Association between three prehospital thoracic decompression techniques by physicians and complications: a retrospective, multicentre study in adults

Advanced and Invasive Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Techniques as an Adjunct to Advanced Cardiac Life Support

BACKGROUND

Despite numerous promising innovations, the chance of survival from sudden cardiac arrest has remained virtually unchanged for decades. Recently, technological advances have been made, user-friendly portable devices have been developed, and advanced invasive procedures have been described that could improve this unsatisfactory situation.

METHODS

A selective literature search in the core databases with a focus on randomized controlled trials and guidelines.

RESULTS

Technical aids, such as feedback systems or automated mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) devices, can improve chest compression quality. The latter, as well as extracorporeal CPR, might serve as a bridge to treatment (with extracorporeal CPR even as a bridge to recovery). Sonography may be used to improve thoracic compressions on the one hand and to rule out potentially reversible causes of cardiac arrest on the other. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta might enhance myocardial and cerebral perfusion. Minithoracostomy, pericardiocentesis, or clamshell thoracotomy might resolve reversible causes of cardiac arrest.

CONCLUSIONS

It is crucial to identify those patients who may benefit from an advanced or invasive procedure and make the decision to implement the intervention in a timely manner. As with all infrequently performed procedures, sound education and regular training are paramount.

Endpoints in Vital Signs as a Useful Tool for Measuring Successful Needle Decompression After Traumatic Tension Pneumothorax: An Analysis of the National Emergency Medicine Information System Database

Background Needle decompression is a useful tool in the pre-hospital setting for treating tension pneumothorax. However the specific improvements in vital signs that determine a successful decompression are only reported in a few studies and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) self-reported assessments of improvement are more commonplace. We hypothesize that EMS reports may exaggerate improvement when compared to objective vital sign changes. Methodology This is a retrospective cohort study using the National Emergency Medicine Information System (NEMSIS) for the year 2020. Vital signs recorded as objective endpoints include systolic blood pressure (SBP), pulse (HR), respiratory rate (RR), and oxygen saturation (SpO₂). Univariate analysis was performed using the t-test for continuous variables and the chi-square test for categorical variables. Results A total of 8,219 calls were included in the sample size analyzed. Most patients were white (2,911, 35.4%) and male (6,694, 81.4%). Abnormal vitals recorded as indications for needle decompression included SBP <100 mmHg, HR <60 or >100 beats/minute, RR <12 or >20 breaths/minute, and SpO₂ <93%. Statistically significant improvements were seen in the number of abnormal vital signs after the procedure. The percentage of improvement was higher in the EMS self-reported assessment than in objective findings for oxygen saturation and SBP. Conclusions Our analysis shows objective improvement of hypoxia and hypotension after field needle decompression, supporting the efficacy of the procedure. The improvement based on vital sign change is modest and is less than that reported by EMS assessment of global improvement. This represents a target for quality improvement in EMS practice.