Effect of spinal immobilization on heart rate, blood pressure and respiratory rate

Prehospital interventions to reduce discomfort caused by immobilization in adult trauma victims: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to identify the level of discomfort caused by immobilization as reported by trauma victims, and to map all the interventions in the prehospital context where they have been implemented and evaluated in order to reduce discomfort in adult victims of trauma.

INTRODUCTION

Immobilization is a cause of discomfort for trauma victims, which has important implications for the deterioration of vital signs and quality of life. However, discomfort caused by immobilization remains an under-explored topic by the scientific community.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review will consider studies of adult victims of trauma, aged 18 years or over, in prehospital emergency care. Studies that focus on interventions designed to reduce immobilization discomfort, implemented and evaluated by health professionals, of any form, duration, frequency, and dose will be considered.

METHODS

An initial search of PubMed and CINAHL will be undertaken, followed by a second search for published and unpublished studies without time restrictions, in major health care-related electronic databases. Studies in English, French, Spanish, and Portuguese will be included. Data extraction will be performed independently by 2 reviewers in a tabular format and will include details about the level of discomfort, interventions, populations, study methods, and outcomes of interest. A narrative synthesis will accompany the results and will describe how they relate to the review objectives.

REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

OSF https://osf.io/4scg5/.

Evidence-Based Nursing Care for Spinal Nursing Immobilization: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

A high degree of suspicion for spinal injury after trauma is commonplace in an emergency department, and spinal immobilization is considered an accepted intervention to prevent the progression of a potential injury. This systematic review was conducted to gain insight into the best research evidence related to nursing interventions for patients with trauma presenting with a suspected spinal injury.

METHODS

A systematic search of online databases was conducted in April 2019 for relevant research using specific search terms. The studies were selected on the basis of pre-established eligibility criteria, and the quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool.

RESULTS

Nineteen included articles were synthesized thematically on the basis of the outcomes from interventions directed at a suspected spinal injury. The main findings were that spinal immobilization may compromise pulmonary function and airway management, cause pain and pressure ulcers, and be inappropriate with penetrating trauma. Furthermore, there was insufficient evidence to support the safety and efficacy of the hard neck collar and long backboard.

DISCUSSION

Patients would benefit from a more selective and cautious approach to spinal immobilization. Emergency nurses should use the evidence to facilitate informed decision-making in balancing the benefits of spinal immobilization against harm when considering the needs and values of the patient.

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.

Decision Support Capabilities of Telemedicine in Emergency Prehospital Care: Systematic Review

Background

Telemedicine offers a unique opportunity to improve coordination and administration for urgent patient care remotely. In an emergency setting, it has been used to support first responders by providing telephone or video consultation with specialists at hospitals and through the exchange of prehospital patient information. This technological solution is evolving rapidly, yet there is a concern that it is being implemented without a demonstrated clinical need and effectiveness as well as without a thorough economic evaluation.

Objective

Our objective is to systematically review whether the clinical outcomes achieved, as reported in the literature, favor telemedicine decision support for medical interventions during prehospital care.

Methods

This systematic review included peer-reviewed journal articles. Searches of 7 databases and relevant reviews were conducted. Eligibility criteria consisted of studies that covered telemedicine as data- and information-sharing and two-way teleconsultation platforms, with the objective of supporting medical decisions (eg, diagnosis, treatment, and receiving hospital decision) in a prehospital emergency setting. Simulation studies and studies that included pediatric populations were excluded. The procedures in this review followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies–of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used for the assessment of risk of bias. The results were synthesized based on predefined aspects of medical decisions that are made in a prehospital setting, which include diagnostic decision support, receiving facility decisions, and medical directions for treatment. All data extractions were done by at least two reviewers independently.

Results

Out of 42 full-text reviews, 7 were found eligible. Diagnostic support and medical direction and decision for treatments were often reported. A key finding of this review was the high agreement between prehospital diagnoses via telemedicine and final in-hospital diagnoses, as supported by quantitative evidence. However, a majority of the articles described the clinical value of having access to remote experts without robust quantitative data. Most telemedicine solutions were evaluated within a feasibility or short-term preliminary study. In general, the results were positive for telemedicine use; however, biases, due to preintervention confounding factors and a lack of documentation on quality assurance and protocol for telemedicine activation, make it difficult to determine the direct effect on patient outcomes.

Conclusions

The information-sharing capacity of telemedicine enables access to remote experts to support medical decision making on scene or in prolonged field care. The influence of human and technology factors on patient care is poorly understood and documented.

The Effects of Positional Change on Hemodynamic Parameters in Spinal Immobilization

INTRODUCTION

The use of a long backboard and cervical collar are commonly recommended by international guidelines for spinal immobilization, but both devices may cause several side effects. In a recent study, it was reported that spinal immobilization at 20° eliminated the decrease in pulmonary function secondary to spinal immobilization performed at 0°. Spinal immobilization at 20° is a new recommendation, but other potential effects need to be explored before it can be implemented in clinical use.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Hemodynamic observation is important in the management of trauma patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of spinal immobilization at a 20° position instead of 0° on hemodynamic parameters.

METHODS

This study included 53 healthy volunteers who underwent spinal immobilization in the supine position (00) and in an elevated position (200). Systolic arterial pressure (SAP), diastolic arterial pressure (DAP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral (LVOT-VTI), left ventricular stroke volume (LVSV), cardiac output (CO), inferior vena cava diameter inspiration (IVC diameter insp), IVC diameter expiration (IVC diameter exp), and inferior vena cava collapsibility index (IVC-CI) were measured at the 0th and 30th minutes of spinal immobilization in both positions. The data were compared for demonstrating the efficiency of both positions in spinal immobilization.

