[Intraosseous infusion in the German Air Rescue Service : Guideline recommendations versus mission reality]

[Treatment of severely injured patients by emergency physicians from different medical specialties : A retrospective multicenter investigation of data from the ADAC Air Recue Service and the German TraumaRegister DGU®]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The level 3 guidelines on treatment of patients with severe/multiple injuries provide a defined framework for an appropriate treatment of these patients. It is presumed that prehospital diagnostic and therapeutic decisions are affected by the clinical expertise and the medical disciplines of the emergency physicians.

METHODS

Retrospective, multicenter study based on data from the ADAC Air Recue Service and the TraumaRegister DGU®. In the study period 2011-2015, a total of 11,019 seriously injured patients were included. They were treated by emergency physicians from the following disciplines: anesthesiology (ANÄ), internal medicine (INN) and surgery (CHIR).

RESULTS

Of the patients 81.9% were treated by ANÄ, 7.6% by INN and 10.5% by CHIR. Preclinically, 40.5% of patients were intubated (ANÄ 43.0%, INN 31.2%, CHIR 28.3%; p < 0.001), 5.5% received pleural decompression (ANÄ 5.9%, INN 4.2%, CHIR 2.8%; p = 0.004),and 10.8% were treated with catecholamines (ANÄ 11.3%, INN 8.3%, CHIR 8.3%; p = 0.022). Unconscious patients were intubated in 96.0% (ANÄ 96.1%, INN 97.7%, CHIR 93.9%; p = 0.205). The mortality was not influenced by the medical specialty of the emergency physician.

CONCLUSION

In this air rescue cohort differences in indications for invasive procedures were observed between the groups. This may be caused by their clinical background. Using the example of intubation, it has been shown that guideline recommendations were closely followed irrespective of the medical specialty of the emergency physician.

Intraosseous and intravenous administration of antibiotics yields comparable plasma concentrations during experimental septic shock

BACKGROUND

We aimed to investigate whether comparable antibiotic concentrations could be reached with intraosseous and intravenous administration during septic shock.

METHODS

In this randomized, prospective experimental study conducted at an animal research laboratory at the University Hospital of Uppsala, eight anesthetized pigs, weighing 21.2 to 29.1 kg (mean: 25.2 ± 2.3 kg), received endotoxin infusion at 4 μg/kg/h for 6 h. At the onset of clinical shock, alternatively after 3 h of endotoxemia, they received 75 mg/kg of cefotaxime and 7 mg/kg of gentamicin either in a proximal tibial intraosseous catheter or in a peripheral intravenous catheter. Mixed venous samples were taken after 5, 15, 30, 60, 120 and 180 min and analyzed for antibiotic concentrations.

RESULTS

For both antibiotics, plasma concentrations after intraosseous and intravenous administration followed similar curves throughout the observation period, and peak concentrations were comparable. Mean concentration area under the curve (AUC mg × h/l) for cefotaxime was 108.1 ± 19.5 after intraosseous and 116.5 ± 11.1 after intravenous administration; ratio 0.93, (95% CI 0.71-1.19). Mean AUC for gentamicin was 28.1 ± 6.8 for intraosseous and 32.2 ± 3.5 for intravenous administration; ratio 0.87 (95% CI 0.62-1.19).

CONCLUSIONS

In this porcine septic shock model, intraosseous and intravenous administration of gentamicin and cefotaxime yielded comparable concentrations. In an emergency, intraosseous administration of these antibiotics may be considered in severe infections when venous access is difficult.

[Primary treatment of penetrating injuries. Part 1: blast trauma]

Blast injuries may result from a variety of causes but the biomechanical impact and pathophysiological consequences do not differ between domestic or industrial accidents or even terrorist attacks. However, this differentiation relevantly affects the tactical procedures of the rescue teams. Focusing on further detonations, top priority is given to the personal safety of all rescue workers. The rareness of blast injuries in a civilian setting results in a lack of experience on the one hand but on the other hand the complexity of blast injuries to the human body places high demands on the knowledge and skills of the entire rescue team for competent treatment. The purpose of this article is to explain the physicochemical principles of explosions and to convey tactical and medical knowledge to emergency medical services.