Prevalence and management of acute pain in prehospital emergency medicine

Efficacy of Co-Crystal of Tramadol-Celecoxib (CTC) in Patients with Acute Moderate-to-Severe Pain: A Pooled Analysis of Data from Two Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

New acute pain medications are needed that provide effective analgesia while minimizing side effects and opioid exposure. Clinical trials of co-crystal of tramadol-celecoxib (CTC) have demonstrated an improved benefit/risk profile versus tramadol or celecoxib alone. We pooled data from two phase 3 clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of CTC 200 mg twice daily (BID) in acute moderate-to-severe pain.

METHODS

Efficacy data were pooled from STARDOM1 [acute pain following oral surgery (NCT02982161)] and ESTEVE-SUSA-301 [acute pain following bunionectomy (NCT03108482)]. The primary efficacy outcome was sum of pain intensity difference from 0 to 48 h (SPID0-48).

RESULTS

A total of 344 patients received CTC 200 mg BID, 342 received tramadol 50 or 100 mg four times a day, 181 received celecoxib 100 mg BID, and 172 received placebo. The least-squares mean difference in SPID0-48 was -21.8 (p = 0.002) for CTC versus tramadol and -72.8 (p < 0.001) for CTC versus placebo. A similar pattern of SPID0-48 was observed with CTC versus comparator whether patients had moderate or severe pain at baseline. Reduction in pain intensity was faster and reached mild intensity earlier with CTC versus comparators. Patients were significantly (p ≤ 0.005) less likely to receive rescue medication within 4 or 48 h with CTC compared with tramadol or placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled analysis reinforces the efficacy profile of CTC versus tramadol and, given that CTC permits lower daily tramadol dosing and thereby reduces unnecessary opioid use, this highlights its improved benefit/risk profile and its potential for the management of moderate-to-severe pain.

Pain Prevalence and Treatment in Hospitalized Children and Adolescents at a US Tertiary Pediatric Hospital

Poorly controlled acute pain is associated with worsened patient outcomes. Prior studies suggest that acute pain is a common complaint among hospitalized pediatric patients, but recent studies with substantial numbers of patients from US hospitals are lacking. We retrospectively reviewed inpatients at a single academic children's hospital during twelve 24-hour periods in 2021. Outcomes were assessed for patients on non-intensive care unit (ICU) inpatient floors and in ICUs. The primary outcome was any presence of moderate to severe pain. Of 1355 patients on a non-ICU inpatient floor and 485 patients in the ICU, 23.5% and 58.6%, respectively, had ≥1 moderate to severe pain score during the 24-hour analysis period. While the mean pain score was low for the majority of patients, moderate to severe pain is frequent in hospitalized children. Future studies may focus on identification of variables associated with pediatric inpatients at risk of moderate to severe pain as well as improved pain prevention and reduction strategies.

Efficacy and Adverse Effects of IV Morphine for Burn Pain Management in the Emergency Department: An Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

The management of pain following a burn is extremely complex because of the multifactorial nature of burn pain (nociceptive and neuropathic). In the pre-hospital setting and emergency department (ED), the main goal of acute pain management is to reduce the patient's pain, allowing them to maintain function and to prevent the chronification of pain. Opioids are used as first-line treatment in management of burn pain. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of intravenous (IV) morphine for burn pain management in the ED and to evaluate pain management in the pre-hospital setting.

METHODS

In this single-center observational study, patients presenting with second- and third-degree burns were enrolled in our ED. Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and Burn Specific Pain Anxiety Scale (BSPAS) were performed at ED admission and after 1 h. Pain medications administered before arrival in the ED were reported by the rescue team. All patients received IV acetaminophen every 8 h and IV morphine according NRS.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were included in this study. At the time of arrival to the ED, > 90% of the patients reported severe pain; 95.8% of them received IV morphine to achieve pain relief. After 1 h, > 65% of patients had NRS < 3. The total amount of IV morphine was 18.12 ± 4.26 mg in the first hour. No adverse events were recorded. The BSPAS on admission to the ED was 34.8 ± 5.6, indicating severe anxiety. After 1 h, BSPAS was 12.8 ± 4.8, indicating mild anxiety.

CONCLUSION

IV morphine used for burn pain management in the emergency setting significantly improves patient outcomes in terms of pain. IV morphine also reduced anxiety scores at 1 h.

Effectiveness and safety of prehospital analgesia with nalbuphine and paracetamol versus morphine by paramedics - an observational study

BACKGROUND

Despite the development of various analgesic concepts, prehospital oligoanalgesia remains very common. The present work examines prehospital analgesia by paramedics using morphine vs. nalbuphine + paracetamol.

METHODS

Patients with out-of-hospital-analgesia performed by paramedics from the emergency medical services of the districts of Fulda (morphine) and Gütersloh (nalbuphine + paracetamol) were evaluated with regards to pain intensity at the beginning and the end of prehospital treatment using the Numeric-Rating-Scale for pain (NRS), sex, age, and complications. The primary endpoint was achievement of adequate analgesia, defined as NRS < 4 at hospital handover, depending on the analgesics administered (nalbuphine + paracetamol vs. morphine). Pain intensity before and after receiving analgesia using the NRS, sex, age and complications were also monitored.

RESULTS

A total of 1,808 patients who received out-of-hospital-analgesia were evaluated (nalbuphine + paracetamol: 1,635 (90.4%), NRS-initial: 8.0 ± 1.4, NRS-at-handover: 3.7 ± 2.0; morphine: 173(9.6%), NRS-initial: 8.5 ± 1.1, NRS-at-handover: 5.1 ± 2.0). Factors influencing the difference in NRS were: initial pain intensity on the NRS (regression coefficient (RK): 0.7276, 95%CI: 0.6602-0.7950, p < 0.001), therapy with morphine vs. nalbuphine + paracetamol (RK: -1.2594, 95%CI: -1.5770 - -0.9418, p < 0.001) and traumatic vs. non-traumatic causes of pain (RK: -0.2952, 95%CI: -0.4879 - -0.1024, p = 0.002). Therapy with morphine (n = 34 (19.6%)) compared to nalbuphine + paracetamol (n = 796 (48.7%)) (odds ratio (OR): 0.274, 95%CI: 0.185-0.405, p < 0.001) and the initial NRS score (OR:0.827, 95%CI: 0.771-0.887, p < 0.001) reduced the odds of having an NRS < 4 at hospital handover. Complications occurred with morphine in n = 10 (5.8%) and with nalbuphine + paracetamol in n = 35 (2.1%) cases. Risk factors for complications were analgesia with morphine (OR: 2.690, 95%CI: 1.287-5.621, p = 0.008), female sex (OR: 2.024, 95%CI: 1.040-3.937, p = 0.0379), as well as age (OR: 1.018, 95%CI: 1.003-1.034, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to morphine, prehospital analgesia with nalbuphine + paracetamol yields favourable effects in terms of analgesic effectiveness and a lower rate of complications and should therefore be considered in future recommendations for prehospital analgesia.

Prevalence of prehospital pain and pain assessment difference between patients and paramedics: a prospective cross-sectional observational study

Adequate analgesia is one of the most important interventions in emergency medicine. However, studies suggest that many patients are undertreated for pain. There can be many reasons why patients assess their pain differently to the paramedics. This study aimed to assess the differences in pain ratings between patients and paramedics and factors influencing them in prehospital emergencies. This prospective cross-sectional observational study included patients treated and transported by paramedics or paramedics and emergency physicians of the German Red Cross in Reutlingen, Germany. This study included 6,365 patients. The prevalence of pain was 49.7%. Among patients with a self-reported numerical rating scale (NRS) > 0, the mean patient pain rating was NRS 4.2 ± 2.7, while the mean paramedic pain rating was NRS 3.6 ± 2.4 (p < 0.001). Approximately 11.8% (n = 751) of patients reported subjectively unbearable pain. Patients reported a mean NRS of 7.7 ± 1.8 for unbearable pain, but a mean NRS of 3.3 ± 2.0 for bearable pain (p < 0.001). The difference in pain ratings between patients and paramedics increased with pain severity. Univariate analysis showed that there were no gender differences, but the difference in pain rating was influenced by patient age (p < 0.001) and paramedic age (p = 0.042). The differences in pain ratings were particularly pronounced for abdominal diseases (p < 0.001) and trauma (p < 0.001). There is a difference in pain ratings between patients and paramedics, which increases with pain severity and appears to be associated with the patient's age and the paramedic's age. To determine the desire and need for analgesics, the question about unbearable pain is a good addition to the NRS.

Co-crystal of Tramadol-Celecoxib Versus Tramadol or Placebo for Acute Moderate-to-Severe Pain After Oral Surgery: Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Trial (STARDOM1)

INTRODUCTION

Co-crystal of tramadol-celecoxib (CTC) is the first analgesic co-crystal for acute pain. This completed phase 3 multicenter, double-blind trial assessed the efficacy and safety/tolerability of CTC in comparison with that of tramadol in the setting of moderate-to-severe pain up to 72 h after elective third molar extraction requiring bone removal.

METHODS

Adults (n = 726) were assigned randomly to five groups (2:2:2:2:1): orally administered twice-daily CTC 100 mg (44 mg rac-tramadol hydrochloride/56 mg celecoxib; n = 164), 150 mg (66/84 mg; n = 160) or 200 mg (88/112 mg; n = 160); tramadol 100 mg four times daily (n = 159); or placebo four times daily (n = 83). Participants in CTC groups also received twice-daily placebo. The full analysis set included all participants who underwent randomization. The primary endpoint was the sum of pain intensity differences over 0 to 4 h (SPID0-4; visual analog scale). Key secondary endpoints included 4-h 50% responder and rescue medication use rates. Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs), laboratory measures, and Opioid-Related Symptom Distress Scale (OR-SDS) score.

