Department of Emergency Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Wake County EMS, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2024;28(6):753-760. doi: 10.1080/10903127.2023.2286292. Epub 2023 Dec 11.
Emergency medical services (EMS) clinicians are tasked with early fluid resuscitation for patients with sepsis. Traditional methods for prehospital fluid delivery are limited in speed and ease-of-use. We conducted a comparative effectiveness study of a novel rapid infusion device for prehospital fluid delivery in suspected sepsis patients.
This pre-post observational study evaluated a hand-operated, rapid infusion device in a single large EMS system from July 2021-July 2022. Prior to device deployment, EMS clinicians completed didactic and simulation-based device training. Data were extracted from the EMS electronic health record. Eligible patients included adults with suspected sepsis treated by EMS with intravenous fluids. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving goal fluid volume (at least 500 mL) prior to hospital arrival. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, disposition, and length of stay. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare outcomes between 6-month pre- and post-implementation periods (July-December 2021 and February-July 2022, respectively), adjusting for patient demographics, abnormal prehospital vital signs, and EMS transport interval.
Of 1,180 eligible patients (552 in the pre-implementation period; 628 in the post-implementation period), the mean age was 72 years old, 45% were female, and 25% were minority race-ethnicity. Median (interquartile range) fluid volume (in mL) increased between the pre- and post-implementation periods (600 [400,1,000] and 850 [500-1,000], respectively). Goal fluid volume was achieved in 70% of pre-implementation patients and 82% of post-implementation patients. In adjusted analysis, post-implementation patients were significantly more likely to receive goal fluid volume than pre-implementation patients (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.51-2.66). Pre-post in-hospital mortality was not significantly different (aOR 0.91, 95% CI 0.59-1.39).
In a single EMS system, sepsis education and introduction of a rapid infusion device was associated with achieving goal fluid volume for suspected sepsis. Further research is needed to assess the clinical effectiveness of infusion device implementation to improve sepsis patient outcomes.
急救医疗服务(EMS)临床医生的任务是对脓毒症患者进行早期液体复苏。传统的院前输液方法在速度和易用性方面存在局限性。我们对一种新型院前快速输液设备在疑似脓毒症患者中的应用进行了比较有效性研究。
这项在单一大 EMS 系统中进行的前后观察性研究于 2021 年 7 月至 2022 年 7 月期间评估了一种手动快速输液设备。在设备部署之前,EMS 临床医生完成了理论和基于模拟的设备培训。数据从 EMS 电子健康记录中提取。符合条件的患者包括由 EMS 治疗的疑似脓毒症的成年人,给予静脉输液。主要结局是在到达医院之前接受目标液体量(至少 500mL)的患者比例。次要结局包括院内死亡率、处置和住院时间。使用多变量逻辑回归比较实施前后 6 个月(2021 年 7 月至 12 月和 2022 年 2 月至 7 月)的结局,调整患者人口统计学特征、院前异常生命体征和 EMS 转运间隔。
在 1180 名符合条件的患者中(实施前 552 例,实施后 628 例),平均年龄为 72 岁,45%为女性,25%为少数民族种族。中位(四分位距)液体量(mL)在实施前和实施后期间分别增加(600[400,1,000]和 850[500-1,000])。70%的实施前患者和 82%的实施后患者达到了目标液体量。在调整分析中,实施后患者比实施前患者更有可能达到目标液体量(调整优势比(aOR)2.00,95%置信区间(CI)1.51-2.66)。实施前后院内死亡率无显著差异(aOR 0.91,95%CI 0.59-1.39)。
在单个 EMS 系统中,脓毒症教育和引入快速输液设备与实现疑似脓毒症患者的目标液体量有关。需要进一步研究输液设备实施以改善脓毒症患者结局的临床效果。