Dataset Information

Oxygenation strategies prior to and during prehospital emergency anaesthesia in UK HEMS practice (PREOXY survey).

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Maintaining effective oxygenation throughout the process of Pre-Hospital Emergency Anaesthesia (PHEA) is critical. There are multiple strategies available to clinicians to oxygenate patients both prior to and during PHEA. The optimal pre-oxygenation technique remains unclear, and it is unknown what techniques are being used by United Kingdom Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS). This study aimed to determine the current pre- and peri-PHEA oxygenation strategies used by UK HEMS services. METHODS:An electronic questionnaire survey was delivered to all UK HEMS services between 05 July and 26 December 2019. Questions investigated service standard operating procedures (SOPs) and individual clinician practice regarding oxygenation strategies prior to airway instrumentation (pre-oxygenation) and oxygenation strategies during airway instrumentation (apnoeic oxygenation). Service SOPs were obtained to corroborate questionnaire replies. RESULTS:Replies were received from all UK HEMS services (n?=?21) and 40 individual clinicians. All services specified oxygenation strategies within their PHEA/RSI SOP and most referred to pre-oxygenation as mandatory (81%), whilst apnoeic oxygenation was mandatory in eight (38%) SOPs. The most commonly identified pre-oxygenation strategies were bag-valve-mask without PEEP (95%), non-rebreathable face mask (81%), and nasal cannula at high flow (81%). Seven (33%) services used Mapleson C circuits, whilst there were eight services (38%) that did not carry bag-valve-masks with PEEP valve nor Mapleson C circuits. All clinicians frequently used pre-oxygenation, however there was variability in clinician use of apnoeic oxygenation by nasal cannula. Nearly all clinicians (95%) reported manually ventilating patients during the apnoeic phase, with over half (58%) stating this was their routine practice. Differences in clinician pre-hospital and in-hospital practice related to availability of humidified high flow nasal oxygenation and Mapleson C circuits. CONCLUSIONS:Pre-oxygenation is universal amongst UK HEMS services and is most frequently delivered by bag-valve-mask without PEEP or non-rebreathable face masks, whereas apnoeic oxygenation by nasal cannula is highly variable. Multiple services carry Mapleson C circuits, however many services are unable to deliver PEEP due to the equipment they carry. Clinicians are regularly manually ventilating patients during the apnoeic phase of PHEA. The identified variability in clinical practice may indicate uncertainty and further research is warranted to assess the impact of different strategies on clinical outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Boulton AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7552361 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Oxygenation strategies prior to and during prehospital emergency anaesthesia in UK HEMS practice (PREOXY survey).

Boulton Adam J AJ Mashru Amar A Lyon Richard R

Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine 20201012 1

<h4>Background</h4>Maintaining effective oxygenation throughout the process of Pre-Hospital Emergency Anaesthesia (PHEA) is critical. There are multiple strategies available to clinicians to oxygenate patients both prior to and during PHEA. The optimal pre-oxygenation technique remains unclear, and it is unknown what techniques are being used by United Kingdom Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS). This study aimed to determine the current pre- and peri-PHEA oxygenation strategies used by ...[more]

PMID: 33046111

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPre-hospital emergency anaesthesia is a critical intervention undertaken by helicopter emergency medical teams. Previous studies informed current practice for induction regimes, using a standardized approach of fentanyl, ketamine and rocuronium. There may be a trend towards post-induction hypotension attributed to the induction regime used. Several new combinations of fentanyl, ketamine and rocuronium are emerging in clinical practice. There is currently no consensus on what induction regimes should be used.MethodsA semi-structured survey was distributed to the medical leads of all UK air ambulance organisations between December 2022 and February 2023. Responses that were returned within the study period were included. Exclusions included missing data, declined participation and failure to return the survey within the data collection period. The survey sought to establish provision of pre-hospital emergency anaesthesia and current induction regimes for stable, unstable and post-cardiac arrest patients. Data was extracted from Microsoft Forms into Excel. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse survey response rate, provision of PHEA and induction regimes. The survey was endorsed by the National HEMS Research and Audit Forum.Results19 air ambulance organisations responded (response rate 86%). The majority of organisations provide over 100 pre-hospital emergency anaesthetics per annum (79%, n = 15/19). A standard combination of fentanyl, ketamine and rocuronium is used as a primary induction regime in haemodynamically stable patients by 52% of services (n = 10/19). In haemodynamically compromised patients, fentanyl was omitted or pracititioner choice emphasized by 79% of services (n = 15/19). There was variability in the dose of rocuronium from 1 mg/kg to 2 mg/kg throughout services.ConclusionThere is variability in the approach to pre-hospital emergency anaesthesia. There is a growing dataset that would enable development of a registry to better understand induction regimes and the impact on patient physiology. Organisations are increasingly adopting a patient centered, practitioner choice model towards induction of anaesthesia.

