in which the attending pre-hospital critical care anaesthesiologist considered performing pre-hospital advanced airway management but decided to withhold such interventions.
Anaesthesiologists from eight pre-hospital critical care teams in the Central Denmark Region (a mixed rural and urban region with 1.27 million inhabitants) registered data from February 1st 2011 to October 31st 2012. Included were patients of all ages for whom pre-hospital advanced airway management were considered but not performed. The main objectives were to investigate (1) the pre-hospital critical care anaesthesiologists' reasons for considering performing pre-hospital advanced airway management in this group of patients (2) the pre-hospital critical care anaesthesiologists' reasons for not performing pre-hospital advanced airway management (3) the methods used to treat these patients (4) the incidence of complications related to pre-hospital advanced airway management not being performed.
We registered data from 1081 cases in which the pre-hospital critical care anaesthesiologists' considered performing pre-hospital advanced airway management. The anaesthesiologists decided to withhold pre-hospital advanced airway management in 32.1% of these cases (n = 347). In 75.1% of these cases (n = 257) pre-hospital advanced airway management were withheld because of the patient's condition and in 30.8% (n = 107) because of patient co-morbidity. The most frequently used alternative treatment was bag-mask ventilation, used in 82.7% of the cases (n = 287). Immediate complications related to the decision of not performing pre-hospital advanced airway management occurred in 0.6% of the cases (n = 2).
We have illustrated the complexity of the critical decision-making associated with pre-hospital advanced airway management. This study is the first to identify the most common reasons why pre-hospital critical care anaesthesiologists sometimes choose to abstain from pre-hospital advanced airway management as well as the alternative treatment methods used.
我们前瞻性地记录了连续病例的观察数据,这些病例中,参与的院前危重病麻醉医师考虑进行院前高级气道管理,但决定不进行此类干预。
来自丹麦中部地区(一个混合农村和城市地区,有 127 万居民)的 8 个院前危重病护理团队的麻醉师从 2011 年 2 月 1 日至 2012 年 10 月 31 日登记了数据。纳入的患者年龄均在接受院前高级气道管理的考虑范围内,但未进行。主要目的是调查(1)在这组患者中,院前危重病麻醉医师考虑进行院前高级气道管理的原因;(2)不进行院前高级气道管理的原因;(3)治疗这些患者的方法;(4)未进行院前高级气道管理相关并发症的发生率。
我们登记了 1081 例麻醉医师考虑进行院前高级气道管理的病例。在这些病例中,麻醉医师决定在 32.1%(n = 347)的病例中保留院前高级气道管理。在这些病例中,75.1%(n = 257)因患者病情而保留了院前高级气道管理,30.8%(n = 107)因患者合并症而保留了院前高级气道管理。最常用的替代治疗方法是面罩通气,在 82.7%的病例中使用(n = 287)。与不进行院前高级气道管理的决策相关的立即并发症发生在 0.6%的病例中(n = 2)。
我们已经说明了与院前高级气道管理相关的关键决策的复杂性。这项研究首次确定了院前危重病麻醉医师有时选择不进行院前高级气道管理的最常见原因以及使用的替代治疗方法。