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference was found in the parameters of the IVC diameter (exp), IVC diameter (insp), LVOT-VTI, LVSV, and CO through the measurements starting in the 0th minute of the transition from 0° to 20° (P <.001). Delta values (∆) of hemodynamic parameters (∆IVC diameter [exp], ∆IVC diameter [insp], ∆LVOT-VTI, ∆SV, ∆CO, ∆IVC-CI, ∆MAP, ∆SAP, ∆DAP, and ∆HR) were similar in spinal immobilization at 0° and 20°.

CONCLUSION

The findings obtained from this study illustrate that spinal immobilization at 20° does not cause clinically significant hemodynamic changes in healthy subjects compared to spinal immobilization at 0°.

To log-roll or not to log-roll - That is the question! A review of the use of the log-roll for patients with pelvic fractures

Pelvic fractures are one of the most serious injuries in polytrauma - massive haemorrhage is a major complication and the leading cause of death. The assessment and early management of these injuries in the Emergency Department (ED) focuses on the recognition of haemodynamic instability and should follow Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) guidelines. The log-roll technique, although an accepted practice in trauma care, has been reported to be inadvisable when a pelvic fracture is suspected. This paper, which includes a case study, briefly explains the pathophysiology and initial management of pelvic fractures. It aims to emphasise how the use of the log-roll can affect the haemodynamic stability of a patient with a pelvic fracture, highlighting gaps in research, along with the ethical and legal implications associated with polytrauma care. It also encourages practitioners to consider reasonable alternatives to the log-roll technique when beneficial and applicable.

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.

The Norwegian guidelines for the prehospital management of adult trauma patients with potential spinal injury

The traditional prehospital management of trauma victims with potential spinal injury has become increasingly questioned as authors and clinicians have raised concerns about over-triage and harm. In order to address these concerns, the Norwegian National Competence Service for Traumatology commissioned a faculty to provide a national guideline for pre-hospital spinal stabilisation. This work is based on a systematic review of available literature and a standardised consensus process. The faculty recommends a selective approach to spinal stabilisation as well as the implementation of triaging tools based on clinical findings. A strategy of minimal handling should be observed.

Confirmation of suboptimal protocols in spinal immobilisation?

Background

Spinal immobilisation during extrication of patients in road traffic collisions is routinely used despite the lack of evidence for this practice. In a previous proof of concept study (n=1), we recorded up to four times more cervical spine movement during extrication using conventional techniques than self-controlled extrication.

Objective

The objective of this study was to establish, using biomechanical analysis which technique provides the minimal deviation of the cervical spine from the neutral in-line position during extrication from a vehicle in a larger sample of variable age, height and mass.

Methods

A crew of two paramedics and four fire-fighters extricated 16 immobilised participants from a vehicle using six techniques for each participant. Participants were marked with biomechanical sensors and relative movement between the sensors was captured via high-speed infrared motion analysis cameras. A three-dimensional mathematical model was developed and a repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare movement across extrication techniques.

Results

Controlled self-extrication without a collar resulted in a mean movement of 13.33° from the neutral in-line position of the cervical spine compared to a mean movement of 18.84° during one of the equipment-aided extrications. Two equipment-aided techniques had significantly higher movement (p<0.05) than other techniques. Both height (p=0.003) and mass (p=0.02) of the participants were significant independent predictors of movement.

Conclusions

These data support the findings of the proof of concept study, for haemodynamically stable patients controlled self-extrication causes less movement of the cervical spine than extrications performed using traditional prehospital rescue equipment.

Effect of spinal immobilization on heart rate, blood pressure and respiratory rate

INTRODUCTION

Vital signs remain important clinical indicators in the management of trauma. Tissue injury and ischemia cause tachycardia and hypertension, which are mediated via the sympathetic nervous system (SNS). Spinal immobilization is known to cause discomfort, and it is not known how this might influence the SNS and contribute to abnormal vital signs. Hypothesis This study aimed to establish whether the pain and discomfort associated with spinal immobilization and the maneuvers commonly used in injured patients (eg, log roll) affect the Heart rate (HR), Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Respiratory rate (RR). The null hypothesis was that there are no effects.

METHODS

A prospective, unblinded, repeated-measure study of 53 healthy subjects was used to test the null hypothesis. Heart rate, BP and RR were measured at rest (five minutes), after spinal immobilization (10 minutes), following log roll, with partial immobilization (10 minutes) and again at rest (five minutes). A visual analog scale (VAS) for both pain and discomfort were also collected at each stage. Results were statistically compared.

RESULTS

Pain VAS increased significantly during spinal immobilization (3.8 mm, P < .01). Discomfort VAS increased significantly during spinal immobilization, after log roll and during partial immobilization (17.7 mm, 5.8 mm and 8.9 mm, respectively; P < .001). Vital signs however, showed no clinically relevant changes. Discussion Spinal immobilization does not cause a change in vital signs despite a significant increase in pain and discomfort. Since no relationship appears to exist between immobilization and abnormal vital signs, abnormal vital signs in a clinical situation should not be considered to be the result of immobilization. Likewise, pain and discomfort in immobilized patients should not be disregarded due to lack of changes in vital signs.