The out-of-hospital validation of the Canadian C-Spine Rule by paramedics

Wilderness Medical Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for Spinal Cord Protection: 2024 Update

The Wilderness Medical Society reconvened an expert panel to update best practice guidelines for spinal cord protection during trauma management. This panel, with membership updated in 2023, was charged with the development of evidence-based guidelines for management of the injured or potentially injured spine in wilderness environments. Recommendations are made regarding several parameters related to spinal cord protection. These recommendations are graded based on the quality of supporting evidence and balance the benefits and risks/burdens for each parameter according to American College of Chest Physicians methodology. Key recommendations include the concept that interventions should be goal-oriented (spinal cord/column protection in the context of overall patient and provider safety) rather than technique-oriented (immobilization). An evidence-based, goal-oriented approach excludes the immobilization of suspected spinal injuries via rigid collars or backboards.

Patterns of change in prehospital spinal motion restriction: A retrospective database review

BACKGROUND

Acute management of trauma patients with potential spine injuries has evolved from uniform spinal immobilization (SI) to spinal motion restriction (SMR). Little research exists describing how these changes have been implemented. This study aims to describe and analyze the practice of SMR in one emergency medical services (EMS) agency over the time frame of SMR adoption.

METHODS

This was a retrospective database review of electronic patient care reports from 2009 to 2020. The effects of key practice changes (revised documentation and a collar-only treatment option) were analyzed in an interrupted time series using the rate of SI/SMR as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included patient age, sex, acuity, mechanism of injury, treatment provided, cervical collar size, and positioning. These were assessed for changes from year to year by Poisson regression. Associations between patient and treatment characteristics were investigated with binomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

There were 25,747 instances of SI/SMR included. Among all patients, the median age was 40 (interquartile range 24-56), 58% (14,970) were male, and 20% (5062) were high-acuity. The rate of SI/SMR declined from 31.2 to 12.7 treatments per 100 trauma calls per month. The proportion of high-acuity patients increased by 9.6% per year on average (95% CI 8.7%-10.0%). When first available, collar-only treatment was provided to 47% of patients, rising by 6.3% per year (95% CI 3.2%-9.5%) to 60% in 2020. Collar-only treatment (compared to board-and-collar) was more likely to be applied to low-acuity patients (as compared to high): odds ratio 3.01 (95% CI 2.64-3.43).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows decreasing SI/SMR treatment and changing patient and practice characteristics. These patterns of care cannot be attributed solely to formal protocol changes. Similar patterns and their possible explanations should be investigated elsewhere.

The prehospital management of ambulance-attended adults who fell: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The ageing population is requiring more ambulance attendances for falls. This scoping review aimed to map and synthesise the evidence for the prehospital management of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) attended adult patients who fall.

METHODS

The Joanna Briggs Institute methods for scoping reviews were used. Six databases were searched (Medline, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, ProQuest), 1st August 2021. Included sources reported: ambulance attended (context), adults who fell (population), injuries, interventions or disposition data (concept). Data were narratively synthesised.

RESULTS

One-hundred and fifteen research sources met the inclusion criteria. Detailed information describing prehospital delivered EMS interventions, transport decisions and alternative care pathways was limited. Overall, adults< 65 years were less likely than older adults to be attended repeatedly and/or not transported. Being male, falling from height and sustaining severe injuries were associated with transport to major trauma centres. Older females, falling from standing/low height with minor injuries were less likely to be transported to major trauma centres.

CONCLUSION

The relationship between patient characteristics, falls and resulting injuries were well described in the literature. Other evidence about EMS management in prehospital settings was limited. Further research regarding prehospital interventions, transport decisions and alternative care pathways in the prehospital setting is recommended.

Cervical spine injuries in adults ≥ 65 years after low-level falls - A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Adults ≥ 65 are at risk of cervical spine (C-spine) injury, even after low-level falls. The objectives of this systematic review were to determine the prevalence of C-spine injury in this population and explore the association of unreliable clinical exam with C-spine injury.

METHODS

We conducted this systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews to include studies reporting on C-spine injury in adults ≥ 65 years after low-level falls. Two reviewers independently screened articles, abstracted data, and assessed bias. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. A meta-analysis was performed to estimate overall prevalence and the pooled odds ratio for the association between C-spine injury and an unreliable clinical exam.

RESULTS

The search identified 2044citations, 138 full texts were screened, and 21 studies were included in the systematic review. C-spine injury prevalence in adults ≥ 65 years after low-level falls was 3.8% (95% CI: 2.8-5.3). The odds of c-spine injury in those with altered level of consciousness (aLOC) v/s not aLOC was 1.21 (0.90-1.63) and in those with GCS < 15 v/s GCS 15 was 1.62 (0.37-6.98). Studies were at a low-risk of bias, although some had low recruitment and significant loss to follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Adults ≥ 65 years are at risk of cervical spine injury after low-level falls. More research is needed to determine whether there is an association between cervical spine injury and GCS < 15 or altered level of consciousness.

Implementation of the Modified Canadian C-Spine Rule by Paramedics

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The Canadian C-spine rule was modified and validated for use by the paramedics in a multicenter study where patients were assessed with the Canadian C-spine rule yet all transported with immobilization. This study evaluated the clinical impact of the modified Canadian C-spine rule when implemented by paramedics.

METHODS

This single-center prospective cohort implementation study took place in Ottawa, Canada (from 2011 to 2015). Advanced and primary care paramedics were trained to use the modified Canadian C-spine rule, collect data on a standardized study form, and selectively transport eligible patients without immobilization. We evaluated all consecutive low-risk adult patients (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] 15, stable vital signs) at risk for a neck injury. We followed all patients without initial radiologic evaluation for 30 days. Analyses included descriptive statistics with 95% confidence intervals (CI), sensitivity, specificity, and kappa coefficients.

RESULTS

The 4,034 enrolled patients had a mean age of 43 (range 16 to 99), and 53.4% were female. Motor vehicle collisions were the most common mechanism of injury (55.1%), followed by falls (23.9%). There were 11 clinically important injuries. The paramedics classified these injuries with a sensitivity of 90.9% (95% CI, 58.7 to 99.8) and specificity of 66.5% (95% CI, 65.1 to 68.0). There was no adverse event or resulting spinal cord injury. The kappa agreement between paramedics and investigators was 0.94. A total of 2,583 (64.0%) immobilizations were avoided using the modified Canadian C-spine rule.

CONCLUSION

Paramedics could accurately apply the modified Canadian C-spine rule to low-risk trauma patients and significantly reduce the need for spinal immobilization during transport. This resulted in no adverse event or any spinal cord injury.

Factors which affect the application and implementation of a spinal motion restriction protocol by prehospital providers in a low resource setting: A scoping review

·

There is a need for a patient-centred approach to the prehospital spinal management approach, which considers the associated risks, available personnel and limited resources.

·

There is limited evidence supporting the use of the NEXUS and CCR decision tools in the prehospital setting.

·

Prehospital spinal motion restriction decision tools should focus on reducing unnecessary spinal motion restriction and its associated adverse effects

·

Developing a decision tool with more context-specific prehospital instructions for selective spinal motion restriction is of value.