RESULTS

All CTC doses were superior to placebo (P < 0.001) for primary and key secondary endpoints. All were superior to tramadol for SPID0-4 (analysis of covariance least squares mean differences [95% confidence interval]: - 37.1 [- 56.5, - 17.6], - 40.2 [- 59.7, - 20.6], and - 41.7 [- 61.2, - 22.2] for 100, 150, and 200 mg CTC, respectively; P < 0.001) and 4-h 50% responder rate. Four-hour 50% responder rates were 32.9% (CTC 100 mg), 33.8% (CTC 150 mg), 40.6% (CTC 200 mg), 20.1% (tramadol), and 7.2% (placebo). Rescue medication use was lower in the 100-mg (P = 0.013) and 200-mg (P = 0.003) CTC groups versus tramadol group. AE incidence and OR-SDS scores were highest for tramadol alone.

CONCLUSIONS

CTC demonstrated superior pain relief compared with tramadol or placebo, as well as an improved benefit/risk profile versus tramadol.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02982161; EudraCT number, 2016-000592-24.

Clinical practice guidelines in prehospital pain management for paramedics: a systematic review protocol

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this review is to examine prehospital pain management clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to identify recommendations that can be adopted or adapted into paramedic clinical practice. An additional aim is to consider the methodological quality of these CPGs and the recommendations within them.

INTRODUCTION

Quality, evidence-based CPGs support clinicians and optimize patient care. However, not all CPGs meet rigorous evidence-based standards, and some may be misleading. As pain is a common reason for patients to access ambulance services, the evaluation of pain management CPGs, their quality, and whether their recommendations can be adopted or adapted into practice is required to increase understanding in this area.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

We will include CPGs for pain management intended for prehospital services in civilian communities. CPGs in English published from 2017, and containing clear recommendations addressing pain of any cause will be considered for inclusion.

METHODS

This review will combine methodologies, including the PICAR framework (population, intervention, comparison, attributes of eligible CPGs, recommendation characteristics) by Johnston et al. , and the JBI umbrella and scoping review methodologies. The search strategy will cover 12 databases, including PubMed, Embase, and specific CPG databases (eg, GIN Library). Additionally, Google Scholar and Google will be searched, and prehospital organizations without regular publications will be contacted. The AGREE II and AGREE-REX tools will be used to assess the methodological rigor and clinical credibility of the CPGs. The characteristics of both CPGs and the recommendations will be extracted and discussed in the review.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022352951.

Analgesic Therapy with the Opioids Fentanyl and Morphine by Ambulance Personnel in Rural Areas: An Observational Study Over 7 Years

Background

The treatment of severe pain is one of the basic procedures of emergency medicine. In rural regions, longer arrival times of the emergency doctor prevent the earliest possible treatment of pain. Since 2014, a project for independent analgesia by ambulance personnel has been introduced in our ambulance service area.

Methods

Over a period of 7 years the mission protocols were recorded and statistically evaluated within the framework of an observational study. Among other things, the attendance and transport times, vital signs, pain level, symptom groups (body region) and classification according to disease or accident mechanism were recorded. Treatment data by medication, including dosages, were recorded for fentanyl (monotherapy), morphine (monotherapy) and a combination (change from morphine to fentanyl, additional application of esketamine, metamizole or butylscopolamine).

Results

In 659 patients, the opioids fentanyl and morphine were used by the ambulance staff, 596 data sets could be evaluated. When an emergency physician was requested, the average time of presence at the scene was 34.8 +- 11.7 min, in cases of unavailability it was 29.0 +-9.8 min (p<0.0001). Analgesic therapy resulted in a reduction of pain from NRS 8.4 (+-1.3) to NRS 3.5 +-1.8 (p<0.0001). Pain intensity after treatment by emergency paramedics compared to emergency physicians was not significantly different with NRS 3.5 +- 1.7 versus NRS 3.6 +-1.9 (p=0.788). Fentanyl was used at a mean dose of 0.18mg +- 0.11 and morphine at a mean dose of 4.4mg +- 3.6mg. There was no clinically relevant decrease in oxygen saturation or respiratory rate in any of the treatment groups. Antagonisation of the opioid effect with naloxone was not necessary in any case.

Conclusion

Analgesia with morphine and fentanyl by specially trained ambulance personnel according to defined rules of use is a safe and necessary procedure for patients, especially in rural regions.

Ketamine Compared With Morphine for Out-of-Hospital Analgesia for Patients With Traumatic Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Pain is a common out-of-hospital symptom among patients, and opioids are often prescribed. Research suggests that overprescribing for acute traumatic pain is still prevalent, even when limits restricting opioid prescriptions have been implemented. Ketamine hydrochloride is an alternative to opioids in adults with out-of-hospital traumatic pain.

Objective

To assess the noninferiority of intravenous ketamine compared with intravenous morphine sulfate to provide pain relief in adults with out-of-hospital traumatic pain.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The Intravenous Subdissociative-Dose Ketamine Versus Morphine for Prehospital Analgesia (KETAMORPH) study was a multicenter, single-blind, noninferiority randomized clinical trial comparing ketamine hydrochloride (20 mg, followed by 10 mg every 5 minutes) with morphine sulfate (2 or 3 mg every 5 minutes) in adult patients with out-of-hospital trauma and a verbal pain score equal to or greater than 5. Enrollment occurred from November 23, 2017, to November 26, 2022, in 11 French out-of-hospital emergency medical units.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned to ketamine (n = 128) or morphine (n = 123).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the between-group difference in mean change in verbal rating scale pain scores measured from the time before administration of the study drug to 30 minutes later. A noninferiority margin of 1.3 was chosen.

Results

A total of 251 patients were randomized (median age, 51 [IQR, 34-69] years; 111 women [44.9%] and 140 men [55.1%] among the 247 with data available) and were included in the intention-to-treat population. The mean pain score change was -3.7 (95% CI, -4.2 to -3.2) in the ketamine group compared with -3.8 (95% CI, -4.2 to -3.4) in the morphine group. The difference in mean pain score change was 0.1 (95% CI, -0.7 to 0.9) points. There were no clinically meaningful differences for vital signs between the 2 groups. The intravenous morphine group had 19 of 113 (16.8% [95% CI, 10.4%-25.0%]) adverse effects reported (most commonly nausea [12 of 113 (10.6%)]) compared with 49 of 120 (40.8% [95% CI, 32.0%-49.6%]) in the ketamine group (most commonly emergence phenomenon [24 of 120 (20.0%)]). No adverse events required intervention.

Conclusions and Relevance

In the KETAMORPH study of patients with out-of-hospital traumatic pain, the use of intravenous ketamine compared with morphine showed noninferiority for pain reduction. In the ongoing opioid crisis, ketamine administered alone is an alternative to opioids in adults with out-of-hospital traumatic pain.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03236805.

Effectiveness and safety of prehospital analgesia including nalbuphine and paracetamol by paramedics: an observational study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness and safety of prehospital analgesia with nalbuphine and/or paracetamol by paramedics.

METHODS

In this retrospective trial, following the implementation of a standard-operating-procedure for pain requiring treatment as defined as a score ≥4 on the 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale for pain, all emergency operations in the district of Gütersloh between January 1, 2020, and June 30, 2022, with analgesic administration by paramedics in patients ≥18 years were included in the study. Analgesic agents employed by the paramedics included nalbuphine and/or paracetamol, butylscopolamine for abdominal colic, and esketamine in case of failure of the other analgesics. The primary endpoint was the patients' rating of their pain on the Numeric Rating Scale at the end of the operation. Additional covariates included sex, cause of pain, analgesics used, Numeric Rating Scale at beginning and analgesic-associated complications (reduced level of consciousness, hypotension, desaturation, a- or bradypnea).

RESULTS

A total of 1931 emergency operations (female: N.=1039 [53.8%]) with pain requiring treatment (non-traumatic cause: N.=1106 [57.3%]; initial Numeric Rating Scale: 8.0±1.4). Analgesics applied were nalbuphine + paracetamol (50.6%), paracetamol (38.7%), butylscopolamine (13.4%), nalbuphine (7.7%), and esketamine (4.9%). Mean pain reduction was 4.3±2.3 (nalbuphine + paracetamol: 5.0±2.1; nalbuphine: 4.7±2.3) and paracetamol: 3.3±2.2, respectively. Factors influencing a change in the Numeric Rating Scale were trauma (regression-coefficient: -0.308, 95% CI: -0.496 - -0.119, P=0.0014 vs. non-trauma; nalbuphine [yes vs. no]: regression-coefficient 0.684, 95% CI 0.0774-1.291, P=0.03; nalbuphine + paracetamol: regression-coefficient 0.763, 95% CI 0.227-1.299, P=0.005). At the end of the operation, 49.7% had a Numeric Rating Scale <4, 34.3% had a Numeric Rating Scale 4-5, and 16.0% had a Numeric Rating Scale ≥6. Factors influencing a Numeric Rating Scale <4 at end of use were trauma vs. non-trauma: odds ratio 0.788, 95% CI 0.649-0.957, P=0.02. The Numeric Rating Scale at beginning reported: odds ratios 0.754, 95% CI 0.700-0.812, P<0.0001. Analgesic-associated complications were not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Prehospital analgesia by paramedics with nalbuphine as monotherapy or in combination with paracetamol allows for sufficient analgesia without the occurrence of complications.

Analgesic agents administered by ambulance personnel to mountain bikers and hikers on trails in Western Australia

Objective

To describe the types of analgesic medications administered to patients who were attended by ambulance on recreational trails while mountain biking or hiking and report on the reduction in pain by these agents.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients attended by ambulance (2015-2021) after mountain biking or hiking, on Western Australia (WA) trails. All data were extracted from electronic patient care records created by ambulance personnel who attended the patient. We compared patient and case characteristics between mountain bikers and hikers and the reduction in pain scores achieved by different analgesics.

