Foster Alexander, Florea Victor, Fahrenbruch Carol, Blackwood Jennifer, Rea Thomas D
University of Washington School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Public Health-Seattle and King County, Emergency Medical Services Division of Public Health, Seattle, Washington.
West J Emerg Med. 2017 Aug;18(5):864-869. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2017.5.33198. Epub 2017 Jul 14.
Field information available to emergency medical services (EMS) about a patient's chronic health conditions or medication therapies could help direct patient care or be used to investigate outcome disparities. However, little is known about the field availability or accuracy of information of chronic health conditions or chronic medication treatments in emergent circumstances, especially when the patient cannot serve as an information resource. We evaluated the prehospital availability and accuracy of specific chronic health conditions and medication treatments among out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients.
The investigation was a retrospective cohort study of adult persons suffering ventricular fibrillation OHCA treated by EMS in a large metropolitan county from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2013. The study was designed to determine the availability and accuracy of EMS ascertainment of selected chronic health conditions and medication treatments. We evaluated chronic health conditions of "any heart disease," congestive heart failure (CHF), and diabetes and medication treatments of beta blockers and loop diuretics using two distinct sources: 1) EMS report, and 2) hospital record specific to the OHCA event. Because hospital information was considered the gold standard, we restricted the primary analysis to those who were admitted to hospital.
Of the 1,496 initially eligible patients, 387 could not be resuscitated and were pronounced dead in the field, one patient was left alive at scene due to Physician's Orders for Life-sustaining Treatment (POLST) orders, 125 expired in the emergency department (n=125), and 983 were admitted to hospital. A total of 832 of 1,496 (55.6%) had both sources of data for comparison and comprised the primary analytic group. Using the hospital record as the gold standard, EMS ascertainment had a sensitivity of 0.79 (304/384) and a specificity of 0.88 (218/248) for any prior heart disease; sensitivity 0.45 (47/105) and specificity 0.87 (477/516) for CHF; sensitivity 0.71 (143/201) and specificity 0.98 (416/424) for diabetes; sensitivity 0.70 (118/169) and specificity 0.94 (273/290) for beta blockers; sensitivity 0.70 (62/89) and specificity 0.97 (358/370) for loop diuretics.
In this cohort of OHCA, information about selected chronic health conditions and medication treatments based on EMS ascertainment was available for many patients, generally revealing moderate sensitivity and greater specificity.
提供给紧急医疗服务(EMS)的关于患者慢性健康状况或药物治疗的现场信息,有助于指导患者护理或用于调查结果差异。然而,对于紧急情况下慢性健康状况或慢性药物治疗信息的现场可获取性或准确性知之甚少,尤其是当患者无法作为信息来源时。我们评估了院外心脏骤停(OHCA)患者中特定慢性健康状况和药物治疗的院前可获取性及准确性。
该调查是一项回顾性队列研究,研究对象为2007年1月1日至2013年12月31日在一个大城市县接受EMS治疗的成年心室颤动OHCA患者。该研究旨在确定EMS对选定慢性健康状况和药物治疗的确定的可获取性及准确性。我们使用两个不同来源评估“任何心脏病”、充血性心力衰竭(CHF)、糖尿病等慢性健康状况以及β受体阻滞剂和袢利尿剂的药物治疗:1)EMS报告,以及2)OHCA事件的医院记录。由于医院信息被视为金标准,我们将主要分析限制在那些入院的患者。
在1496名最初符合条件的患者中,387名无法复苏并在现场被宣布死亡,1名患者因医生维持生命治疗医嘱(POLST)而在现场存活,125名在急诊科死亡(n = 125),983名入院。1496名患者中有832名(55.6%)有两种数据来源可供比较,构成了主要分析组。以医院记录作为金标准,对于任何既往心脏病,EMS确定的敏感性为0.79(304/384),特异性为0.88(218/248);对于CHF,敏感性为0.45(47/105),特异性为0.87(477/516);对于糖尿病,敏感性为0.71(143/201),特异性为0.98(416/424);对于β受体阻滞剂,敏感性为0.70(118/169),特异性为0.94(273/290);对于袢利尿剂,敏感性为0.70(62/89),特异性为0.97(358/370)。
在这个OHCA队列中,许多患者可获得基于EMS确定的选定慢性健康状况和药物治疗的信息,总体显示出中等敏感性和较高特异性。