Introduction

The safety and effectiveness of prehospital clinical c-spine clearance or spinal motion restriction (SMR) decision support tools are unclear. The present study aimed to examine the available literature on clinical cervical spine clearance and selective SMR decision support tools to identify possible barriers to implementation, safety, and effectiveness when used by emergency medical service (EMS) practitioners.

Method

We performed a focused scoping review of published literature on the prehospital use of clinical c-spine clearance and SMR decision tools in adult blunt trauma patients. The Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, Turning Research into Practice and EBSCOhost online databases were searched (February 2021). The type of decision support tool and facilitators and barriers to its use were extracted from each included publication in accordance with a modified descriptive-analytical framework. Extracted data were subjected to thematic analysis.

Results

Following screening, forty-two articles were included in this scoping review. No studies conducted specifically in low resource settings were found. The majority of articles (57%) evaluated the use of specific SMR decision support tools, such as the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) and the Canadian C-spine Rule (CCR). Potential facilitators of safe and effective use were identified in 60%, and potential barriers to safe and effective use in 55% of included articles. Only one study evaluated the CCR when used by EMS practitioners, making it difficult to determine its appropriateness for implementation in the prehospital setting.

Conclusion

This is the first scoping review, to our knowledge, that has attempted to identify the possible barriers and facilitators to their implementation, safety, and effectiveness when used by EMS practitioners. Key issues identified included terminology, guideline compliance and implementation, and a lack of context-specific evidence. These may provide important considerations for future guideline development.

Recommendation for changes to the guidelines of trauma patients with potential spinal injury within a regional UK ambulance trust

BACKGROUND

Spinal assessment and immobilisation has been a topic of debate for many years where, despite an emerging evidence base and the delivery of new guidance overseas, little has changed within UK pre-hospital practice. Since 2018, South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust has spent time working with local trauma networks and expertise from within the region and international colleagues to develop a set of C-spine assessment and immobilisation guidelines that reflect the current best available international evidence and significant changes in international pre-hospital practice from settings such as Scandinavia and Australasia.

METHODS

A specialist group was commissioned to review the topic of pre-hospital spinal immobilisation and explore potential for evidence-based improvement. In conjunction with local trauma networks, subject matter experts and a thorough review of recent literature, a series of recommendations were made in order to improve spinal care within the authoring trust.

RESULTS

Seven recommendations were made, and an updated set of guidelines produced. These included the removal of semi-rigid collars from pre-hospital spinal immobilisation; the creation of two tiers of patients to ensure that the high-risk and low-risk populations are considered separately and an accompanying decision tool to safeguard both cohorts; an increased emphasis on the risk of spinal injury in the frail and older patient; an emphasis on spinal motion restriction rather than rigid immobilisation; an increased emphasis on self-extrication; and the use of a marker for emergency departments.

SUMMARY

An updated set of guidance has been produced using a combination of specialist and expert opinion alongside a literature review with close involvement of key stakeholders, both public and professional. The new guidance helps to ensure a patient-centred approach where each person is considered an individual with their risk of injury and management measures tailored to their specific needs.

Development of a New Emergency Medicine Spinal Immobilization Protocol for Pediatric Trauma Patients and First Applicability Test on Emergency Medicine Personnel

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to (i) develop a protocol that supports decision making for prehospital spinal immobilization in pediatric trauma patients based on evidence from current scientific literature and (ii) perform an applicability test on emergency medicine personnel.

METHODS

A structured search of the literature published between 1980 and 2019 was performed in MEDLINE using PubMed. Based on this literature search, a new Emergency Medicine Spinal Immobilization Protocol for pediatric trauma patients (E.M.S. IMMO Protocol Pediatric) was developed. Parameters found in the literature, such as trauma mechanism and clinical findings that accounted for a high probability of spinal injury, were included in the protocol. An applicability test was administered to German emergency medicine personnel using a questionnaire with case examples to assess correct decision making according to the protocol.

RESULTS

The E.M.S. IMMO Protocol Pediatric was developed based on evidence from published literature. In the applicability test involving 44 emergency medicine providers revealed that 82.9% of participants chose the correct type of immobilization based on the protocol. A total of 97.8% evaluated the E.M.S. IMMO Protocol Pediatric as helpful.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current literature, the E.M.S. IMMO Protocol Pediatric was developed in accordance with established procedures used in trauma care. The decision regarding immobilization is made on based on the cardiopulmonary status of the patient, and life-threatening injuries are treated with priority. If the patient presents in stable condition, the necessity for full immobilization is assessed based upon the mechanisms of injury, assessment of impairment, and clinical examination.

Evaluation of external stabilization of type II odontoid fractures in geriatric patients-An experimental study on a newly developed cadaveric trauma model

Background

Along with the growing geriatric population, the number of odontoid fractures is steadily increasing. However, the effectiveness of immobilizing geriatric odontoid fractures using a cervical collar has been questioned. The aim of the present study is to analyze the physiological and pathological motion in odontoid fractures and to assess limitation of motion in the cervical spine when applying a cervical collar.

Methods

Motion analysis was performed with wireless motion tracker on unfixed geriatric human cadavers. First, a new geriatric type II odontoid fracture model was developed. In this model, the type II odontoid fracture is operated via a transoral approach. The physiological and pathological flexion and lateral bending of the cervical spine resulting from this procedure was measured. The resulting motion after external stabilization using a cervical collar was analyzed.

Results

The new geriatric type II odontoid fracture model was successfully established using seven unfixed human cadavers. The pathological flexion of the cervical spine was significantly increased compared to the physiological flexion (p = 0.027). Furthermore, the flexion was significantly reduced when a cervical collar was applied. In case of flexion the mean remaining motion was significantly reduced (p = 0.0017) from 41° to 14°. For lateral bending the mean remaining motion was significantly reduced (p = 0.0137) from 48° to 18°.

Conclusions

In case of type II odontoid fracture, flexion and lateral bending of the cervical spine are increased due to spinal instability. Thus, if an odontoid fracture is suspected in geriatric patients, the application of a cervical collar should always be considered since external stabilization can significantly reduce flexion and lateral bending.

ResQbot 2.0: An Improved Design of a Mobile Rescue Robot with an Inflatable Neck Securing Device for Safe Casualty Extraction

Despite the fact that a large number of research studies have been conducted in the field of search and rescue robotics, significantly little attention has been given to the development of rescue robots capable of performing physical rescue interventions, including loading and transporting victims to a safe zone—i.e., casualty extraction tasks. The aim of this study is to develop a mobile rescue robot that could assist first responders when saving casualties from a dangerous area by performing a casualty extraction procedure whilst ensuring that no additional injury is caused by the operation and no additional lives are put at risk. In this paper, we present a novel design of ResQbot 2.0—a mobile rescue robot designed for performing the casualty extraction task. This robot is a stretcher-type casualty extraction robot, which is a significantly improved version of the initial proof-of-concept prototype, ResQbot (retrospectively referred to as ResQbot 1.0), that has been developed in our previous work. The proposed designs and development of the mechanical system of ResQbot 2.0, as well as the method for safely loading a full-body casualty onto the robot’s ‘stretcher bed’, are described in detail based on the conducted literature review, evaluation of our previous work, and feedback provided by medical professionals. We perform simulation experiments in the Gazebo physics engine simulator to verify the proposed design and the casualty extraction procedure. The simulation results demonstrate the capability of ResQbot 2.0 to carry out safe casualty extractions successfully.