Results

A total of 717 patients were included. Paramedics reported traumatic aetiology for mountain bikers in 92 % of cases and hikers in 58 % of cases. A pain score out of 10 was recorded for 538 (75 %) patients. The median (inter-quartile range) initial pain score was 6 (2-8) and the median final pain score was 3 (1-5). Around 48 % of these 538 patients reported ≥25 % reduction in their pain score. A reduction of ≥25 % in their pain score was greatest in those patients who received intravenous fentanyl (81 %), followed by patients administered multiple analgesics (72 %) and methoxyflurane only (52 %). Even 37 % of 134 patients who received no analgesia still reported ≥25 % reduction in their pain score by hospital arrival.

Conclusion

Trauma was the most common reason mountain bikers and hikers on trails called an ambulance and a large proportion of these patients were in pain on ambulance arrival. Further work assessing the effectiveness of safe, non-opioid analgesics, additional to methoxyflurane, is needed to ensure non-registered practitioners such as first aid providers and event medical teams can offer suitable safe analgesics to these patients. Additionally, among patients given no pharmacological analgesic agent, almost half still achieved a >25 % reduction in their pain scores which reiterates the importance of non-pharmacological pain reduction strategies.

Application of analgesics in emergency services in Germany: a survey of the medical directors

ABSTRAC

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute pain is an essential element of pre-hospital care for injured and critically ill patients. Clinical studies indicate the need for improvement in the prehospital analgesia.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess the current situation in out of hospital pain management in Germany regarding the substances, indications, dosage and the delegation of the use of analgesics to emergency medical service (EMS) staff.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A standardized survey of the medical directors of the emergency services (MDES) in Germany was carried out using an online questionnaire. The anonymous results were evaluated using the statistical software SPSS (Chi-squared test, Mann-Whitney-U test).

RESULTS

Seventy-seven MDES responsible for 989 rescue stations and 397 EMS- physician bases in 15 federal states took part in this survey. Morphine (98.7%), Fentanyl (85.7%), Piritramide (61%), Sufentanil (18.2%) and Nalbuphine (14,3%) are provided as opioid analgesics. The non-opioid analgesics (NOA) including Ketamine/Esketamine (98,7%), Metamizole (88.3%), Paracetamol (66,2%), Ibuprofen (24,7%) and COX-2-inhibitors (7,8%) are most commonly available. The antispasmodic Butylscopolamine is available (81,8%) to most rescue stations. Fentanyl is the most commonly provided opioid analgesic for treatment of a traumatic pain (70.1%) and back pain (46.8%), Morphine for visceral colic-like (33.8%) and non-colic pain (53.2%). In cases of acute coronary syndrome is Morphine (85.7%) the leading analgesic substance. Among the non-opioid analgesics is Ketamine/Esketamine (90.9%) most frequently provided to treat traumatic pain, Metamizole for visceral colic-like (70.1%) and non-colic (68.6%) as well as back pain (41.6%). Butylscopolamine is the second most frequently provided medication after Metamizole for "visceral colic-like pain" (55.8%). EMS staff (with or without a request for presence of the EMS physician on site) are permitted to use the following: Morphine (16.9%), Piritramide (13.0%) and Nalbuphine (10.4%), and of NOAs for (Es)Ketamine (74.1%), Paracetamol (53.3%) and Metamizole (35.1%). The dosages of the most important and commonly provided analgesic substances permitted to independent treatment by the paramedics are often below the recommended range for adults (RDE). The majority of medical directors (78.4%) of the emergency services consider the independent application of analgesics by paramedics sensible. The reason for the relatively rare authorization of opioids for use by paramedics is mainly due to legal (in)certainty (53.2%).

CONCLUSION

Effective analgesics are available for EMS staff in Germany, the approach to improvement lies in the area of application. For this purpose, the adaptations of the legal framework as well as the creation of a guideline for prehospital analgesia are useful.

Comparison of three regimens with inhalational methoxyflurane versus intranasal fentanyl versus intravenous morphine in pre-hospital acute pain management: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (PreMeFen)

BACKGROUND

Pre-hospital pain management has traditionally been performed with intravenous (IV) morphine, but oligoanalgesia remain a recognized problem. Pain reduction is essential for patient satisfaction and is regarded as a measure of successful treatment. We aim to establish whether non-invasive methods such as inhalation of methoxyflurane is non-inferior to intranasal fentanyl or non-inferior to the well-known IV morphine in the pre-hospital treatment of acute pain.

METHOD/DESIGN

The PreMeFen study is a phase three, three-armed, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial to compare three regimens of analgesics: inhalation of methoxyflurane and intranasal (IN) fentanyl versus IV morphine. It is an open-label trial with a 1:1:1 randomization to the three treatment groups. The primary endpoint is the change in pain numeric rating scale (NRS) (0-10) from baseline to 10 min after start of investigational medicinal product administration (IMP). The non-inferiority margin was set to 1.3, and a sample size of 270 patients per protocol (90 in each treatment arm) will detect this difference with 90% power.

DISCUSSION

We chose a study design with comparison of analgesic regimens rather than fixed doses because of the substantial differences in drug characteristics and for the results to be relevant to inform policymakers in the pre-hospital setting. We recognize that easier administration of analgesics will lead to better pain management for many patients if the regimens are as good as the existing, and hence, we chose a non-inferiority design. The primary endpoint, the change in pain (NRS) after 10 min, is set to address the immediate need of pain reduction for patients with acute prehospital pain. On a later stage, more analgesic methods are often available. PreMeFen is a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial comparing three analgesic regimens aiming to establish whether inhalation of methoxyflurane or intranasal fentanyl is as good as IV morphine for fast reduction of acute pain in the prehospital setting.

Patient, family member, and ambulance staff experiences of prehospital acute pain management in adults: A systematic review and meta-synthesis

Background

We aimed to synthesize the qualitative experiences of patients, their family members, and ambulance staff involved in the prehospital management of acute pain in adults and generate recommendations to improve the quality of care.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted following the enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research (ENTREQ) guidelines. We searched from inception to June 2021: MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, PsycINFO and Web of Science (search alerts were screened up to December 2021). Articles were eligible for inclusion if they reported qualitative data and were published in the English language. The Critical Appraisal Skills Program for qualitative studies checklist was used to assess risk of bias, thematic synthesis was performed on included studies and recommendations for clinical practice improvement were generated.

Results

Twenty-five articles were included in the review, representing over 464 patients, family members, and ambulance staff from 8 countries. Six analytical themes and several recommendations to improve clinical practice were generated. Strengthening the patient-clinician relationship by building trust, promoting patient empowerment, addressing patient needs and expectations, and providing a holistic approach to pain treatment is key to improving prehospital pain management in adults. Shared pain management guidelines and training across the prehospital and emergency department intersection should improve the patient journey.

Conclusion

Interventions and guidelines that strengthen the patient-clinician relationship and span the prehospital and emergency department phase of care are likely to improve the quality of care for adults suffering acute pain in the prehospital setting.

Evidence-Based Guidelines for Prehospital Pain Management: Recommendations

This project sought to develop evidence-based guidelines for the administration of analgesics for moderate to severe pain by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) clinicians based on a separate, previously published, systematic review of the comparative effectiveness of analgesics in the prehospital setting prepared by the University of Connecticut Evidence-Based Practice Center for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). A technical expert panel (TEP) was assembled consisting of subject matter experts in prehospital and emergency care, and the development of evidence-based guidelines and patient care guidelines. A series of nine "patient/population-intervention-comparison-outcome" (PICO) questions were developed based on the Key Questions identified in the AHRQ systematic review, and an additional PICO question was developed to specifically address analgesia in pediatric patients. The panel made a strong recommendation for the use of intranasal fentanyl over intravenous (IV) opioids for pediatric patients without intravenous access given the supporting evidence, its effectiveness, ease of administration, and acceptance by patients and providers. The panel made a conditional recommendation for the use of IV non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) over IV acetaminophen (APAP). The panel made conditional recommendations for the use of either IV ketamine or IV opioids; for either IV NSAIDs or IV opioids; for either IV fentanyl or IV morphine; and for either IV ketamine or IV NSAIDs. A conditional recommendation was made for IV APAP over IV opioids. The panel made a conditional recommendation against the use of weight-based IV ketamine in combination with weight-based IV opioids versus weight-based IV opioids alone. The panel considered the use of oral analgesics and a conditional recommendation was made for either oral APAP or oral NSAIDs when the oral route of administration was preferred. Given the lack of a supporting evidence base, the panel was unable to make recommendations for the use of nitrous oxide versus IV opioids, or for IV ketamine in combination with IV opioids versus IV ketamine alone. Taken together, the recommendations emphasize that EMS medical directors and EMS clinicians have a variety of effective options for the management of moderate to severe pain in addition to opioids when designing patient care guidelines and caring for patients suffering from acute pain.

