Pre-hospital anaesthesia and assessment of head injured patients presenting to a UK Helicopter Emergency Medical Service with a high Glasgow Coma Scale: a cohort study.
GCS
HEMS
RSI
head injury
neurotrauma
trauma management
triage
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 02 2019
19 02 2019
Historique:
entrez:
21
2
2019
pubmed:
21
2
2019
medline:
26
2
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Patients who sustain a head injury but maintain a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) of 13-15 may still be suffering from a significant brain injury. We aimed to assess the appropriateness of triage and decision to perform prehospital rapid sequence induction (RSI) in patients attended by a UK Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) following head injury. A retrospective cohort study of patients attended by Kent Surrey & Sussex Air Ambulance Trust (KSSAAT) HEMS. A mixed urban and rural area of 4.5 million people in South East England. GCS score of 13, 14 or 15 on arrival of the HEMS team and clinical findings suggesting head injury. Patients accompanied by the HEMS team to hospital ('Escorted'), and those that were 'Assisted' but conveyed by the ambulance service were reviewed. No age restrictions to inclusion were set. Significant brain injury. Recognition of patients requiring prehospital anaesthesia for head injury. Of 517 patients, 321 had adequate follow-up, 69% of these were Escorted, 31% Assisted. There was evidence of intracranial injury in 13.7% of patients and clinically important brain injury in 7.8%. There was no difference in the rate of clinically important brain injury between Escorted and Assisted patients (p=0.46). Nineteen patients required an RSI by the HEMS team and this patient group was significantly more likely to have clinically important brain injury (p=0.04). In patients attended by a UK HEMS service with a head injury and a GCS of 13-15, a small but significant proportion had a clinically important brain injury and a proportion were appropriately recognised as requiring prehospital RSI. For patients deemed not to need a HEMS intervention, differentiating between those with and without clinically important brain injury appears challenging. V.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30782878
pii: bmjopen-2018-023307
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023307
pmc: PMC6377567
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anesthetics
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e023307Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: DB, CR and RL are all employees of Kent, Surrey and Sussex Air Ambulance Trust.
Références
J Am Coll Surg. 2010 Dec;211(6):804-11
pubmed: 21036070
Ann Emerg Med. 1995 Jun;25(6):731-6
pubmed: 7755192
BMJ. 1995 Jul 22;311(6999):217-22
pubmed: 7627033
Emerg Med J. 2007 Feb;24(2):139-41
pubmed: 17251629
Eur J Neurol. 2012 Feb;19(2):191-8
pubmed: 22260187
Lancet. 2001 May 5;357(9266):1391-6
pubmed: 11356436
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2006 Apr-Jun;10(2):198-206
pubmed: 16531377
Br Med J. 1979 May 12;1(6173):1240-2
pubmed: 455011
Am J Emerg Med. 2014 Sep;32(9):997-1004
pubmed: 24993680
J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2010 Jul;1(2):82-8
pubmed: 21808509
Neurosurgery. 1987 Jul;21(1):51-5
pubmed: 3614604