Project description:BackgroundUltrasound in podiatry practice encompasses musculoskeletal ultrasound imaging, vascular hand-held Doppler ultrasound and therapeutic ultrasound. Sonography practice is not regulated by the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC), with no requirement to hold a formal qualification. The College of Podiatry does not currently define ultrasound training and competencies.This study aimed to determine the current use of ultrasound, training received and mentorship received and/or provided by podiatrists using ultrasound.MethodsA quantitative study utilising a cross-sectional, on-line, single-event survey was undertaken within the UK.ResultsCompleted surveys were received from 284 podiatrists; 173 (70%) use ultrasound as part of their general practice, 139 (49%) for musculoskeletal problems, 131 (46%) for vascular assessment and 39 (14%) to support their surgical practice. Almost a quarter (n = 62) worked for more than one organisation; 202 (71%) were employed by the NHS and/or private sector (n = 118, 41%).Nearly all (93%) respondents report using a hand-held vascular Doppler in their daily practice; 216 (82%) to support decisions regarding treatment options, 102 (39%) to provide diagnostic reports for other health professionals, and 34 (13%) to guide nerve blocks.Ultrasound imaging was used by 104 (37%) respondents primarily to aid clinical decision making (n = 81) and guide interventions (steroid injections n = 67; nerve blocks n = 39). Ninety-three percent stated they use ultrasound imaging to treat their own patients, while others scan at the request of other podiatrists (n = 28) or health professionals (n = 18). Few use ultrasound imaging for research (n = 7) or education (n = 2).Only 32 (11%) respondents (n = 20 private sector) use therapeutic ultrasound to treat patients presenting with musculoskeletal complaints, namely tendon pathologies.Few respondents (18%) had completed formal post-graduate CASE (Consortium for the Accreditation of Sonographic Education) accredited ultrasound courses.Forty (14%) respondents receive ultrasound mentorship; the majority from fellow podiatrists (n = 17) or medical colleagues (n = 15). Over half (n = 127) who do not have ultrasound mentorship indicated they would like a mentor predominantly for ultrasound imaging. Fifty-five (19%) report they currently provide ultrasound mentorship for others.ConclusionsUnderstanding the scope of ultrasound practice, the training undertaken and the requirements for mentorship will underpin the development of competencies and recommendations defined by the College of Podiatry to support professional development and ensure safe practice.

Project description:BackgroundFluid therapy in patients with suspected infection is controversial, and it is not known whether fluid treatment administered in the prehospital setting is beneficial. In the absence of evidence-based guidelines for prehospital fluid therapy for patients with suspected infection, Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel are challenged on when and how to initiate such therapy. This study aimed to assess EMS personnel's decision-making in prehospital fluid therapy, including triggers for initiating fluid and fluid volumes, as well as the need for education and evidence-based guidelines on prehospital fluid therapy in patients with suspected infection.MethodsAn online survey concerning fluid administration in prehospital patients with suspected infection was distributed to all EMS personnel in the Central Denmark Region, including ambulance clinicians and prehospital critical care anaesthesiologists (PCCA). The survey consisted of sections concerning academic knowledge, statements about fluid administration, triggers to evaluate patient needs for intravenous fluid, and clinical scenarios.ResultsIn total, 468/807 (58%) ambulance clinicians and 106/151 (70%) PCCA responded to the survey. Of the respondents, 73% (n = 341) of the ambulance clinicians and 100% (n = 106) of the PCCA felt confident about administering fluids to prehospital patients with infections. However, both groups primarily based their fluid-related decisions on "clinical intuition". Ambulance clinicians named the most frequently faced challenges in fluid therapy as "Unsure whether the patient needs fluid" and "Unsure about the volume of fluid the patient needs". The five most frequently used triggers for evaluating fluid needs were blood pressure, history taking, skin turgor, capillary refill time, and shock index, the last of which only applied to ambulance clinicians. In the scenarios, the majority administered 500 ml to a normotensive woman with suspected sepsis and 1000 ml to a woman with suspected sepsis-related hypotension. Moreover, 97% (n = 250) of the ambulance clinicians strongly agreed or agreed that they were interested in more education about fluid therapy in patients with suspected infection.ConclusionThe majority of ambulance clinicians and PCCA based their fluid administration on "clinical intuition". They faced challenges deciding on fluid volumes and individual fluid needs. Thus, they were eager to learn more and requested research and evidence-based guidelines.

Dataset Information

Oxygenation strategies prior to and during prehospital emergency anaesthesia in UK HEMS practice (PREOXY survey).

Publications

Oxygenation strategies prior to and during prehospital emergency anaesthesia in UK HEMS practice (PREOXY survey).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets