• Bypassing nearest hospital for more distant neuroscience care in head-injured adults with suspected traumatic brain injury: findings of the head injury transportation straight to neurosurgery (HITS-NS) pilot cluster randomised trial

      Lecky, Fiona E.; Russell, Wanda; McClelland, Graham; Pennington, Elspeth; Fuller, Gordon W.; Goodacre, Steve; Han, Kyee; Curran, Andrew; Holliman, Damian; Chapman, Nathan; et al. (2017-10)
      Objective Reconfiguration of trauma services, with direct transport of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) to specialist neuroscience centres (SNCs)— bypassing non-specialist acute hospitals (NSAHs), could improve outcomes. However, delays in stabilisation of airway, breathing and circulation (ABC) may worsen outcomes when compared with selective secondary transfer from nearest NSAH to SNC. We conducted a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial to determine the feasibility and plausibility of bypassing suspected patients with TBI —directly into SNCs—producing a measurable effect. Setting Two English Ambulance Services. Participants 74 clusters (ambulance stations) were randomised within pairs after matching for important characteristics. Clusters enrolled head-injured adults— injured nearest to an NSAH—with internationally accepted TBI risk factors and stable ABC. We excluded participants attended by Helicopter Emergency Medical Services or who were injured more than 1 hour by road from nearest SNC. Interventions Intervention cluster participants were transported directly to an SNC bypassing nearest NSAH; control cluster participants were transported to nearest NSAH with selective secondary transfer to SNC. Outcomes Trial recruitment rate (target n=700 per annum) and percentage with TBI on CT scan (target 80%) were the primary feasibility outcomes. 30-day mortality, 6-month Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale and quality of life were secondary outcomes. Results 56 ambulance station clusters recruited 293 patients in 12 months. The trial arms were similar in terms of age, conscious level and injury severity. Less than 25% of recruited patients had TBI on CT (n=70) with 7% (n=20) requiring neurosurgery. Complete case analysis showed similar 30-day mortality in the two trial arms (control=8.8 (2.7–14.0)% vs intervention=9.4(2.3–14.0)%). Conclusion Bypassing patients with suspected TBI to SNCs gives an overtriage (false positive) ratio of 13:1 for neurosurgical intervention and 4:1 for TBI. A measurable effect from a full trial of early neuroscience care following bypass is therefore unlikely https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/7/10/e016355.full.pdf This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016355
    • Characteristics of patients according to the mode of admission to regional stroke services

      Price, Christopher; Rae, V.; Duckett, Jay; Wood, R.; McMeekin, Peter; Gray, J.; Rodgers, Helen; Ford, Gary A. (2012-12)
    • A comparison of manual and mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation on the move using a manikin: single-person and two-person emergency medical service crews

      Blair, Laura; Kendal, Simon P.; Shaw, Gary; Byers, Sonia; Wright, John (2016-09)
      Background Delivery of good quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is essential for survival from cardiac arrest but manual CPR has its limitations, especially in the pre-hospital environment and situations which demand transportation. Our aim was to examine the effect that transporting a patient during Advanced Life Support (ALS) has on the quality of CPR being provided. In the same simulated pre-hospital scenario we directly compared manual (standard) CPR (SCPR) and mechanical CPR (MCPR), as well as comparing both against the 2010 European Resuscitation Council guidelines. The quality of CPR provided by one and two person crews was also compared. Methods Ten experienced paramedics volunteered to take part in four pre-hospital observational manikin CPR scenarios each. The mechanical CPR device chosen was the LUCASTM2. Data were captured electronically using QCPRTM with the core values being minute-by-minute mean compression rate and depth, as well as variations within, hands off ratios and the average time to CPR commencement. Results A marked reduction in the rate, depth and percentage of correct compressions was noted when the paramedics started to move the patient. When compared against the 2010 ERC guidelines, SCPR was more variable than MCPR and not delivered in a way that conforms to the guidelines. MCPR was consistent and conformed to the guidelines. There was significant time required for a single paramedic to start CPR with a mechanical device. Conclusion In the pre-hospital setting having to transport a patient during ALS can have a negative impact on the quality of CPR being provided. The quality of CPR is closer to that currently recommended when provided by a mechanical device rather than manually, but two persons would be required for rapid deployment of the device. This could suggest a potential role for pre-hospital MCPR even in the absence of recommendation for routine use. https://emj.bmj.com/content/emermed/33/9/e9.2.full.pdf This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2016-206139.30
    • Trauma systems: the anticipated impact of trauma divert in the North East

      Moy, R.; Denning, J.; Han, Kyee (2011-11)
      Introduction The advent of the new Trauma Network system will drive significant changes in the transport of trauma patients. We aimed to find out what the impact of the new trauma network would be on the two prospective trauma centres in the Northern region, in terms of increased workload. This could allow the centres to gain additional resources to provide care for these patients. Methods We conducted a retrospective audit of all trauma patients conveyed by North East Ambulance service during the month of October 2009. These patients were then assessed by the London Ambulance Service Trauma Divert Criteria. Any patients who would have bypassed their local hospital, and been taken to the nearest trauma centre were identified. Also identified were any patients at risk of airway compromise, who would have been transported to the nearest ED for stabilisation and secondary transfer. Patients transported by air ambulance were excluded, as they are already taken to the Trauma Centres. Results 3500 patients were identified during the initial search. Of these, 70 met the criteria for bypass, although 16 were transported to trauma centres as the nearest hospitals. 54 were transported to their nearest hospital, although under the criteria used, would have been taken to a trauma centre. 8 met the criteria for transfer to the nearest hospital, for airway protection. Based on geography of receiving hospital, we estimate that an additional 17 patients would have gone to James Cook University Hospital, and 29 to Newcastle General Hospital. Conclusion We conclude that introduction of the bypass guidelines would lead to an additional 46 patients being taken to a trauma centre in that month. This suggests that specific arrangements may need to be made to deal with the extra workload, and further investment may be required. https://emj.bmj.com/content/emermed/28/11/e2.15.full.pdf This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2011-200645.8