Cost-effectiveness and benefit of alternatives to improve training for prehospital trauma care in Mexico. Effects of 2 patterns of prehospital care on the outcome of patients with severe head injury. The impact of advanced prehospital emergency care on the mortality of severely brain-injured patients. The OPALS Major Trauma Study: impact of advanced life-support on survival and morbidity. A comparison of ground paramedics and aeromedical treatment of severe blunt trauma patients. Effect of helicopter transport of trauma victims on survival in an urban trauma center. The United Kingdom pre-hospital study of active compression-decompression resuscitation. Reduced mortality in injured adults transported by helicopter emergency medical services. Effect of newborn resuscitation training on health worker practices in Pumwani Hospital, Kenya.
In Latin America, there is a preponderance of prehospital trauma deaths. However, scarce resources mandate that any improvements in prehospital medical care must be cost-effective. This study sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of several approaches to improving training for personnel in three ambulance services in Mexico.
                In Monterrey, training was augmented with PreHospital Trauma Life Support (PHTLS) at a cost of [US] dollar 150 per medic trained. In San Pedro, training was augmented with Basic Trauma Life Support (BTLS), Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS), and a locally designed airway management course, at a cost of dollar 400 per medic. Process and outcome of trauma care were assessed before and after the training of these medics and at a control site.
                The training was effective for both intervention services, with increases in basic airway maneuvers for patients in respiratory distress in Monterrey (16% before versus 39% after) and San Pedro (14% versus 64%). The role of endotrachal intubation for patients with respiratory distress increased only in San Pedro (5% versus 46%), in which the most intensive Advanced Life Support (ALS) training had been provided. However, mortality decreased only in Monterrey, where it had been the highest (8.2% before versus 4.7% after) and where the simplest and lowest cost interventions were implemented. There was no change in process or outcome in the control site.
                This study highlights the importance of assuring uniform, basic training for all prehospital providers. This is a more cost-effective approach than is higher-cost ALS training for improving prehospital trauma care in environments such as Latin America. A pattern of prehospital care combining advanced life support, physician staffing, and helicopter transport improves the outcome of patients with severe brain injuries, compared with combined expanded basic life support, nurse staffing, and ground transport.
                Inception cohort from the data set of a population-based, prospective study on major trauma.
                Prehospital and hospital trauma systems of an Italian region.
                All patients with major trauma (Injury Severity Score, >or=16) and severe head injury (Abbreviated Injury Scale score for the head, >or=4) rescued alive from March 1, 1998, to February 28, 1999, who received either form of care. Patients with self-inflicted injuries were excluded. The 184 patients who met the entry criteria were divided equally between care groups.
                None.
                Mortality at 30 days and Glasgow Outcome Scale score of survivors.
                After verifying the comparability of the cohorts, no survival or disability benefit could be demonstrated (95% confidence interval [CI] of the odds ratio for mortality [helicopter/ambulance] [95% CI 1], 0.72 to 2.67; 95% CI of the difference in Glasgow Outcome Scale score medians between helicopter and ambulance groups [95% CI 2], 0.0 to 0.0). Similar results were derived from analyses restricted to the subgroups identified by low (<or=90 mm Hg) roadside systolic blood pressure (95% CI 1, 0.58 to 7.17; 95% CI 2, -1 to 2) and by need for urgent neurosurgical intervention (95% CI 1, 0.16 to 2.60; 95% CI 2, 0 to 2). Exclusion from the ambulance group of victims rescued in urban areas did not change the results (95% CI 1, 0.80 to 3.24; 95% CI 2, 0.0 to 0.0). Stratification by age, Injury Severity Score, and Glasgow Coma Scale score demonstrated a small survival benefit (95% CI 1, 1.12 to 2.12) in the ambulance subgroup with Glasgow Coma Scale score from 10 to 12. Multiple logistic regression analysis confirmed that the group did not affect mortality.