Prehospital Factors Associated With Cervical Spine Injury in Pediatric Blunt Trauma Patients

BACKGROUND

The risk for cervical spine injury (CSI) must be assessed in children who sustain blunt trauma. The Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) retrospectively derived CSI model identifies CSI risk in children based on emergency department (ED) provider observations. The objective of this pilot study was to determine the univariate association of emergency medical services (EMS) provider-observed historical, mechanistic, and physical examination factors with CSI in injured children. Secondarily, we assessed the performance of the previously identified eight PECARN CSI risk factors (PECARN model) based exclusively on EMS provider observation.

METHODS

We conducted a four-center, prospective observational study of children 0 to 17 years old who were transported by EMS after blunt trauma and underwent spinal motion restriction or trauma team activation in the ED. In the ED, EMS providers recorded their observations for a priori determined CSI risk factors. CSIs were classified by reviewing imaging, consultations, and/or telephone follow-up. We calculated bivariable relative risks and test characteristics for the PECARN model based solely on EMS provider observations.

RESULTS

Of 1,372 enrolled children, 25 (1.8%) had CSIs. Of the a priori determined CSI risk factors, seven factors had bivariable associations with CSIs: axial load, altered mental status, signs of basilar skull fracture, substantial torso injury, substantial thoracic injury, respiratory distress, and decreased oxygen saturation. The PECARN model (high-risk motor vehicle collision, diving mechanism, predisposing condition, neck pain, decreased neck mobility, altered mental status, neurologic deficits, and/or substantial torso injury) exhibited the following test characteristics when based on EMS provider observations: sensitivity = 96.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 88.3% to 100.0%); negative predictive value = 99.8% (95% CI = 99.4% to 100.0%); specificity = 38.5% (95% CI = 35.9% to 41.1%); and positive predictive value = 2.8% (95% CI = 1.7% to 3.9%).

CONCLUSION

EMS providers can identify risk factors associated with CSI in injured children who experience blunt trauma. These risk factors may be considered for inclusion in a pediatric CSI decision rule specific to the prehospital setting.

Evaluating the paramedic application of the prehospital Canadian C-Spine Rule in sport-related injuries

OBJECTIVES

We sought to compare the ability of the prehospital Canadian C-Spine Rule to selectively recommend immobilization in sport-related versus non-sport-related injuries and describe sport-related mechanisms of injury.

METHODS

We reviewed data from the prospective paramedic Canadian C-Spine Rule validation and implementation studies in 7 Canadian cities. A trained reviewer further categorized sport-related mechanisms of injury collaboratively with a sport medicine physician using a pilot-tested standardized form. We compared the Canadian C-Spine Rule's recommendation to immobilize sport-related versus non-sport-related patients using Chi-square and relative risk statistics with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

There were 201 sport-related patients among the 5,978 included. Sport-related injured patients were younger (mean age 36.2 vs. 42.4) and more predominantly male (60.5% vs. 46.8%) than non-sport-related patients. Paramedics did not miss any C-Spine injury when using the Canadian C-Spine Rule. C-Spine injury rates were similar between sport (2/201; 1.0%) and non-sport-injured patients (47/5,777; 0.8%). The Canadian C-Spine Rule recommended immobilization equally between groups (46.4% vs. 42.5%; RR 1.09 95%CI 0.93-1.28), most commonly resulting from a dangerous mechanism among sport-injured (68.7% vs. 54.5%; RR 1.26 95%CI 1.08-1.47). The most common dangerous mechanism responsible for immobilization in sport was axial load.

CONCLUSION

Although equal proportions of sport and non-sport-related injuries were immobilized, a dangerous mechanism was most often responsible for immobilization in sport-related cases. These findings do not address the potential impact of using the Canadian C-Spine Rule to evaluate collegiate or pro athletes assessed by sport medicine physicians. It does support using the Canadian C-Spine Rule as a tool in sport-injured patients assessed by paramedics.

Multiple trauma management in mountain environments - a scoping review : Evidence based guidelines of the International Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MedCom). Intended for physicians and other advanced life support personnel

Background

Multiple trauma in mountain environments may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared to urban environments.

Objective

To provide evidence based guidance to assist rescuers in multiple trauma management in mountain environments.

Eligibility criteria

All articles published on or before September 30th 2019, in all languages, were included. Articles were searched with predefined search terms.

Sources of evidence

PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and hand searching of relevant studies from the reference list of included articles.

Charting methods

Evidence was searched according to clinically relevant topics and PICO questions.

Results

Two-hundred forty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. Recommendations were developed and graded according to the evidence-grading system of the American College of Chest Physicians. The manuscript was initially written and discussed by the coauthors. Then it was presented to ICAR MedCom in draft and again in final form for discussion and internal peer review. Finally, in a face-to-face discussion within ICAR MedCom consensus was reached on October 11th 2019, at the ICAR fall meeting in Zakopane, Poland.

Conclusions

Multiple trauma management in mountain environments can be demanding. Safety of the rescuers and the victim has priority. A crABCDE approach, with haemorrhage control first, is central, followed by basic first aid, splinting, immobilisation, analgesia, and insulation. Time for on-site medical treatment must be balanced against the need for rapid transfer to a trauma centre and should be as short as possible. Reduced on-scene times may be achieved with helicopter rescue. Advanced diagnostics (e.g. ultrasound) may be used and treatment continued during transport.

Epidemiology and predictors of traumatic spine injury in severely injured patients: implications for emergency procedures

PURPOSE

This study aimed to identify the prevalence and predictors of spinal injuries that are suitable for immobilization.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study drawing from the multi-center database of the TraumaRegister DGU^®, spinal injury patients ≥ 16 years of age who scored ≥ 3 on the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) between 2009 and 2016 were enrolled.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 145,833 patients enrolled was 52.7 ± 21.1 years. The hospital mortality rate was 13.9%, and the mean injury severity score (ISS) was 21.8 ± 11.8. Seventy percent of patients had no spine injury, 25.9% scored 2-3 on the AIS, and 4.1% scored 4-6 on the AIS. Among patients with isolated traumatic brain injury (TBI), 26.8% had spinal injuries with an AIS score of 4-6. Among patients with multi-system trauma and TBI, 44.7% had spinal injuries that scored 4-6 on the AIS. Regression analysis predicted a serious spine injury (SI; AIS 3-6) with a prevalence of 10.6% and cervical spine injury (CSI; AIS 3-6) with a prevalence of 5.1%. Blunt trauma was a predictor for SI and CSI (OR 4.066 and OR 3.640, respectively; both p < 0.001) and fall > 3 m for SI (OR 2.243; p < 0.001) but not CSI (OR 0.636; p < 0.001). Pre-hospital shock was predictive for SI and CSI (OR 1.87 and OR 2.342, respectively; both p < 0.001), and diminished or absent motor response was also predictive for SI (OR 3.171) and CSI (OR 7.462; both p < 0.001). Patients over 65 years of age were more frequently affected by CSI.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to the clinical symptoms of pain, we identify '4S' [spill (fall) > 3 m, seniority (age > 65 years), seriously injured, skull/traumatic brain injury] as an indication for increased attention for CSIs or indication for spinal motion restriction.