Clinical assessment and risk stratification for prehospital use of methoxyflurane versus standard analgesia in adult patients with trauma pain

Oligoanalgesia, the undertreatment of trauma-related pain using standard analgesics in prehospital and emergency departments, has been extensively documented as one of the major challenges affecting the effective treatment of trauma-related pain. When administered in low doses, methoxyflurane has been highlighted by numerous medical works of literature to provide an effective, nonopioid, nonnarcotic treatment alternative to standard analgesics for prehospital and emergency department use. Low-dose methoxyflurane has been associated with fast-pain relief in adult patients manifesting moderate-to-severe pain symptoms. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the clinical implication of low-dose methoxyflurane use in prehospital and emergency departments in adult patients with moderate-to-severe trauma-related pain. Moreover, the review aimed at assessing the risk stratification associated with using low-dose methoxyflurane in prehospital and emergency departments. The systematic review and meta-analysis performed a comprehensive search for pertinent literature assessing the implications and risks of using low-dose methoxyflurane in adult patients exhibiting moderate-to-severe trauma-related pain in prehospital settings. A comparison between the use of low-dose methoxyflurane and standard-of-care analgesics, placebo, in prehospital settings was reported in four clinically conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs). These RCTs included the STOP! trial, InMEDIATE, MEDIATA, and the PenASAP trials. A meta-analysis comparing the time taken to achieve first pain relief on initial treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe trauma-related pain favored the use of low-dose methoxyflurane to the standard-of-care analgesics (mean difference = -6.63, 95% confidence interval = -7.37, -5.09) on time taken to establish effective pain relief. Low-dose methoxyflurane has been associated with superior and faster pain relief in prehospital and emergency departments in adult patients exhibiting moderate-to-severe trauma-related pain compared to other standard analgesics.

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/.

Patient Demographics Are Associated with Differences in Prehospital Pain Management among Trauma Patients

OBJECTIVE

Disparities have been observed in the treatment of pain in emergency department patients. However, few studies have evaluated such disparities in emergency medical services (EMS). We describe pain medication administration for trauma indications in an urban EMS system and how it varies with patient demographics.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of the electronic medical records of adult patients transported for isolated trauma (without accompanying medical complaint) from 1/1/18 to 6/30/2020 by a third service EMS agency in a major United States metropolitan area. We performed descriptive statistics on epidemiology, type of pain medications administered, and pain scores. Kruskall-Wallis and chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively. We constructed a logistic regression model to estimate the odds of nontreatment of pain by age, race, sex, transport interval, pain score, and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score for patients with pain scores of at least four on a one to ten scale, the threshold for pain treatment per the EMS protocol.

RESULTS

Of 32,463 EMS patients with traumatic injuries included in the analysis, 40% (12,881/32,463) were African American, 50% (16,284/32,463) were female, the median age was 27 years (IQR 45-64), and the median initial pain score was 5 (IQR 2-8). Fifteen percent (4,989/32,463) received any analgesic. Initial pain scores were significantly higher for African American and female patients. African American patients were less likely to receive analgesia compared to White and Hispanic patients (19% versus 25% and 23%, respectively, p < 0.0001). Adjusting for age, pain score, transport interval, and GCS, African American compared to White, and female compared to male patients were less likely to be treated for pain, OR 1.59 (95% CI 1.47-1.72) and OR 1.20 (95% CI 1.11-1.28), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with isolated traumatic injuries treated in a single, urban EMS system, African American and female patients were less likely to receive analgesia than White or male patients. Analgesics were given to a small percentage of patients who were eligible for treatment by protocol, and intravenous opioids were used in the vast majority patients who received treatment.

Pain Management in a Prehospital Emergency Setting: A Retrospective Observational Study

Purpose

Acute pain is a prevalent symptomatology in prehospital emergency care. Although inadequate assessment and treatment of acute pain are associated with various complications, about 43% of adults suffering from pain are undertreated. This phenomenon is poorly studied, and limited data are available in the literature. The objective was to investigate the pain management in a prehospital emergency health-care setting, verifying pain assessment, pharmacological treatment adherence and the effectiveness of pain relief therapy.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective observational study was conducted in a sample including all adults treated by the professionals of nurse-staffed ambulances and medical cars in an Italian Emergency Medical Services (EMS) from 1 January 2019 to 31 May 2019. We collected both demographic information and Numeric Rating Scale scores, which evaluated presence and intensity of pain, from the EMS paper forms. All analyses were performed using SPSS, version 27.

Results

The study sample was composed of 629 people: 310 males (49%) and 319 females (51%), with an average age of 64.2±22 years (range 18-108). Pain information was collected in 75.5% (n = 475) of our sample; among them 222 patients (46.7%) suffered from pain. We recorded that 79.7% (n = 177) of the subjects with pain received no pharmacological treatment, and in almost all of the treated cases they did not adhere to the analgesia algorithm in use. Among those who were pharmacologically treated, pain statistically significantly decreased in intensity, from before to after, in both emergency vehicles (nurse-staffed ambulances pre m = 8.36±0.9 vs post m = 4.18±2.2, p<0.001; medical cars pre m = 7.25±1.7 vs post m = 3.50±2.6, p<0.001). Subsequently, pain was only re-ascertained in 24.3% of subjects.

Conclusion

Our findings confirm that pain is a prevalent symptom in prehospital patients, especially in the younger age range, but that it remains an underrecognized, underestimated, and undertreated symptom with the risk of causing worse health outcomes.

Intranasal Fentanyl for On-the-Hill Analgesia by Ski Patrol

INTRODUCTION

Intranasal fentanyl offers a means for safe and effective pain management in austere environments. Prehospital analgesia traditionally involves intravenous or intramuscular medication. However, for wilderness rescuers, these methods are often impractical.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of health records to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intranasal fentanyl administered by EMT-Basic certified ski patrollers. Our primary aim was to measure the reduction in initial pain scores to subsequent measurements at 5, 10, and 15 min using the pain numeric rating scale (0-10). Clinically significant reduction in severe pain has been established as ≥1.8 points. We used paired t-tests and multilevel modeling to measure statistical significance and potential interactions and reviewed patient charts for adverse events, including respiratory depression or the use of naloxone.

RESULTS

We compiled the results from the winter seasons for 2007 through 2012 and 2016 through 2020. A total of 247 patients were included. The initial pain score was 8.6±1.5 (mean±SD). The decrease in pain scores from 0 to 5, 10, and 15 min, respectively, was -1.8, -2.4, and -2.9 (P<0.0001), which demonstrated a clinically and statistically significant decrease in pain scores. There were no adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Traditional standard of care analgesics are invasive, elongate scene times, and increase the risk of environmental exposure and provider needlestick. Intranasal fentanyl offers a safe, noninvasive, and rapid analgesia that is well-suited for austere winter environments, such as those encountered at ski resorts. This study demonstrates the safety and efficacy of the administration of intranasal fentanyl by EMT-Basic certified providers.

Polish Experiences of Pain Treatment by Paramedics in relation to Good Practices of Pain Treatment: A Register-Based Study

Background

Pain is frequently encountered in the prehospital setting. The treatment of pain is one of the priority activities for paramedics.

Methods

1048576 patients under the care of EMS over a 7-month period were included in this study. Data included using pain scale and pain score, the initial diagnosis, analgesic treatment and the given drug obtained from the Ambulance Emergency Procedure Cards.

Results

The complete absence of pain was detected in 43.9% (95% CI 43.8–44.0) of patients, mild pain in 17.0% (95% CI 16.9–17.1), moderate pain in 11.6% (95% CI 11.5–11.7), and severe pain in 4.9% (95% CI 4.9–4.9) of cases. In 22.5% (95% CI 22.4–22.6), no pain rating scale was used. 98.0% (95% CI 97.9–98.1) of patients with mild, 96.1% (95% CI 96.0–96.2) with moderate, and 94.0% (95% CI 93.9–94.1) with severe pain did not receive any pain medication. The most commonly used drugs in all groups were metamizole and ketoprofen. The greatest analgesic effect was observed in the group of patients with severe pain. Pain decreased by an average of 3.2 NRS points in the drug-free group and 3.1 NRS points in the treated group. The most commonly documented diagnoses in all groups of patients were signs and diseases not classified in other groups (ICD-10 R00-R99), injuries and consequences of external causes (ICD-10 S00-T98), and diseases of the circulatory system (ICD-10 I00–I99).

Conclusions

Paramedics may use a variety of medications but use them rarely. Adding metamizole to the list of medications used by paramedics has made it one of the most commonly used drugs. Regardless of whether the drug was used or not, the analgesic effect was similar.

Impact of In-Station Medication Automated Dispensing Systems On Prehospital Pain Medication Administration

Introduction: Medication automatic dispensing systems (ADS) have been implemented in many settings, including fire-based EMS stations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of in-station ADSs on controlled substance administration rates and EMS response intervals.Methods: This study was a retrospective review of data from a single fire-based EMS agency. Medication administration rates and EMS response intervals were compared before ADS implementation (P1; 6/1/15 to 5/31/16) and after ADS implementation (P3; 6/1/17-5/31/19). Cases with missing data and during a one-year implementation period were excluded.Results: 4045 cases were identified in P1 and 8168 in P3. The odds of morphine or versed administration increased following ADS implementation: OR =1.77 (95% CI: 1.53, 2.03) and OR =1.53 (95%CI: 1.18, 2.00) respectively. There were statistically, but likely not operationally significant increases in median response interval and transport interval from P1 to P3 of 14 seconds, (p < 0.001) and 39 seconds (p< 0.001) respectively. Time at hospital for all calls decreased by more than 11 minutes for all transports, from a median of 34 minutes (IQR; 23.7, 45.5) to 22.7 minutes (IQR:18.5, 27.6) in P3, p < 0.001 and by 27.9 minutes for calls in which a controlled substance was given: P1 = 50.6 minutes (IQR: 34.6, 63.2), P3 = 22.7 minutes (IQR: 18.3, 27.4), p < 0.001.Conclusion: In this system, medication ADS implementation was associated with an increase in the rates of controlled substance administration and a decrease in the time units were at hospitals.

Opioids for Treatment of Pre-hospital Acute Pain: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Acute pain is a frequent symptom among patients in the pre-hospital setting, and opioids are the most widely used class of drugs for the relief of pain in these patients. However, the evidence base for opioid use in this setting appears to be weak. The aim of this systematic review was to explore the efficacy and safety of opioid analgesics in the pre-hospital setting and to assess potential alternative therapies.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Scopus, and Epistemonikos databases were searched for studies investigating adult patients with acute pain prior to their arrival at hospital. Outcomes on efficacy and safety were assessed. Risk of bias for each included study was assessed according to the Cochrane approach, and confidence in the evidence was assessed using the GRADE method.

