Oliver G J, Walter D P, Redmond A D
Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute, Ellen Wilkinson Building, Oxford Road, University of Manchester, Manchester, M15 6JA, UK.
Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute, Ellen Wilkinson Building, Oxford Road, University of Manchester, Manchester, M15 6JA, UK.
Injury. 2017 May;48(5):978-984. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.01.039. Epub 2017 Jan 23.
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: In 1994, Hussain and Redmond revealed that up to 39% of prehospital deaths from accidental injury might have been preventable had basic first aid care been given. Since then there have been significant advances in trauma systems and care. The exclusion of prehospital deaths from the analysis of trauma registries, giv en the high rate of those, is a major limitation in prehospital research on preventable death. We have repeated the 1994 study to identify any changes over the years and potential developments to improve patient outcomes.
We examined the full Coroner's inquest files for prehospital deaths from trauma and accidental injury over a three-year period in Cheshire. Injuries were scored using the Abbreviated-Injury-Scale (AIS-1990) and Injury Severity Score (ISS), and probability of survival estimated using Bull's probits to match the original protocol.
One hundred and thirty-four deaths met our inclusion criteria; 79% were male, average age at death was 53.6 years. Sixty-two were found dead (FD), fifty-eight died at scene (DAS) and fourteen were dead on arrival at hospital (DOA). The predominant mechanism of injury was fall (39%). The median ISS was 29 with 58 deaths (43%) having probability of survival of >50%. Post-mortem evidence of head injury was present in 102 (76%) deaths. A bystander was on scene or present immediately after injury in 45% of cases and prior to the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) in 96%. In 93% of cases a bystander made the call for assistance, in those DAS or DOA, bystander intervention of any kind was 43%.
The number of potentially preventable prehospital deaths remains high and unchanged. First aid intervention of any kind is infrequent. There is a potentially missed window of opportunity for bystander intervention prior to the arrival of the ambulance service, with simple first-aid manoeuvres to open the airway, preventing hypoxic brain injury and cardiac arrest.
1994年,侯赛因和雷德蒙德指出,若实施基本的急救护理,高达39%的意外伤害院前死亡可能可避免。自那时起,创伤系统和护理取得了重大进展。鉴于院前死亡比例较高,在创伤登记分析中排除这些死亡情况是院前可预防死亡研究的一个主要局限。我们重复了1994年的研究,以确定多年来的变化以及改善患者预后的潜在发展方向。
我们查阅了柴郡三年期间死因裁判官关于创伤和意外伤害院前死亡的完整问询档案。使用简略损伤量表(AIS - 1990)和损伤严重度评分(ISS)对损伤进行评分,并使用布尔概率估计生存概率,以符合原始方案。
134例死亡符合我们的纳入标准;79%为男性,平均死亡年龄为53.6岁。62例被发现死亡(FD),58例在现场死亡(DAS),14例到达医院时死亡(DOA)。主要损伤机制是跌倒(39%)。ISS中位数为29,58例死亡(43%)的生存概率>50%。102例(76%)死亡有头部损伤的尸检证据。45%的病例中有旁观者在现场或受伤后立即出现,96%在紧急医疗服务(EMS)之前。在93%的病例中,是旁观者呼叫求助,在那些DAS或DOA病例中,任何形式的旁观者干预为43%。
潜在可预防的院前死亡数量仍然居高不下且未变。任何形式的急救干预都很少见。在救护车服务到达之前,旁观者干预存在潜在的机会窗口被错过的情况,可通过简单的急救操作开放气道,预防缺氧性脑损伤和心脏骤停。