Pragmatic Strategy Empowering Paramedics to Assess Low-Risk Trauma Patients With the Canadian C-Spine Rule and Selectively Transport Them Without Immobilization: Protocol for a Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Each year, half a million patients with a potential neck (c-spine) injury are transported to Ontario emergency departments (EDs). Less than 1.0% (1/100) of these patients have a neck bone fracture. Even less (1/200, 0.5%) have a spinal cord injury or nerve damage. Currently, paramedics transport all trauma victims (with or without an injury) by ambulance using a backboard, cervical collar, and head immobilizers. Importantly, prolonged immobilization is often unnecessary; it causes patient discomfort and pain, decreases community access to paramedics, contributes to ED crowding, and is very costly. We therefore developed the Canadian C-Spine Rule (CCR) for alert and stable trauma patients. This decision rule helps ED physicians and triage nurses to safely and selectively remove immobilization, without x-rays and missed injury. We successfully taught Ottawa paramedics to use the CCR in the field in a single-center study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to improve patient care and health system efficiency and outcomes by allowing paramedics to assess eligible low-risk trauma patients with the CCR and selectively transport them without immobilization to the ED.

METHODS

We propose a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized design with health economic evaluation, designed collaboratively with knowledge users. Our 36-month study will consist of a 12-month setup and training period (year 1), followed by the stepped-wedge trial (year 2) and a 12-month period for study completion, analyses, and knowledge translation. A total of 12 Ontario paramedic services of various sizes distributed across the province will be randomly allocated to one of three sequences. Paramedic services in each sequence will cross from the control condition (usual care) to the intervention condition (CCR implementation) at intervals of 3 months until all communities have crossed to the intervention. Data will be collected on all eligible patients in each paramedic service for a total duration of 12 months. A major strength of our design is that each community will have implemented the CCR by the end of the study.

RESULTS

Interim results are expected in December 2019 and final results in 2020. If this multicenter trial is successful, we expect the Ontario Ministry of Health will recommend that paramedics evaluate all eligible patients with the CCR in the Province of Ontario.

CONCLUSIONS

We conservatively estimate that in Ontario, more than 60% of all eligible trauma patients (300,000 annually) could be transported safely and comfortably, without c-spine immobilization devices. This will significantly reduce patient pain and discomfort, paramedic intervention times, and ED length of stay, thereby improving access to paramedics and ED care. This could be achieved rapidly and with lower health care costs compared with current practices (possible cost saving of Can $36 [US $25] per immobilization or Can $10,656,000 [US $7,335,231] per year).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02786966; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02786966.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/16966.

Prehospital Protocols Reducing Long Spinal Board Use Are Not Associated with a Change in Incidence of Spinal Cord Injury

Introduction: Many emergency medical services (EMS) agencies have de-emphasized or eliminated the use of long spinal boards (LSB) for patients with possible spinal injury. We sought to determine if implementation of spinal motion restriction (SMR) protocols, which reduce LSB use, was associated with an increase in spinal cord injury (SCI). Methods: This retrospective observational study includes EMS encounters from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2015 submitted by SMR-adopting ground-based agencies to a state EMS database with hospital discharge data. Encounters were excluded if SMR implementation date was unknown, occurred during a 3-month run-in period, or were duplicates. Study samples include patients with traumatic injury (TI), possible spinal trauma (P-ST), and verified spinal trauma (V-ST) using hospital discharge ICD-9/10 diagnosis codes. The incidence of SCI before and after implementation of SMR was compared using Chi-squared and logistic regression. Results: From 1,005,978 linked encounters, 104,315 unique encounters with traumatic injury and known SMR implementation date were identified with 51,199 cases of P-ST and 5,178 V-ST cases. The incidence of SCI in the pre-SMR and post-SMR interval for each group was: TI, 0.20% vs. 0.22% (p = 0.390); P-ST, 0.40% vs. 0.45% (p = 0.436); and V-ST, 4.04% vs. 4.37% (p = 0.561). Age and injury severity adjusted odds ratio of SCI in the highest risk cohort of patients with V-ST was 1.097 after SMR implementation (95% CI 0.818-1.472). Conclusion: In this limited study, no change in the incidence of SCI was identified following implementation of SMR protocols. Prospective evaluation of this question is necessary to evaluate the safety of SMR protocols.

Does prehospital spinal immobilization influence in hospital decision to obtain imaging after trauma?

IMPORTANCE

This study highlights the unnecessarily high suspicion for cervical spine injury among study providers and shows that cervical CT scans were more likely in patients who arrived to the emergency department wearing a cervical collar, even when clinically cleared for suspicion of cervical spine injury by the emergency department provider.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if patients with a cervical collar were more likely to undergo cervical spine imaging than those who arrived to the emergency department without a collar.

DESIGN

Adult trauma patients at a level 1 trauma center over 4 months (n = 1,438) were stratified by acuity (1,2, or 3), mechanism, and known injury cephalad to clavicles, defined as pain, wounds, or hematomas. Cervical spine imaging findings were recorded.

RESULTS

975 patients (67.8%) had cervical CT scans. Twenty-six (1.81%) sustained a fracture or ligamentous injury, all with known injury cephalad to clavicles. 161 (11.2%) patients without injury cephalad to clavicles all had a negative cervical CT. Category 1 patients with gunshot wounds with injury cephalad to clavicles were more likely to have CT if they arrived with a collar versus without (66.7% vs 14.3%, p = 0.027). Category 2 and 3 patients with injury cephalad to clavicles after motor vehicle collision (MVC) (88.2% vs 69.6%, p = 0.011), low energy falls (88.3% vs 59.4%, p < 0.0001), and assault (86.0% vs 37.1%, p < 0.0001) underwent cervical CT more frequently if they arrived wearing a collar. Category 2 and 3 trauma patients without injury cephalad to clavicles were also more likely to undergo CT when wearing a collar after MVC (66.3% vs 21.4%, p = 0.001), low energy fall (81.8% vs 35.3%, p = 0.016), and pedestrian vs MVC (55.6% vs 12.5%, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Certain trauma patients were more likely to undergo cervical CT if they arrived wearing a cervical collar. No conscious patients without complaints proximal to the clavicles had cervical injury.