RESULTS

A total of 3453 papers were screened, of which the full text of 125 was assessed. Twelve studies were ultimately included in this systematic review. Meta-analysis was not undertaken due to substantial clinical heterogeneity among the included studies. Several studies had high risk of bias resulting in low or very low quality of evidence for most of the outcomes. No pre-hospital studies compared opioids with placebo, and no studies assessed the risk of opioid administration for subgroups of frail patients. The competency level of the attending healthcare provider did not seem to affect the efficacy or safety of opioids in two observational studies of very low quality. Intranasal opioids had a similar effect and safety profile as intravenous opioids. Moderate quality evidence supported a similar efficacy and safety of synthetic opioid compared to morphine.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence for pre-hospital opioid administration to relieve acute pain is scarce and the overall quality of evidence is low. Intravenous administration of synthetic, fast-acting opioids may be as effective and safe as intravenous administration of morphine. More controlled studies are needed on alternative routes for opioid administration and pre-hospital pain management for potentially more frail patient subgroups.

Usability and effectiveness of inhaled methoxyflurane for prehospital analgesia - a prospective, observational study

Background

Pain relief in the prehospital setting is often insufficient, as the administration of potent intravenous analgesic drugs is mostly reserved to physicians. In Australia, inhaled methoxyflurane has been in routine use by paramedics for decades, but experience in Central European countries is lacking. Thus, we aimed to assess whether user friendliness and effectiveness of inhaled methoxyflurane as sole analgesic match the specific capabilities of local ground and air-based EMS systems in Austria.

Methods

Observational study in adult trauma patients (e.g. dislocations, fracture or low back pain following minor trauma) with moderate to severe pain (numeric rating scale [NRS] ≥4). Included patients received a Penthrop® inhaler containing 3 mL of methoxyflurane (maximum use 30 min). When pain relief was considered insufficient (NRS reduction < 3 after 10 min), intravenous analgesics were administered by an emergency physician. The primary endpoint was effectiveness of methoxyflurane as sole analgesic for transport of patients. Secondary endpoints were user friendliness (EMS personell), time to pain relief, vital parameters, side effects, and satisfaction of patients.

Results

Median numeric pain rating was 8.0 (7.0–8.0) in 109 patients. Sufficient analgesia (reduction of NRS ≥3) was achieved by inhaled methoxyflurane alone in 67 patients (61%). The analgesic effect was progressively better with increasing age. Side effects were frequent (n = 58, 53%) but mild. User satisfaction was scored as very good when pain relief was sufficient, but fair in patients without benefit. Technical problems were observed in 16 cases (14.7%), mainly related to filling of the inhaler. In every fifth use, the fruity smell of methoxyflurane was experienced as unpleasant. No negative effects on vital signs were observed.

Conclusion

In prehospital use, inhaled methoxyflurane as sole analgesic is effective for transport of trauma patients (62%) with moderate to severe pain. Older patients benefit especially from inhaled methoxyflurane. Side effects are mild and vital parameters unaffected. Thus, inhaled methoxyflurane could be a valuable device for non-physician EMS personnel rescue services also in the central Europe region.

The effectiveness and safety of paediatric prehospital pain management: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Clinically meaningful pain reduction with respect to severity and the adverse events of drugs used in prehospital pain management for children are areas that have not received sufficient attention. The present systematic review therefore aims to perform a comprehensive search of databases to examine the preferable drugs for prehospital pain relief in paediatric patients with acute pain, irrespective of aetiology.

METHODS

The systematic review includes studies from 2000 and up to 2020 that focus on children's prehospital pain management. The study protocol is registered in PROSPERO with registration no. CRD42019126699. Pharmacological pain management using any type of analgesic drug and in all routes of administration was included. The main outcomes were (1) measurable pain reduction (effectiveness) and (2) no occurrence of any serious adverse events. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Epistemonikos and Cochrane library. Finally, the risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist and a textual narrative analysis was performed due to the heterogeneity of the results.

RESULTS

The present systematic review on the effectiveness and safety of analgesic drugs in prehospital pain relief in children identified a total of eight articles. Most of the articles reviewed identified analgesic drugs such as fentanyl (intranasal/IV), morphine (IV), methoxyflurane (inhalational) and ketamine (IV/IM). The effects of fentanyl, morphine and methoxyflurane were examined and all of the included analgesic drugs were evaluated as effective. Adverse events of fentanyl, methoxyflurane and ketamine were also reported, although none of these were considered serious.

CONCLUSION

The systematic review revealed that fentanyl, morphine, methoxyflurane and combination drugs are effective analgesic drugs for children in prehospital settings. No serious adverse events were reported following the administration of fentanyl, methoxyflurane and ketamine. Intranasal fentanyl and inhalational methoxyflurane seem to be the preferred drugs for children in pre-hospital settings due to their ease of administration, similar effect and safety profile when compared to other analgesic drugs. However, the level of evidence (LOE) in the included studies was only three or four, and further studies are therefore necessary.

How safe is prehospital care? A systematic review

Background

As compared to other domains of healthcare, little is known about patient safety incidents (PSIs) in prehospital care. The aims of our systematic review were to identify how the prevalence and level of harm associated with PSIs in prehospital care are assessed; the frequency of PSIs in prehospital care; and the harm associated with PSIs in prehospital care.

Method

Searches were conducted of Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete and the grey literature. Reference lists of included studies and existing related reviews were also screened. English-language, peer-reviewed studies reporting data on number/frequency of PSIs and/or harm associated with PSIs were included. Two researchers independently extracted data from the studies and carried out a critical appraisal using the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs (QATSDD).

Results

Of the 22 included papers, 16 (73%) used data from record reviews, and 6 (27%) from incident reports. The frequency of PSIs in prehospital care was found to be a median of 5.9 per 100 records/transports/patients. A higher prevalence of PSIs was identified within studies that used record review data (9.9 per 100 records/transports/patients) as compared to incident reports (0.3 per records/transports/patients). Across the studies that reported harm, a median of 15.6% of PSIs were found to result in harm. Studies that utilized record review data reported that a median of 6.5% of the PSIs resulted in harm. For data from incident reporting systems, a median of 54.6% of incidents were associated with harm. The mean QATSDD score was 25.6 (SD = 4.1, range = 16–34).

Conclusions

This systematic review gives direction as to how to advance methods for identifying PSIs in prehospital care and assessing the extent to which patients are harmed.

[Volatile anesthetics for prehospital analgesia by paramedics-An overview]

Treatment of acute pain is a central task in emergency medicine. Yet, prehospital pain relief is often insufficient or delayed since the administration of potent intravenous analgesic drugs (such as opioids) is mostly limited to physicians due to legal restrictions or training deficiencies in Germany and Austria. Frequently, prehospitally operating emergency physicians have to be demanded later for anguished patients limiting disposability of physicians for patients who are in a potentially life-threatening condition. Thus, inhaled analgesics could represent an interesting alternative.A mixture of 50% nitrous oxide and 50% oxygen (N₂O, Livopan®) has been available in Germany and Austria for several years; however, prehospital use of Livopan has been merely realized and only one trial has been published. In addition, methoxyflurane (Penthrop®), a volatile anesthetic from the group of the dialkyl esters (2-dichloro-1:1-difluoroethyl-methyl-ester) was approved for the treatment of moderate to severe pain following trauma in adults in many European countries in recent years and was brought onto the market in Austria in 2018. Several in-hospital trials demonstrated high effectiveness in this setting.This article discusses the effects and prehospital areas of application of both substances in the light of the existing literature. We provide a narrative overview of the current study situation and report on a recently performed prehospital application study of methoxyflurane (Penthrop®) from Austria.The need for pressurized gas cylinders for the use of N₂O represents a certain limitation in prehospital use. Furthermore, in certain injuries such as of the inner ear or a pneumothorax N₂O should not be used and the risk of diffusion hypoxemia has to be addressed. Users should be particularly careful and limit the use in alcohol addicts and vegans. The advances of N₂O are that it is odorless, has a fast onset of action, the usability in patients over 1 month old and has stabilizing effects on the circulation. Plenty of literature regarding prehospital as well as in-hospital use of nitrous oxide in emergency, obstetric and pediatric settings show its effectiveness as a single drug as well as in combination with other analgesics, such as paracetamol or various opioids. Its long tradition in Anglo-American countries is also based on its safety and low rate of side effects.Methoxyflurane is easier to store and handle and may be slightly more effective in severe pain after trauma; however, its approval is restricted to adults, where it works significantly better with increasing age, based on the declining minimal alveolar concentration (MAC) of all inhaled anesthetics with increasing age. Furthermore, decades of use of inhaled methoxyflurane in Australia have shown the drug is effective, safe and low in side effects and has a broad spectrum of applications. The use of methoxyflurane is limited in patients with severe hepatic or renal insufficiency and the characteristic odor has been described as unpleasant by some patients. In Europe, three large in-hospital trials showed strong pain relief in trauma patients, even comparable to opioids.Overall, based on the current evidence, the use of nitrous oxide and even more of methoxyflurane may be recommended also for prehospital use by skilled paramedics.

