A standard operating procedure for prehospital anaesthesia and its effect on mortality-An observational study.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-26 DOI:10.1111/aas.14459
Harry Ljungqvist, Jussi Pirneskoski, Anssi Saviluoto, Timo Iirola, Hetti Kirves, Jouni Nurmi
{"title":"A standard operating procedure for prehospital anaesthesia and its effect on mortality-An observational study.","authors":"Harry Ljungqvist, Jussi Pirneskoski, Anssi Saviluoto, Timo Iirola, Hetti Kirves, Jouni Nurmi","doi":"10.1111/aas.14459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prehospital anaesthesia is a complex intervention performed for critically ill patients. To minimise complications, a standard operating procedure (SOP) outlining the process is considered valuable. We investigated the implementation of an SOP for prehospital anaesthesia in helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective observational study of patients receiving prehospital anaesthesia by Finnish HEMS from January 2012 to August 2019. The intervention studied was the implementation of an SOP at two of the five bases during 2015-2016. Patients were stratified according to whether they were anaesthetised before, during or after implementation and the primary outcomes were 1- and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included anaesthesia quality indicators. Confounding factors was assessed via logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3902 tracheal intubations were performed without an SOP, 430 during implementation and 1525 after implementation. The SOP had a significant effect on 1-day mortality during implementation with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.56, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.37-0.81 and a further trend towards benefit after implementation (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68-1.04), but no difference in 30-day mortality (OR after implementation 1.10, 95% CI 0.92-1.30). Implementation of an SOP improved first-pass success rate from 87.3% to 96.5%, p < 0.001.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implementation of an SOP for prehospital anaesthesia was associated with a trend towards lower 1-day mortality and an improved first-pass success but did not affect 30-day mortality. Despite this, we advocate prehospital systems to consider implementation of a prehospital anaesthesia SOP as immediate performance markers improved significantly.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":"1068-1075"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14459","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Prehospital anaesthesia is a complex intervention performed for critically ill patients. To minimise complications, a standard operating procedure (SOP) outlining the process is considered valuable. We investigated the implementation of an SOP for prehospital anaesthesia in helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS).

Methods: We performed a retrospective observational study of patients receiving prehospital anaesthesia by Finnish HEMS from January 2012 to August 2019. The intervention studied was the implementation of an SOP at two of the five bases during 2015-2016. Patients were stratified according to whether they were anaesthetised before, during or after implementation and the primary outcomes were 1- and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included anaesthesia quality indicators. Confounding factors was assessed via logistic regression.

Results: A total of 3902 tracheal intubations were performed without an SOP, 430 during implementation and 1525 after implementation. The SOP had a significant effect on 1-day mortality during implementation with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.56, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.37-0.81 and a further trend towards benefit after implementation (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68-1.04), but no difference in 30-day mortality (OR after implementation 1.10, 95% CI 0.92-1.30). Implementation of an SOP improved first-pass success rate from 87.3% to 96.5%, p < 0.001.

Conclusion: Implementation of an SOP for prehospital anaesthesia was associated with a trend towards lower 1-day mortality and an improved first-pass success but did not affect 30-day mortality. Despite this, we advocate prehospital systems to consider implementation of a prehospital anaesthesia SOP as immediate performance markers improved significantly.

院前麻醉标准操作程序及其对死亡率的影响--一项观察性研究。
背景:院前麻醉是为危重病人实施的一项复杂干预措施。为了最大限度地减少并发症,概述该过程的标准操作程序(SOP)被认为是非常有价值的。我们对直升机急救医疗服务(HEMS)院前麻醉标准操作程序的实施情况进行了调查:我们对 2012 年 1 月至 2019 年 8 月期间接受芬兰直升机急救服务院前麻醉的患者进行了回顾性观察研究。研究的干预措施是在 2015-2016 年期间在五个基地中的两个基地实施 SOP。根据实施前、实施期间或实施后的麻醉情况对患者进行分层,主要结果为1天和30天死亡率。次要结果包括麻醉质量指标。混杂因素通过逻辑回归进行评估:结果:共有 3902 例气管插管在没有 SOP 的情况下进行,430 例在实施期间进行,1525 例在实施后进行。在实施过程中,SOP 对 1 天死亡率有明显影响,几率比 (OR) 为 0.56,95% 置信区间 (95% CI) 为 0.37-0.81,实施后有进一步获益的趋势(OR 为 0.84,95% CI 为 0.68-1.04),但对 30 天死亡率没有影响(实施后 OR 为 1.10,95% CI 为 0.92-1.30)。实施 SOP 后,急救成功率从 87.3% 提高到 96.5%(P 结论:实施 SOP 后,急救成功率从 87.3% 提高到 96.5%:实施院前麻醉 SOP 有降低 1 天死亡率和提高首次麻醉成功率的趋势,但不会影响 30 天死亡率。尽管如此,我们仍建议院前系统考虑实施院前麻醉 SOP,因为即时绩效指标已得到显著改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信