Head-Neck Motion in Prehospital Trauma Patients under Spinal Motion Restriction: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Spinal precautions are intended to limit motion of potentially unstable spinal segments. The efficacy of various treatment approaches for motion restriction in the cervical spine has been rigorously investigated using healthy volunteers and, to a lesser extent, cadaver samples. No previous studies have objectively measured this motion in trauma patients with potential spine injuries during prehospital care. Objective: The purpose of this study was to characterize head-neck (H-N) kinematics in a sample of trauma patients receiving spinal precautions in the field. Methods: This was a prospective observational study of trauma patients in the prehospital setting. Trauma patients meeting criteria for spinal precautions were eligible for inclusion. Participants received usual care, consisting of either a long backboard, cervical collar, and head blocks (BC) or a cervical collar only (CO), and behavior was categorized as compliant (C) or non-compliant (N). Three inertial measurement units (IMUs), placed on each participant's forehead, sternum, and stretcher, yielded data on H-N motion. Outcomes were described in terms of H-N displacement and acceleration, including single- and multi-planar values, root mean square (RMS), and bouts of continuous motion above pre-determined thresholds. Data were analyzed to compare H-N motion by phase of prehospital care, as well as treatment type and patient behavior.

RESULTS

Substantial single- and multi-plane H-N motion was observed among all participants. Maximum single-plane displacements were between 11.3 ± 3.0 degrees (rotation) and 19.0 ± 16.6 degrees (flexion-extension). Maximum multi-plane displacements averaged 31.2 ± 7.2 degrees (range: 7.2 to 82.1 degrees). Maximum multi-plane acceleration averaged 5.8 ± 1.4 m/s² (range: 1.2 to 19.9 m/s²). There were no significant differences among participants between prehospital phase and treatment type. Non-compliant participants showed significantly more motion than compliant participants. Conclusion: Among actual patients, movement appears to be greater than previously recorded in simulation studies, and to be associated with patient behavior. Miniature IMUs are a feasible approach to field-based measurement of H-N kinematics in trauma patients. Future research should evaluate the effects of patient compliance, treatment, and phase of care using larger samples. Key words: spinal immobilization; cervical spine; cervical collar; long backboard.

[Development and first application testing of a new protocol for preclinical spinal immobilization in children : Assessment of indications based on the E.M.S. IMMO Protocol Pediatric]

BACKGROUND

To protect the spine from secondary damage, spinal immobilization is a standard procedure in prehospital trauma management. Immobilization protocols aim to support emergency medicine personnel in quick decision making but predominantly focus on the adult spine; however, trauma mechanisms and injury patterns in adults differ from those in children and applying adult prehospital immobilization protocols to pediatric patients may be insufficient. Adequate protocols for children with spinal injuries are currently unavailable.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was (i) to develop a protocol that supports decision making for prehospital spinal immobilization in pediatric trauma patients based on evidence from current scientific literature and (ii) to perform a first analysis of the quality of results if the protocol is used by emergency personnel.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Based on a structured literature search a new immobilization protocol was developed. Analysis of the quality of results was performed by a questionnaire containing four case scenarios in order to assess correct decision making. The decision about spinal immobilization was made without and with the utilization of the protocol.

RESULTS

The E.M.S. IMMO Protocol Pediatric was developed based on the literature. The analysis of the quality of results was performed involving 39 emergency medicine providers. It could be shown that if the E.M.S. IMMO Protocol Pediatric was used, the correct type of immobilization was chosen more frequently. A total of 38 out of 39 participants evaluated the protocol as helpful.

CONCLUSION

The E.M.S. IMMO Protocol Pediatric provides decision-making support whether pediatric spine immobilization is indicated with respect to the cardiopulmonary status of the patient. In a first analysis, the E.M.S. IMMO Protocol Pediatric improves decision making by emergency medical care providers.

A Robotic Head Stabilization Device for Medical Transport

In this paper, the design and control of a robotic device intended to stabilize the head and neck of a trauma patient during transport are presented. When transporting a patient who has suffered a traumatic head injury, the first action performed by paramedics is typically to restrain and stabilize the head and cervical spine of a patient. The proposed device would drastically reduce the time required to perform this action while also freeing a first responder to perform other possibly lifesaving actions. The applications for robotic casualty extraction are additionally explored. The design and construction are described, followed by control simulations demonstrating the improved behavior of the chosen controller paradigm, linear active disturbance rejection control (LADRC). Finally, experimental validation is presented, followed by future work and directions for the research.

Epidemiology of Injuries Requiring Emergency Transport Among Collegiate and High School Student-Athletes

CONTEXT: 

Data regarding the epidemiology of emergency-transport incidents (ETIs) of patients with sport-related injuries are lacking. Understanding the use of emergency services by athletic trainers can help improve emergency preparedness and prehospital care for injured student-athletes.

OBJECTIVE: 

To determine the frequencies and types of ETIs resulting from athletic participation.

DESIGN: 

Descriptive epidemiology study.

SETTING: 

Participating colleges and high schools during 2009-2010 to 2014-2015 and 2011-2012 to 2013-2014, respectively.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: 

Student-athletes in 23 high school and 25 intercollegiate sports.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): 

Data on injuries requiring emergency transport were collected by each team's athletic trainer via their respective online injury-tracking software. Athletic trainers also collected data on athlete-exposures (AEs). Emergency-transport incident frequencies and injury rates per 10 000 AEs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. For each ETI, the sport, body part, injury mechanism, and final diagnosis were recorded.

RESULTS: 

A total of 339 and 146 ETIs were reported in collegiate and high school players, respectively. Collegiate women's ice hockey had the highest ETI rate (1.28/10 000 AEs; 95% CI = 0.71, 1.86). In high school, football had the highest rate at 0.80 per 10 000 AEs (95% CI = 0.64, 0.97). Athletes with head or face injuries required the most transports in college (n = 71, 20.9%) and high school (n = 33, 22.6%) across all sports. Strains (n = 50, 14.7%) and fractures (n = 35, 24.0%) were the leading diagnoses for patients undergoing transport in college and high school, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: 

Athletic trainers should maintain a high level of emergency preparedness when working with sports that have high rates and numbers of ETIs. Athletes with injuries to the head/face required the most frequent transport across competition levels. Athletic trainers should have the appropriate equipment and protocols in place to handle these patients. Future researchers should examine the differences between field and hospital diagnoses to help improve prehospital care and decrease the likelihood of unnecessary emergency transports.

Value of prehospital assessment of spine fracture by paramedics

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines state that trauma patients at risk of spine injury should undergo prehospital spine immobilization to reduce the risk of neurological deterioration. Although this approach has been accepted and implemented as a standard for decades, there is little scientific evidence to support it. Furthermore, the potential dangers and sequelae of spine immobilization have been extensively reported. The role of the paramedic in this process has not yet been examined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of prehospital evaluations for the presence of spine fractures made by paramedics.

METHODS

All patients who presented with prehospital spine immobilization at our level II trauma center between January 2013 and January 2014 were prospectively included in a database. Prior to the diagnosis, paramedics recorded the probability of a spine fracture after a prehospital examination. These predictions were compared with patient outcomes. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-nine patients were included that positive predictive value was 22%, negative predictive value was 95%, sensitivity was 92%, specificity was 30%, and accuracy was 41%.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that paramedics cannot accurately predict spinal fractures.