Methoxyflurane in Non-Life-Threatening Traumatic Pain-A Retrospective Observational Study

Pain management is a key issue in prehospital trauma. In Switzerland, paramedics have a large panel of analgesic options. Methoxyflurane was recently introduced into Switzerland, and the goal of this study was to describe both the effect of this medication and the satisfaction of its use. This was a retrospective cohort study, performed in one emergency ambulance service. It included adult patients with traumatic pain and a self-assessment of 3 or more on the visual analogue scale or verbal numerical rating scale. The primary outcome was the reduction in pain between the start of the care and the arrival at the hospital. Secondary outcomes included successful analgesia and staff satisfaction. From December 2018 to 4 June to October 2020, 263 patients were included in the study. Most patients had a low prehospital severity score. The median pain at arrival on site was 8 and the overall decrease in pain observed was 4.2 (95% CI 3.9–4.5). Regarding secondary outcomes, almost 60% had a successful analgesia, and over 70% of paramedics felt satisfied. This study shows a reduction in pain, following methoxyflurane, similar to outcomes in other countries, as well as the attainment of a satisfactory level of pain reduction, according to paramedics, with the advantage of including patients in their own care.

Non-pharmacological interventions for acute pain management in adult trauma victims: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aimed to map non-pharmacological interventions to reduce acute pain in adult trauma victims.

INTRODUCTION

Acute pain is a consequence of a pathological or traumatic event, and a result of invasive or non-invasive health care procedures. Acute trauma pain, as well as its treatment, is one of the least-studied areas of acute pain. Although non-pharmacological interventions are responsible for pain relief among a significant number of patients, only a small percentage of patients receive non-pharmacological interventions.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review considered all studies conducted on adult victims of trauma, aged 18 years or over, in pre-hospital emergency care, emergency rooms, and trauma-center settings. Studies were considered if they focused on non-pharmacological interventions designed to reduce acute pain, and were implemented and evaluated by health professionals. Non-pharmacological interventions of any type, duration, frequency, and intensity were considered.

METHODS

A comprehensive search strategy across 11 bibliometric databases and gray literature sources was developed. Full texts of selected citations were assessed in detail for eligibility by two independent reviewers. No other relevant studies were identified by searching the references of the included articles. Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers using an instrument previously developed, and those reviewers were later responsible for its validation. Findings were then extracted directly into tables that are accompanied by a narrative summary to show how they relate to the objectives of the review conducted.

RESULTS

This scoping review included nine studies: two retrospective cohort studies, five randomized controlled trials, one case report, and one literature review for five different countries. Non-pharmacological interventions identified and administered to trauma victims in pre-hospital settings, emergency services, and trauma centers were as follows: acupressure, auricular acupressure, auricular acupuncture, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, repositioning, use of pressure relief devices, massage, heat therapy, music therapy, relaxation therapy, immobilization, ice therapy, compression, elevation, and bandage. Non-pharmacological interventions were mainly developed by nurses, physicians, and paramedics. They were, in most studies, poorly described in terms of their efficacy and were mostly reported in minor traumas, such as simple fractures or small wounds.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is no consensus for the implementation of non-pharmacological interventions in the treatment of acute trauma pain. Their application is primarily used for minor traumas, and their potential for the treatment of major traumas is yet unknown. No studies on the use of non-pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing the impact of traumatic adverse environments were identified. Further investigation on the effects of these interventions should be encouraged so that robust decisions and recommendations can be made.

Nurse-Administered Analgesic Treatment in Italian Emergency Medical Services: A Nationwide Survey

Background

Acute pain is common among patients requiring assistance from prehospital emergency medical services (EMS). Nonetheless, the undertreatment of pain in this context remains a frequent phenomenon. Timely and effective analgesia is a crucial feature in emergency medicine. To ensure analgesia provision, prehospital paramedics and nurses can administer analgesics via standard operating protocols or under a physician’s remote supervision. Information about such protocols in Italian EMS is lacking.

Objective

Evaluation of the availability of nurse’s standard analgesia protocols in Italy’s prehospital EMS settings.

Methods

A cross-sectional online survey involved all 74 Italian emergency medical dispatch centres (EMDCs). Aside from descriptive statistics, we used χ²-analysis and Spearman-rank correlation to look for associations between geographical areas’ dependence upon independent variable categories and their correlations.

Results

Of all the 74 Italian EMDCs, 70 (94.6%) completed the survey, covering 100 provinces out of a total of 107 (93.5%). Operating nurses’ prehospital analgesia protocols are available in 46 provinces (46.0%). The availability of prehospital analgesia protocols is more extended in northern Italy EMDCs (n=30, 66.7%) than in central Italy (n=9, 42.8%) and southern Italy and islands (n=7, 20.6%). Morphine (76.1% for medical patients and 95.7% for trauma) and paracetamol (89.1% for both) are the most common drugs included in the prehospital analgesia protocols.

Conclusion

Despite international consensus on the necessity, efficacy, and safety of nurses’ prehospital analgesia provision, nurse-administered analgesia protocols are available in less than half of Italian provinces, with substantial differences between northern, central, and southern areas. These results indirectly indicate potential undertreatment of prehospital pain in Italy and yield practice improvements.

Inhaled methoxyflurane for the management of trauma related pain in patients admitted to hospital emergency departments: a randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled trial (PenASAP study)

BACKGROUND

Oligo-analgesia is common in the emergency department (ED). This study aimed at reporting, when initiated by triage nurse, the superior efficacy of inhaled methoxyflurane plus standard of care (m-SoC) analgesia versus placebo plus SoC (p-SoC) for moderate-to-severe trauma-related pain in the hospital ED.

METHODS

A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at eight EDs. Adults with pain score ≥4 (11-point numerical rate scale, NRS) at admission were randomised to receive one or two inhalers containing m-SoC or p-SoC. Primary outcome measure was time until pain relief ≤30 mm, assessed on the 100-mm Visual Analogic Scale (VAS).

RESULTS

A total of 351 patients were analysed (178 m-SoC; 173 p-SoC). Median pain prior to first inhalation was 66 mm, 75% had severe pain (NRS 6-10). Median time to pain relief was 35 min [95% confidence interval (CI), 28-62] for m-SoC versus not reached in p-SoC (92 - not reached) [hazard ratio), 1.93 (1.43-2.60), P < 0.001]. Pain relief was most pronounced in the severe pain subgroup: hazard ratio, 2.5 (1.7-3.7). As SoC, 24 (7%) patients received weak opioids (6 versus 8%), 4 (1%) strong opioid and 44 (13%) escalated to weak or strong opioids (8 versus 17%, respectively, P = 0.02). Most adverse events were of mild (111/147) intensity.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we report that methoxyflurane, initiated at triage nurse as part of a multimodal analgesic approach, is effective in achieving pain relief for trauma patients. This effect was particularly pronounced in the severe pain subgroup.

Healthcare resource use and cost implications of low dose methoxyflurane for severe trauma-related pain: a qualitative study

Aims

Management of moderate-to-severe trauma-associated pain is often reported as suboptimal, due in part to limitations associated with frequently used analgesics. Low-dose methoxyflurane (LDM) is an inhaled, non-opioid analgesic, recently approved for emergency relief of moderate-to-severe trauma-associated pain in conscious adults. This study assessed the perspective of healthcare professionals (HCPs) with regard to the time to analgesia and healthcare cost of LDM versus morphine IV, for patients with severe trauma-related pain receiving emergency care in Belgium.

Materials and methods

Interviews and questionnaires were completed by four healthcare HCPs providing emergency care at different hospitals in Belgium. Processes describing analgesic provision in pre-hospital and hospital emergency department (ED) settings were qualitatively mapped and a cost model applied which included reimbursed analgesic costs, time spent by HCPs making analgesic treatment decisions, preparing and administering the analgesic, and post-dose monitoring and management of analgesic-related adverse events (AEs).

Results

LDM was associated with substantial time and costs savings per patient, largely due to no requirement for AE monitoring. Compared with morphine IV, LDM in the hospital ED was associated with a time saving of 4 minutes to analgesic provision (35 vs 39 min) and ≥224 min in total (35 vs ≥259 min; including monitoring and managing AEs). In the pre-hospital setting, LDM was also associated with a time saving of 4 minutes to analgesic provision (21 vs 25 min) and 198 minutes in total. The corresponded total cost savings with LDM vs morphine IV were ≥€27.32 and ≥€17.95 in the ED or prehospital setting, respectively.

Conclusions

The cost model showed that LDM was associated with substantial time and costs savings versus morphine IV for severe trauma-related emergency pain in pre-hospital and hospital ED settings in Belgium.

Ketamine for the treatment of prehospital acute pain: a systematic review of benefit and harm

BACKGROUND

Few publications have addressed prehospital use of ketamine in analgesic doses. We aimed to assess the effect and safety profile of ketamine compared with other analgesic drugs (or no drug) in adult prehospital patients with acute pain.

METHODS

A systematic review of clinical trials assessing prehospital administration of ketamine in analgesic doses compared with other analgesic drugs or no analgesic treatment in adults. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Epistemonikos from inception until 15 February 2020, including relevant articles in English and Nordic languages. We used the Cochrane and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodologies and exclusively assessed patient-centred outcomes. Two independent authors screened trials for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias.

RESULTS

We included eight studies (2760 patients). Ketamine was compared with various opioids given alone, and intranasal ketamine given with nitrous oxide was compared with nitrous oxide given alone. Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and one cluster randomised trial included 699 patients. One prospective cohort included 27 patients and two retrospective cohorts included 2034 patients. Five of the eight studies had high risks of bias. Pain score with ketamine is probably lower than after opioids as demonstrated in a cluster-RCT (308 patients) and a retrospective cohort (158 patients) study, Δvisual analogue scale -0.4 (-0.8 to 0.0) and Δnumeric pain rating scale -3.0 (-3.86 to -2.14), respectively. Ketamine probably leads to less nausea and vomiting (risk ratio (RR) 0.24 (0.11 to 0.52)) but more agitation (RR 7.81 (1.85 to 33)) than opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic literature review finds that ketamine probably reduces pain more than opioids and with less nausea and vomiting but higher risk of agitation. Risk of bias in included studies is high.