                This study was conceived to emphasize the supposed advantages of the combined helicopter, physician, and advanced life-support rescue. No increased benefit compared with the simpler rescue group could be demonstrated. The mortality of 128 consecutive severely brain-injured patients (Glasgow Coma Score less than or equal to 8) treated by a land advanced life support system and transported to a trauma center was compared to the mortality of 104 consecutive severely brain-injured patients treated during the same time period by an advanced care rotorcraft aeromedical emergency service and transported to the same trauma center. The two patient groups had statistically similar distribution of CNS lesions and Glasgow Coma Scores. The mortality of the patients treated by the land ALS system was 40%. The mortality of the patients treated by the aeromedical service was 31%. The 9% reduction in mortality in the patients treated by the aeromedical service was statistically significant (p less than 0.001). There was also a statistically significant (p less than 0.05) reduction in the Glasgow Outcome Scores of the patients treated by the aeromedical service compared with patients treated by the land advanced life support system. To date, the benefit of prehospital advanced life-support programs on trauma-related mortality and morbidity has not been established
                The Ontario Prehospital Advanced Life Support (OPALS) Major Trauma Study was a before-after systemwide controlled clinical trial conducted in 17 cities. We enrolled adult patients who had experienced major trauma in a basic life-support phase and a subsequent advanced life-support phase (during which paramedics were able to perform endotracheal intubation and administer fluids and drugs intravenously). The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge.
                Among the 2867 patients enrolled in the basic life-support (n = 1373) and advanced life-support (n = 1494) phases, characteristics were similar, including mean age (44.8 v. 47.5 years), frequency of blunt injury (92.0% v. 91.4%), median injury severity score (24 v. 22) and percentage of patients with Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9 (27.2% v. 22.1%). Survival did not differ overall (81.1% among patients in the advanced life-support phase v. 81.8% among those in the basic life-support phase; p = 0.65). Among patients with Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9, survival was lower among those in the advanced life-support phase (50.9% v. 60.0%; p = 0.02). The adjusted odds of death for the advanced life-support v. basic life-support phases were nonsignificant (1.2, 95% confidence interval 0.9-1.7; p = 0.16).
                The OPALS Major Trauma Study showed that systemwide implementation of full advanced life-support programs did not decrease mortality or morbidity for major trauma patients. We also found that during the advanced life-support phase, mortality was greater among patients with Glasgow Coma Scale scores less than 9. We believe that emergency medical services should carefully re-evaluate the indications for and application of prehospital advanced life-support measures for patients who have experienced major trauma. This study compared a hospital-based aeromedical program to a ground paramedic service in order to determine whether the element of prehospital time or prehospital care is the major contributor towards improved survival. One hundred twenty-six severe blunt trauma patients were studied. There were 93(73.81%) transported by air and 33(26.19%) transported by ground. Utilizing the TRISS methodology, the air patients had a probability of survival of 2.23 SD better than the national norm, and the ground patients had a -2.69 SD below the national norm. The air patients had a higher percentage of intubated patients (42% vs 3%) and use of PASG(56% vs 30%). There was no significant difference in the prehospital times of either the air or ground services once they had arrived at the scene. Since the scene time of both services is similar, the improved survival of the air patients may be due to the technical intervention procedures performed. This paper reports a retrospective analysis of patients with serious yet substantially survivable injuries represented by ISS scores from 20 to 39 and whether or not survival was influenced by the use of helicopters. A review of 606 of these patients with blunt trauma was performed for the period from 1983 through 1986. When the group was evaluated there were 451 patients in the ISS cohort of 20-29 and 155 in the 30-39 group. The mean age was 30.5 years and 76% were males. A total of 259 patients were transported by ambulance and 347 by helicopter. Characteristics of the two groups were similar. The mean TS was 12.7 for ambulance and 12.1 for helicopter patients. Mean GCS was 10.4 in the ambulance group and 9.6 for helicopter patients. Overall the mortality for ambulance transported patients was 13% compared to 18% for the helicopter group. We conclude that there is no survival advantage in the helicopter transported group in an urban area with a sophisticated prehospital care system. Patients of rural origin deserve further study. This prospective, controlled trial with crossover group design compares the effectiveness of active compression-decompression (ACD) cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and standard CPR on the outcomes of victims of prehospital cardiac arrest. In three UK cities, victims of non-traumatic, out of hospital cardiac arrest, over the age of 8 years received either standard or ACD-CPR on arrival of ambulance personnel. Main outcome measures were return of spontaneous circulation, survival to be admitted to the intensive care unit, survival to hospital discharge, and neurological outcome. A total of 576 patients (STD-CPR, n=309; ACD-CPR, n=267) were analysed. The treatment groups were similar with respect to age, gender, proportion of witnessed arrests, initial cardiac rhythm, and call to advanced life support interval. The proportion of patients receiving bystander CPR was higher in the ACD group (37.1% vs. 28.5%; P=0.028). The interval between collapse and defibrillation was longer in the ACD group (12.3 min vs. 10.4 min; P=0.028). There was no difference between the STD-CPR and ACD-CPR groups in survival to admission to the intensive care unit (13.6% vs. 13.8%; P=0.93) or hospital discharge (4.8% vs. 6.0%; P=0.67). There was no difference between the groups with respect to the neurological outcome of those patients surviving to hospital discharge. Analysis of important subgroups also showed no benefit for ACD-CPR. We conclude that there was no improvement in outcome with ACD-CPR when used by ambulance personnel in Cardiff and Portsmouth. Some studies have shown improved outcomes with helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) transport, while others have not. Safety concerns and cost have prompted reevaluation of the widespread use of HEMS.
                To determine whether the mode of transport of trauma patients affects mortality.
                Data for 56,744 injured adults aged ≥ 18 years transported to 62 U.S. trauma centers by helicopter or ground ambulance were obtained from the National Sample Program of the 2007 National Trauma Data Bank. In-hospital mortality was calculated for different demographic and injury severity groups. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) were produced by utilizing a logistic regression model measuring the association of mortality and type of transport, controlling for age, gender, and injury severity (Injury Severity Score [ISS] and Revised Trauma Score [RTS]).
                The odds of death were 39% lower in those transported by HEMS compared with those transported by ground ambulance (AOR = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.54-0.69). Among those aged ≥ 55 years, the odds of death were not significantly different (AOR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.74-1.13). Among all transports, male patients had a higher odds of death (AOR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.10-1.38) than female patients. The odds of death increased with each year of age (AOR = 1.040, 95% CI = 1.037-1.043) and each unit of ISS (AOR = 1.080, 95% CI = 1.075-1.084), and decreased with each unit of RTS (AOR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.45-0.48).
                The use of HEMS for the transport of adult trauma patients was associated with reduced mortality for patients aged 18-54 years. In this study, HEMS did not improve mortality in adults aged ≥ 55 years. Identification of additional variables in the selection of those patients who will benefit from HEMS transport is expected to enhance this reduction in mortality. Birth asphyxia kills 0.7 to 1.6 million newborns a year globally with 99% of deaths in developing countries. Effective newborn resuscitation could reduce this burden of disease but the training of health-care providers in low income settings is often outdated. Our aim was to determine if a simple one day newborn resuscitation training (NRT) alters health worker resuscitation practices in a public hospital setting in Kenya.
                We conducted a randomised, controlled trial with health workers receiving early training with NRT (n = 28) or late training (the control group, n = 55). The training was adapted locally from the approach of the UK Resuscitation Council. The primary outcome was the proportion of appropriate initial resuscitation steps with the frequency of inappropriate practices as a secondary outcome. Data were collected on 97 and 115 resuscitation episodes over 7 weeks after early training in the intervention and control groups respectively. Trained providers demonstrated a higher proportion of adequate initial resuscitation steps compared to the control group (trained 66% vs control 27%; risk ratio 2.45, [95% CI 1.75-3.42], p<0.001, adjusted for clustering). In addition, there was a statistically significant reduction in the frequency of inappropriate and potentially harmful practices per resuscitation in the trained group (trained 0.53 vs control 0.92; mean difference 0.40, [95% CI 0.13-0.66], p = 0.004).
                Implementation of a simple, one day newborn resuscitation training can be followed immediately by significant improvement in health workers' practices. However, evidence of the effects on long term performance or clinical outcomes can only be established by larger cluster randomised trials.
                Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN92218092.
At this time, the evidence indicates that there is no benefit of advanced life support training for ambulance crews.