Interobserver Agreement in Pediatric Cervical Spine Injury Assessment Between Prehospital and Emergency Department Providers

BACKGROUND

Investigators have derived cervical spine injury (CSI) decision support tools from physician observations. There is a need to demonstrate that prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) providers can use these tools to appropriately determine the need for spinal motion restrictions and make field disposition decisions.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to determine the interobserver agreement between EMS and emergency department (ED) providers for CSI risk assessment variables and overall gestalt for CSI in children after blunt trauma.

METHODS

This was a planned, substudy of a four-site, prospective cohort of children < 18 years transported by EMS to pediatric EDs for evaluation of CSI after blunt trauma. Inclusion criteria were trauma team activation and/or EMS-initiated spinal motion restriction. Exclusion criteria were penetrating trauma, transfer to another facility for definitive care, state custody, or substantial language barrier. For each eligible child, the transporting EMS provider and treating ED provider independently recorded their clinical assessment for CSI. This included mechanism of injury and patient history and physical examination findings. We assessed each paired variable for interobserver agreement between EMS and ED provider using kappa (κ) analysis. We considered variables with κ lower confidence interval values ≥0.4 to have moderate or better agreement.

RESULTS

We obtained 1,372 paired observations for 29 variables. After finding prevalence and observer bias were adjusted for, all variables achieved moderate to better agreement including eight variables previously shown to be independently associated with CSI in children: diving mechanism, high-risk motor vehicle collision, altered mental status, focal neurologic findings, neck pain, torticollis, substantial torso injury, and predisposing medical condition. EMS and ED providers, however, showed less than moderate agreement for their overall gestalt for CSI in children. Of note, both EMS and ED providers did not assess for neck pain, inability to move the neck, and/or cervical spine tenderness in more than 10% of study patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency medical services and ED providers achieved at least moderate agreement in the assessment of CSI risk factors in children after blunt trauma. However, EMS and ED providers did not achieve moderate agreement on gestalt for CSI and some risk factors went unassessed by providers. These findings support the development of a pediatric CSI risk assessment tool for EMS and ED providers to reduce interventions for those children at very low risk for CSIs while still identifying all children with injury.

Validation of a field spinal motion restriction protocol in a level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

Spinal motion restriction (SMR) after traumatic injury has been a mainstay of prehospital trauma care for more than 3 decades. Recent guidelines recommend a selective approach with cervical spine clearance in the field when criteria are met.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In January 2014, the Department of Health Services of the City of Los Angeles, California, implemented revised guidelines for cervical SMR after blunt mechanism trauma. Adult patients (aged ≥18 y) with an initial Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of ≥13 presented to a single level I trauma center after blunt mechanism trauma over the following 1-y period were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, injury data, and prehospital data were collected. Cervical spine injury (CSI) was identified by International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, codes.

RESULTS

Emergency medical services transported 1111 patients to the emergency department who sustained blunt trauma. Patients were excluded if they refused c-collar placement or if documentation was incomplete. A total of 997 patients were included in our analysis with 172 (17.2%) who were selective cleared of SMR per protocol. The rate of Spinal Cord Injury was 2.2% (22/997) overall and 1.2% (2/172) in patients without SMR. The sensitivity and specificity of the protocol are 90.9% (95% confidence interval: 69.4-98.4) and 17.4% (95% confidence interval: 15.1-20.0), respectively, for CSI. Patients with CSI who arrived without immobilization having met field clearance guidelines, were managed without intervention, and had no neurologic compromise.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidelines for cervical SMR have high sensitivity and low specificity to identify CSI. When patients with injuries were not placed on motion restrictions, there were no negative clinical outcomes.

Prehospital Predictors of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury in Victoria, Australia

OBJECTIVES

To identify the predictors of traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) and describe the differences between confirmed and potential TSCI cases in the prehospital setting.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study including all adult patients over a six-year period (2007-12) with potential TSCI who were attended and transported by Ambulance Victoria (AV). We extracted potential TSCI cases from the AV data warehouse and linked with the Victorian State Trauma Registry to compare with final hospital diagnosis.

RESULTS

We included a total of 106,059 patients with potential TSCI in the study, with 257 having a spinal cord injury confirmed at hospital (0.2%). The median [First and third Quartiles] age of confirmed TSCI cases was 49 [32-69] years, with males comprising 84.1%. Confirmed TSCI were mainly due to falls (44.8%) and traffic incidents (40.5%). AV spinal care guidelines had a sensitivity of 100% to detect confirmed TSCI. There were several factors associated with a diagnosis of TSCI. These were meeting AV Potential Major Trauma criteria, male gender, presence of neurological deficit, presence of an altered state of consciousness, high falls (> 3 meters), diving, or motorcycle or bicycle collisions.

CONCLUSION

This study identified several predictors of TSCI including meeting AV Potential Major Trauma criteria, male gender, presence of neurological deficit, presence of an altered state of consciousness, high falls (> 3 meters), diving, or motorcycle or bicycle collisions. Most of these predictors are included in NEXUS and/or CCR criteria, however, Potential Major Trauma criteria have not previously been linked to the presence of TSCI. Therefore, Emergency Medical Systems are encouraged to integrate similar Potential Major Trauma criteria into their guidelines and protocols to further improve the provider's accuracy in identifying TSCI and to be more selective in their spinal immobilization, thereby reducing unwarranted adverse effects of this practice.

Cervical collars and immobilisation: A South African best practice recommendation

INTRODUCTION

The consequences of spinal injury as a result of trauma can be devastating. Spinal immobilisation using hard trauma boards and rigid cervical collars has traditionally been the standard response to suspected spinal injury patients even though the risk may be extremely low. Recently, adverse events due to the method of immobilisation have challenged the need for motion restriction in all trauma patients. International guidelines have been published for protection of the spine during transport and this article brings those guidelines into the South African context.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Trauma patients need to be properly assessed using both an approved list of high and low risk factors, as well as a thorough examination. They should then be managed accordingly. Internationally validated assessment strategies have been developed, and should be used as part of the patient assessment. The method of motion restriction should be selected to suit the situation. The use of a vacuum mattress is the preferable technique, with the use of a trauma board being the least desirable.

CONCLUSION

The need for motion restriction in suspected spinal injury should be properly evaluated and appropriate action taken. Not all trauma patients require spinal motion restriction.

The definite risks and questionable benefits of liberal pre-hospital spinal immobilisation

INTRODUCTION

The routine practice of pre-hospital spinal immobilisation (phSI) for patients with suspected spinal injury has existed for decades. However, the controversy surrounding it resulted in the 2013 publication of a Consensus document by the Faculty of Pre-Hospital Care. The question remains as to whether the quality of evidence in the literature is sufficient to support the Consensus guidelines. This critical review aims to determine the validity of current recommendations by balancing the potential benefits and side effects of phSI.

METHOD

A review of the literature was carried out by two independent assessors using Medline, PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases. Manual searches of related journals and reference lists were also completed. The selected body of evidence was subsequently appraised using a checklist derived from SIGN and CASP guidelines, as well as Crombie's guide to critical appraisal.