OTHER

Scandinavian society of anaesthesiology and intensive care medicine funded meetings and software. The Norwegian Air Ambulance Foundation funded publication. Otherwise this research received no grant from any agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018114399.

Approaching acute pain in emergency settings: European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) guidelines-part 1: assessment

Pain management is a vital component of patient care, particularly in the emergency setting. Pain can hinder the opportunities to treat and manage pain-causing conditions and remains one of the primary reasons patients seek emergency medical care, yet despite this, pain often remains under-acknowledged, under-assessed and undertreated. Despite the importance of effective management of acute pain, there are currently no well-defined emergency medicine guidelines at a European level to support healthcare professionals in achieving this goal. The European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) identified this as a significant unmet requirement, for improving day-to-day patient management and for providing guidance to trainees and non-emergency medicine physicians. Under the auspices of EUSEM, a programme-the European Pain Initiative-was launched with the aim of providing information, advice and guidance on pain management in pre-hospital and emergency department settings. Search terms were developed to search MEDLINE, Cochrane database, Google Scholar and EMBASE online databases to return English language articles published in the last 10 years. A working package of reference materials was evaluated against inclusion and exclusion criteria and levels of evidence ascribed. A short survey was developed by the European Pain Initiative Steering Committee for completion by EUSEM members to evaluate actual clinical practice. A working document of > 800 publications was identified for further review and evaluation against agreed criteria. Some further publications were included by the Steering Committee to explore older literature for long-established analgesics, or newly emergent literature that was considered important for inclusion but was identified as the guideline development was underway. This article provides the methodology used to inform the guidelines, including survey results of EUSEM members on assessment and treatment of acute pain. A companion manuscript in this issue presents an evidence-based review and recommendations for individualised evaluation of acute pain in patients in emergency settings.

Paramedic Pain Management Practice with Introduction of a Non-opiate Treatment Protocol

Introduction

There is concern about the initiation of opiates in healthcare settings due to the risk of future misuse. Although opiate medications have historically been at the core of prehospital pain management, several states are introducing non-opiate alternatives to prehospital care. Prior studies suggest that non-opiate analgesics are non-inferior to opiates for many acute complaints, yet there is little literature describing practice patterns of pain management in prehospital care. Our goal was to describe the practice patterns and attitudes of paramedics toward pain management after the introduction of non-opiates to a statewide protocol.

Methods

This study was two-armed. The first arm employed a pre/post retrospective chart review model examining medication administrations reported to the Massachusetts Ambulance Trip Information System between January 1, 2017–December 31, 2018. We abstracted instances of opiate and non-opiate utilizations along with patients’ clinical course. The second arm consisted of a survey administered to paramedics one year after implementation of non-opiates in the state protocol, which used binary questions and Likert scales to describe beliefs pertaining to prehospital analgesia.

Results

Pain medications were administered in 1.6% of emergency medical services incidents in 2017 and 1.7% of incidents in 2018. The rate of opiate analgesic use was reduced by 9.4% in 2018 compared to 2017 (90.6% vs 100.0%). The absolute reduction in opiate use in 2018 was 3.6%. Women were less likely (odds ratio [OR] = 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69–0.89) and trauma patients were more likely to receive opiates (OR = 2.36, CI, 1.96–2.84). Mean transport times were longer in opiate administration incidents (36.97 vs 29.35 minutes, t = 17.34, p<0.0001). We surveyed 100 paramedics (mean age 41.98, 84% male). Compositely, 85% of paramedics planned to use non-opiates and 35% reported having done so. Participants planning to use non-opiates were younger and less experienced. Participants indicated that concern about adverse effects, efficacy, and time to effect impacted their practice patterns.

Conclusion

The introduction of non-opiate pain medication to state protocols led to reduced opiate administration. Men and trauma patients were more likely to receive opiates. Paramedics reported enthusiasm for non-opiate medications. Beliefs about non-opioid analgesics pertaining to adverse effects, onset time, and efficacy may influence their utilization.

Role of Inhaled Methoxyflurane in the Management of Acute Trauma Pain

Adequate treatment of trauma pain is an integral part of the management of trauma patients, not just for ethical reasons but also because undertreated pain can lead to increased morbidities and worse long-term outcomes. Trauma pain management presents challenges in the pre-hospital setting, particularly in adverse or hostile environments as well as in busy emergency departments (EDs). Inhaled methoxyflurane, administered at analgesic doses via a disposable inhaler, has recently become available in Europe for the emergency treatment of moderate to severe pain in conscious adult trauma patients. A growing body of evidence demonstrates that inhaled methoxyflurane is well tolerated and effective in providing a rapid onset of analgesia. In this paper, we discuss the rationale for methoxyflurane use in trauma pain management, data from clinical trials recently conducted in Europe, its efficacy and safety profile compared to current standard treatments, its place in therapy and organizational impact. We conclude that inhaled methoxyflurane represents an effective treatment option in the different settings where trauma patients require rapid and flexible pain resolution, with potential organizational advantages.

Prehospital acute traumatic pain assessment and management practices in the Western Cape, South Africa: a retrospective review

BACKGROUND

Trauma is a common aetiology of acute pain in the emergency setting, and traumatic injuries have been recognised as a global public health crisis leading to numerous deaths and disabilities. This study aimed to identify the prevalence of acute pain among high acuity trauma patients presenting to a public sector emergency medical service and to describe prehospital acute traumatic pain assessment and management practices amongst emergency care providers in the Western Cape Province, South Africa.

METHODS

A retrospective review of electronic patient care reports of trauma patients treated by the South African Western Cape Emergency Medical Services between January 1 and December 31, 2017 was conducted. Stratified random sampling was utilised to select 2401 trauma patients out of 24,575 that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 2401 patients reviewed, 435 (18.1%) had a pain score recorded, of which 423 (97.2%) were experiencing pain. An additional 8.1% (n = 194) of patients had pain or tenderness mentioned in the working diagnosis but no pain score noted. Eighty-one (18.6%) patients experienced mild pain, 175 (40.2%) moderate pain and 167 (38.2%) severe pain. No association was found between a pain score recorded and age group (≤ 14 versus > 14 years) (p = 0.649) or gender (p = 0.139). Only 7.6% of patients with moderate-to-severe pain and 2.8% of all trauma patients received any form of analgesic medication. No association was found between the administration of analgesia and age group (≤ 14 versus > 14 years) (p = 0.151) or gender (p = 0.054). Patients were more likely to receive analgesia if they had a pain score recorded (p < 0.001), were managed by advanced life support practitioners (p < 0.001) or had severe pain (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Acute trauma pain assessment and management practices in this prehospital cohort are less well established than reported elsewhere and whether this reflects emergency care training, institutional culture, scopes of practice or analgesic resources, requires further research. Emergency medical services need to monitor and promote quality pain care, enhance pain education and ensure that all levels of emergency care providers have access to analgesic medication approved for prehospital use. Clear and rational guidelines would enable better pain management by all cadres of providers, for all levels of pain.

Acute pain assessment and management in the prehospital setting, in the Western Cape, South Africa: a knowledge, attitudes and practices survey

Background

Acute pain is frequently encountered in the prehospital setting, and therefore, a fundamental aspect of quality emergency care. Research has shown a positive association between healthcare providers’ knowledge of, and attitudes towards pain and pain management practices. This study aimed to describe the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of emergency care providers regarding acute pain assessment and management in the prehospital setting, in the Western Cape, South Africa. The specific objectives were to, identify gaps in pain knowledge; assess attitudes regarding pain assessment and management; describe pain assessment and management behaviours and practices; and identify barriers to and enablers of pain care.

Methods

A web-based descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted among emergency care providers of all qualifications, using a face-validated Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices of Pain survey.

Results

Responses of 100 participants were included in the analysis. The survey response rate could not be calculated. The mean age of respondents was 34.74 (SD 8.13) years and the mean years’ experience 10.02 (SD 6.47). Most respondents were male (69%), employed in the public/government sector (93%) as operational practitioners (85%) with 54% of respondents having attended medical education on pain care in the last 2 years. The mean percentage for knowledge and attitudes regarding pain among emergency care providers was 58.01% (SD 15.66) with gaps identified in various aspects of pain and pain care. Practitioners with higher qualifications, more years’ experience and those who did not attend medical education on pain, achieved higher scores. Alcohol and drug use by patients were the most selected barrier to pain care while the availability of higher qualified practitioners was the most selected enabler. When asked to record pain scores, practitioners were less inclined to assign scores which were self-reported by the patients in the case scenarios. The participant dropout rate was 35%.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that there is suboptimal knowledge and attitudes regarding pain among emergency care providers in the Western Cape, South Africa. Gaps in pain knowledge, attitudes and practices were identified. Some barriers and enablers of pain care in the South African prehospital setting were identified but further research is indicated.

Translation and Validation of the Farsi Version of the Pain Management Self-Efficacy Questionnaire

Introduction

Pain management is a complex process that is managed through a multi-disciplinary team in which nurses have a significant role. The present study aimed at translating and examining the psychometric properties of the Pain Management Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PMSEQ) among Iranian nurses.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional, methodological study conducted in 2019 among nurses working in two teaching hospitals in Sanandaj (Tohid and Kosar). The participants were selected using a convenience sampling method. Responsiveness; interpretability; and face, content, and construct validities were examined using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. In addition, internal consistency and stability were examined using the Cronbach’s alpha and test-retest, respectively.