RESULTS

No reliable sources were found proving the benefit for patient immobilisation. In contrast there is strong evidence to show that pre-hospital spinal immobilisation is not benign with recognised complications ranging from discomfort to significant physiological compromise. The published literature supports the Consensus guideline recommendations for safely reducing the impact of these side effects without compromising the patient.

CONCLUSION

The literature supports the Consensus Guidelines but raises the question as to whether they go far enough as there is strong evidence to suggest phSI is an inherently harmful procedure without having any proven benefit. These results demonstrate an urgent need for further studies to determine its treatment effect.

Does Every Patient Require Imaging after Cervical Spine Trauma? A Knowledge Translation Project to Support Evidence-Informed Practice for Physiotherapists

Purpose: This article evaluates, describes, and addresses a gap in British Columbia physiotherapists' knowledge of the decision making required for the diagnostic imaging of patients after traumatic neck injury. Method: An online survey of orthopaedic physiotherapists in British Columbia was undertaken to explore their awareness of, knowledge of, and attitudes toward the Canadian Cervical Spine Rule (C-Spine Rule) and decision making regarding the need for diagnostic imaging in managing patients with traumatic neck injury. The survey included questions about managing clinical scenarios; respondents' awareness, knowledge, and use of a specific clinical decision rule-the C-Spine Rule-and any perceived barriers to using clinical practice guidelines in general and the C-Spine Rule in specific. The survey also included questions about the facilitators of and barriers to using the C-Spine Rule. These data were used to guide development of a tool kit to facilitate use of the rule. Results: Of 889 physiotherapists, 467 (52.5%) completed the survey. Given a scenario in which imaging was indicated according to the C-Spine Rule, 95.2% of the respondents correctly recommended imaging. However, in a scenario in which imaging was not indicated, 42.7% incorrectly recommended it. The barriers to using the guidelines included their perceived rigidity, role limitation, and reliance on clinical judgment. The results indicated a need for, and guided development of, resources to facilitate the use of the C-Spine Rule by British Columbia physiotherapists. Conclusions: We identified a gap in the knowledge of British Columbia physiotherapists in identifying which patients were most likely to require imaging after sustaining a traumatic neck injury. We developed a tool kit to address these barriers. British Columbia physiotherapists have accessed this resource extensively. Evaluating its impact on clinical practice, although desirable, was not feasible.

On-scene treatment of spinal injuries in motor sports

Because spinal cord injuries can have fatal consequences for injured race car drivers, prehospital treatment of spinal injuries is a major concern in motor sports. A structured procedure for assessing trauma patients and their treatment should follow established ABCDE principles. Only then, a stable patient could be further examined and appropriate measures can be undertaken. For patients in an acute life-threatening condition, rapid transport must be initiated and should not be delayed by measures that are not indicated. If a competitor must first be extricated from the racing vehicle, the correct method of extrication must be chosen. To avoid secondary injury to the spine after a racing accident, in-line extrication from the vehicle and immobilization of the patient are standard procedures in motor sports and have been used for decades. Since immobilization can be associated with disadvantages and complications, the need for immobilization of trauma patients outside of motor sports medicine has become the subject of an increasing number of reports in the scientific literature. Even in motor sports, where specific safety systems that offer spinal protection are present, the indications for spinal immobilization need to be carefully considered rather than being blindly adopted as a matter of course. The aim of this article is to use recent literature to present an overview about the treatment of spinal injuries in motor sports. Further, we present a new protocol for indications for immobilizing the spine in motor sports that is based on the ABCDE principles and takes into account the condition of the patient.

Development of a new Emergency Medicine Spinal Immobilization Protocol for trauma patients and a test of applicability by German emergency care providers

Background

In order to match the challenges of quickly recognizing and treating any life-threatening injuries, the ABCDE principles were established for the assessment and treatment of trauma patients. The high priority of spine protection is emphasized by the fact that immobilization of the cervical spine is performed at the very first step in the ABCDE principles. Immobilization is typically performed to prevent or minimize secondary damage to the spinal cord if instability of the spinal column is suspected. Due to increasing reports about disadvantages of spinal immobilization, the indications for performing spinal immobilization must be refined.

The aim of this study was (i) to develop a protocol that supports decision-making for spinal immobilization in adult trauma patients and (ii) to carry out the first applicability test by emergency medical personnel.

Methods

A structured literature search considering the literature from 1980 to 2014 was performed. Based on this literature and on the current guidelines, a new protocol that supports on scene decision-making for spinal immobilization has been developed. Parameters found in the literature concerning mechanisms and factors increasing the likelihood of spinal injury have been included in the new protocol. In order to test the applicability of the new protocol two surveys were performed on German emergency care providers by means of a questionnaire focused on correct decision-making if applying the protocol.

Results

Based on the current literature and guidelines, the Emergency Medicine Spinal Immobilization Protocol (E.M.S. IMMO Protocol) for adult trauma patients was developed. Following a fist applicability test involving 21 participants, the first version of the E.M.S. IMMO Protocol has to be graphically re-organized. A second applicability test comprised 50 participants with the current version of the protocol confirmed good applicability. Questions regarding immobilization of trauma patients could be answered properly using the E.M.S. IMMO Protocol.

Discussion

Current literature increasingly reports of disadvantages that may be associated with immobilization. Based on the requirements of the current guidelines, a new protocol that supports decision-making for indications for out-of-hospital spinal immobilization has been developed in this study. In contrast to established protocols, the new protocol offers different options for immobilization as well as a decicion-support.

Conclusions

The E.M.S. IMMO protocol provides a decision-support tool for indications for spinal immobilization in adult trauma patients that permits variable decision-making depending on the current condition of the trauma patient and the pattern of injuries for immobilization in general and for immobilization method in particular.

Expertise of German paramedics concerning the prehospital treatment of patients with spinal trauma

PURPOSE

Spinal immobilization is a standard procedure in emergency medicine. Increasing awareness of complications associated with immobilization of trauma patients leads to controversial discussions in the literature. Current guidelines require to include considerations of accident mechanism, an assessment of the patient's condition and an examination of the spine in the decision-making process if immobilization of the spine should be performed. This requires sound knowledge of assessing these parameters. The aim of the current study is to analyze German paramedics' subjective uncertainty in terms of their prehospital assessment and treatment of patients suffering from spine injuries.

METHODS

Over a period of 17 months participants in a trauma course were asked to complete a standardized anonymous questionnaire about subjective uncertainty of prehospital assessment and management of spinal trauma before participation in that course. Questions about the frequency of application of different immobilization tools and skills training on spinal immobilization were also asked.

RESULTS

A total of 465 paramedics were surveyed. The participants did not indicate any uncertainty about the prehospital diagnosis and treatment of spinal injuries. The feeling of confidence was significantly greater in participants who had already attended another course on structured trauma care before. The participants agreed with the statements that standardized algorithms facilitate teamwork and that there is a need for a protocol for the prehospital treatment of spinal injuries.

CONCLUSIONS

Paramedics do not feel uncertain about the prehospital assessment and treatment of spinal injuries. The feeling of confidence in participants who had already attended a course on the treatment of trauma patients before was significantly higher.

Characteristics of Trauma Patients With Potential Cervical Spine Injuries Underimmobilized by Prehospital Providers

STUDY DESIGN

This study was a retrospective chart review to determine characteristics of patients under-immobilized by prehospital providers.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to examine the characteristics of patients who met the criteria for spinal immobilization but were inappropriately cleared.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Many emergency medical services (EMS) use selective spinal immobilization (SSI) based on the NEXUS criteria. However, there is been research examining patients who are under-immobilized by EMS.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review over 18 months of a single EMS service. We reviewed all charts dispatched as "motor vehicle crash" (MVC) or "fall". We then determined, whether the patient met the criteria for SSI under Pennsylvania protocols, which mirror the NEXUS criteria.

RESULTS

Our EMS system responded to 1151 falls and MVCs over the study period. Seventy-six patients were immobilized leaving 1075 patients who had clinical clearance of their cervical spine. Of these patients, 4/1075 (0.3%) were considered to be under-immobilized. All 4 of these patients had intoxication or altered mentation mentioned in their charts. Two of these patients had CT scans of their cervical spine, with both being negative. One patient eloped from the ED before any imaging, and 1 patient was clinically cleared.

CONCLUSION

EMTs are very proficient in following the SSI guidelines with an under-immobilization rate of approximately 0.3% in our study. However, all patients who were under-immobilized were under the influence of alcohol. There were no patients who were not immobilized and had cervical spine injuries. This was a limited chart review involving only 2 dispatch categories. EMTs should be cautious while evaluating patients with possible spinal injuries who are under the influence of alcohol.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Pre-hospital spinal immobilisation: an initial consensus statement

This paper reviews the current evidence available on the practice of spinal immobilisation in the prehospital environment. Following this, initial conclusions from a consensus meeting held by the Faculty of Pre-hospital Care, Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh in March 2012 are presented.

Cervical spine injury in dismounted improvised explosive device trauma

BACKGROUND

The injury pattern from improvised explosive device (IED) trauma is different if the target is in a vehicle (mounted) or on foot (dismounted). Combat and civilian first response protocols require the placement of a cervical collar on all victims of a blast injury.

METHODS

We searched the Joint Theatre Trauma Registry (JTTR) and the Role 3 Hospital, Kandahar Airfield (KAF) database from Mar. 1, 2008, to May 31, 2011. We collected data on cervical fracture; head injury; traumatic amputation; initial blood pressure, pulse, injury severity score (ISS), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score and base excess; and patient demographic information.

RESULTS

The concordance rate between JTTR and KAF databases was 98%. Of the 15 693 admissions in JTTR, 326 patients with dismounted IED injuries were located. The rate of cervical collar prehospital placement was 7.6%. Cervical fractures were found in 19 (5.8%) dismounted IED victims, but only 4 (1.2%) were considered radiographically unstable. None of these 19 patients had prehospital placement of a collar. Patients with cervical spine fractures were more severely injured than those without (ISS 18.2 v. 13.4; GCS 10.1 v. 12.5). Patients with head injuries had significantly higher risk of cervical spine injury than those with no head injury recorded (13.6% v. 3.9%). No differences in frequency of cervical spine injury were found between patients who had associated traumatic amputations and those who did not (5.4% v. 6.0%).

CONCLUSION

Dismounted IED is a mechanism of injury associated with a low risk for cervical spine trauma. A selective protocol for cervical collar placement on victims of dismounted IED blasts is possible and may be more amenable to combat situations.

A systematic review of studies comparing diagnostic clinical prediction rules with clinical judgment

Background

Diagnostic clinical prediction rules (CPRs) are developed to improve diagnosis or decrease diagnostic testing. Whether, and in what situations diagnostic CPRs improve upon clinical judgment is unclear.

Methods and Findings

We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL, with supplementary citation and reference checking for studies comparing CPRs and clinical judgment against a current objective reference standard. We report 1) the proportion of study participants classified as not having disease who hence may avoid further testing and or treatment and 2) the proportion, among those classified as not having disease, who do (missed diagnoses) by both approaches. 31 studies of 13 medical conditions were included, with 46 comparisons between CPRs and clinical judgment. In 2 comparisons (4%), CPRs reduced the proportion of missed diagnoses, but this was offset by classifying a larger proportion of study participants as having disease (more false positives). In 36 comparisons (78%) the proportion of diagnoses missed by CPRs and clinical judgment was similar, and in 9 of these, the CPRs classified a larger proportion of participants as not having disease (fewer false positives). In 8 comparisons (17%) the proportion of diagnoses missed by the CPRs was greater. This was offset by classifying a smaller proportion of participants as having the disease (fewer false positives) in 2 comparisons. There were no comparisons where the CPR missed a smaller proportion of diagnoses than clinical judgment and classified more participants as not having the disease. The design of the included studies allows evaluation of CPRs when their results are applied independently of clinical judgment. The performance of CPRs, when implemented by clinicians as a support to their judgment may be different.

Conclusions

In the limited studies to date, CPRs are rarely superior to clinical judgment and there is generally a trade-off between the proportion classified as not having disease and the proportion of missed diagnoses. Differences between the two methods of judgment are likely the result of different diagnostic thresholds for positivity. Which is the preferred judgment method for a particular clinical condition depends on the relative benefits and harms of true positive and false positive diagnoses.

Outcome of trauma patients immobilized by emergency department staff, but not by emergency medical services providers: a quality assurance initiative

BACKGROUND

Prehospital selective cervical spine immobilization (CSI) is a relatively new concept. In our emergency medical services (EMS) system, protocols for selective CSI are widely used; yet, some patients who are brought to the hospital without CSI undergo secondary immobilization and cervical spine imaging in the emergency department (ED). Immobilization in the ED, after a decision not to immobilize by EMS, suggests that either the prehospital assessment is not trusted or the patient has developed new symptoms over time. We undertook a quality assurance initiative to evaluate whether trauma patients brought to the ED without CSI, who then underwent secondary CSI and imaging in the ED, had injuries that were initially missed by EMS selective CSI protocol.

METHODS

This was a 36-month retrospective data analysis of blunt trauma patients transported directly from the field to the University of New Mexico Hospital level I trauma center by Albuquerque Ambulance Service (AAS) between March 2009 and February 2012. Inclusion criteria were age 18 years and older, transported by AAS without CSI, and cervical spinal imaging done in the ED. Patients were excluded if they were being transported between facilities, were prisoners, and/or refused CSI. A positive finding was defined as any acute abnormality identified by the attending radiologist on the final imaging report.

RESULTS

The study included 101 patients who met inclusion criteria. There were no significant missed injuries. Ninety-four of the 101 patients received cervical spinal CT imaging at an estimated cost of $1,570 per scan, not including physician charges. The remaining patients had plain film radiographic imaging. No patients had magnetic resonance imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective quality assurance initiative, none of 101 patients who underwent secondary CSI and imaging in the ED had a missed acute cervical injury. No patients had any adverse effects or required treatment, yet these patients incurred substantial costs and increased radiation exposure. While our results suggest hospital personnel should have confidence in prehospital decisions regarding CSI, continued surveillance and a large-scale, prospective study are needed to confirm our findings.