Results

Overall, 410 nurses (210 for the EFA and 200 for the CFA) were included in the sample. In the exploratory factor analysis, two factors of comprehensive pain assessment and pain management with eigenvalues of 6.36 and 1.91, respectively, were extracted. The two factors together explained 56.64% of the variance of nurses’ pain management self-efficacy. The confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the model had a moderate fit to the data (RMSEA: 0.12; NFI: 0.84; NNFI: 0.86; CFI: 0.88; IFI: 0.88; RFI: 0.81; GFI: 0.76; AGFI: 0.69; PGFI: 0.59; RMR: 0.09; standardized RMR: 0.09). Total questionnaire and the two factors (i.e. comprehensive pain assessment and pain management) had internal consistency coefficients of 0.891, 0.876, and 0.803, respectively.

Conclusion

The Farsi version of PMSEQ had good internal consistency and reliability, as well as content and construct validity, and can be used in future studies.

Comparison of inhalational methoxyflurane (Penthrox®) and intramuscular tramadol for prehospital analgesia

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of pain is an important component of prehospital care. Inhalational analgesia agents have attractive strengths, but there is a paucity of studies comparing these with more conventional agents. We aimed to compare inhalational methoxyflurane and intramuscular (IM) tramadol as first-contact analgesia in the Singapore national ambulance service.

METHODS

Ambulances were randomised to carry either methoxyflurane or IM tramadol for the first six months and crossed over to the other arm after six months. Patients aged ≥ 16 years, with acute pain arising from musculoskeletal trauma with Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score ≥ 3 were enrolled. Variables included NRS reduction, time variables, adverse effects, Ramsay Sedation Scores, and patient and paramedic satisfaction scores on a Likert scale.

RESULTS

A total of 369 patients were enrolled into this study, but 26 patients were excluded due to missing data. The methoxyflurane arm had a shorter median time taken from arrival at the scene to drug administration (9.0 [interquartile range 6.0-14.0] minutes vs. 11.0 [interquartile range 8.0-15.0] minutes). For patients who achieved reduction in NRS ≥ 3 within 20 minutes, those in the methoxyflurane arm took a shorter time. However, the methoxyflurane (46.7%) arm experienced lower proportion of patients not achieving NRS reduction ≥ 3 when compared to the tramadol (71.6%) arm after over 20 minutes. The methoxyflurane arm had significantly higher paramedic and patient satisfaction scores.

CONCLUSION

For the doses of medication used in this implementation study, methoxyflurane was superior in efficacy, speed of onset and administration, but had more minor adverse effects when compared to IM tramadol.

Non-traditional administration of remifentanil in an experimental setting

Remifentanil is ultrashort-acting opioid with a unique pharmacokinetic profile. It is used exclusively intravenously. While considering its rapid onset of action and other pharmacokinetic properties, we decided to assess its effects following administration via non-traditional routes. Rabbits (n=10 per each group) were randomized into six groups: remifentanil 1 microg/kg and 3 microg/kg IM, 5.0 and 10.0 microg/kg conjunctivally, and 10 microg/kg and 25.0 microg/kg intranasally. Sedating effects were assessed via a loss of the righting reflex. Secondary, mean arterial blood pressure, arterial oxygen saturation of hemoglobin, and pulse rate was monitored in all rabbits. Non-traditional routes of administration were shown to provide a rapid onset of action as well as fast recovery. Importantly, the administration of remifentanil did not result in any deterioration of cardiovascular functions.

Clinical practice of pre-hospital analgesia: An observational study of 20,978 missions in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

Pain is a frequent problem faced by emergency medical services (EMS) in pre-hospital settings. This large observational study aims to assess the prevalence of sufficiently provided analgesia and to analyze the efficacy of different analgesics. Moreover, we evaluated if quality of analgesia changed with an emergency physician on scene or depended on paramedics' gender.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of all pre-hospital medical charts from adults and adolescents treated by the municipal EMS Schutz & Rettung Zürich over a period of 4 years from 2013 to 2016. Inclusion criteria were age ≥16 years, initial GCS > 13, NACA score ≥I and ≤V, an initial numeric rating scale (NRS) ≥ I and a documented NRS at hospital admission. 20,978 out of 142,484 missions fulfilled the inclusion criteria and therefore underwent further investigation. Descriptive, univariate and multivariate analyses were applied.

RESULTS

Initial NRS on scene was on average 5.2 ± 3.0. Mean NRS reduction after treatment was 2.2 ± 2.5 leading to a NRS at hospital admission of 3.0 ± 1.9. This resulted in sufficient analgesia for 77% of included patients. Among analgesics, the highest odds ratio for sufficient analgesia was observed for ketamine (OR 4.7, 95%CI 2.2-10.4, p < 0.001) followed by fentanyl (OR 1.4, 95%CI 1.1-1.7, p = 0.004). Female paramedics provided better analgesia (OR 1.2, 95%CI 1.1-1.2; p < 0.001). Patient's sex had no influence on analgesia. In patients with a NACA score > 2, the presence of an emergency physician on scene improved the quality of analgesia significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-hospital analgesia is mostly adequate, especially when done with ketamine or fentanyl. Female paramedics provided better analgesia and in selected patients, an emergency physician on scene improved quality of analgesia in critical patients.

Non-pharmacological interventions for pain management in adult victims of trauma: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to map non-pharmacological interventions for reducing acute pain for adult victims of trauma.

INTRODUCTION

Acute pain, as a consequence of either a pathological or traumatic event or even due to invasive and non-invasive healthcare procedures, is highly prevalent in critically ill patients. However, specific acute pain as a direct consequence of trauma is one of the least studied areas of acute pain.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review will consider studies on adult victims of trauma, aged 18 years or over, in prehospital emergency care, emergency departments and trauma centers. All studies that focus on non-pharmacological interventions designed to reduce acute pain, implemented and evaluated by health professionals in any form, duration, frequency and intensity, will be considered.

METHODS

An initial search of PubMed and CINAHL will be undertaken, followed by a second search for published and unpublished studies from 2000 to the present in major healthcare related electronic databases. Studies in English, French, Spanish and Portuguese will be included. Data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers in tabular form and include details about the 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.

Intravenous Acetaminophen vs. Ketorolac in Terms of Pain Management in Prehospital Emergency Services: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Introduction:

Although pain management in EDs has been fully addressed in clinical trials, prehospital settings have rarely been investigated.

Objective:

The present study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of intravenous acetaminophen with that of ketorolac in pre-hospital pain control.

Method:

This randomized clinical trial (RCT) was performed at a prehospital setting during EMS missions in Tehran, Iran. The eligible candidates comprised all patients over the age of 7 years with a complaint of moderate to severe pain. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups, one receiving 30 mg of intravenous (IV) ketorolac and the other 1 g of IV acetaminophen. The pain intensity was measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) before administering the analgesic and upon admission to the ED.

Results:

The present study was conducted on 150 patients aged 8–81 years with a mean age of 40.4 ± 17.7, including 84 (56%) males. The mean reduction in the pain score was 14.9±8.6 in the acetaminophen group and 16.0±8.8 in the ketorolac group. Univariate analyses suggested no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of delta pain score (pain reduction) (P=0.429).

Conclusion:

Based on the obtained findings, both ketorolac and acetaminophen could be administered for pain management in prehospital settings in both traumatic and non-traumatic patients in case their contraindications are considered.

Acute Pain in the African Prehospital Setting: A Scoping Review

Background

Acute pain is a common reason for seeking prehospital emergency care. Regrettably, acute pain is often underestimated and poorly managed in this setting. The scoping review was conducted to gain insight into existing research on the topic and to make recommendations for future work.

Objectives

To identify all available evidence related to acute pain assessment and management in the African prehospital setting, describe the extent of the evidence, encapsulate findings, and identify research gaps.

Methods

The scoping review considered primary and secondary research related to acute pain assessment and management of both medical and traumatic origins in all age groups in the African prehospital setting. The search strategy aimed to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing research which met the inclusion criteria. Potentially eligible studies were identified by a comprehensive search of electronic databases, trial registers, dissertation/thesis databases, grey literature databases, and conference proceedings. Screening and data extraction were conducted independently and in duplicate.

Results

The comprehensive search identified 3823 potential studies, duplicate titles were removed, and 3358 titles/abstracts were screened. Full text of 66 potentially eligible titles was screened, 60 were excluded, and six publications met the inclusion criteria. Despite recommendations for pain assessment during general patient care, most studies reported no/limited pain assessment. In general, pain management was concluded to be insufficient and not conforming to best practice.

Conclusions

Only six publications addressing prehospital acute pain care in Africa could be identified, possibly indicative of a knowledge gap. Future research is indicated to enable a better understanding of the epidemiology of acute pain and barriers and enablers of acute pain care and to develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) catering for all EMS systems in Africa. Additionally, educational initiatives should be implemented to improve the quality of acute pain care and to monitor quality through continuous quality improvement (CQI) programs.

Prehospital intravenous fentanyl administered by ambulance personnel: a cluster-randomised comparison of two treatment protocols

Background

Prehospital acute pain is a frequent symptom that is often inadequately managed. The concerns of opioid induced side effects are well-founded. To ensure patient safety, ambulance personnel are therefore provided with treatment protocols with dosing restrictions, however, with the concomitant risk of insufficient pain treatment of the patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of a liberal intravenous fentanyl treatment protocol on efficacy and safety measures.

Methods

A two-armed, cluster-randomised trial was conducted in the Central Denmark Region over a 1-year period. Ambulance stations (stratified according to size) were randomised to follow either a liberal treatment protocol (3 μg/kg) or a standard treatment protocol (2 μg/kg). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with sufficient pan relief (numeric rating scale (NRS, 0–10) < 3) at hospital arrival. Secondary outcomes included abnormal vital parameters as proxy measures of safety. A multi-level mixed effect logistic regression model was applied.

Results

In total, 5278 patients were included. Ambulance personnel following the liberal protocol administered higher doses of fentanyl [117.7 μg (95% CI 116.7–118.6)] than ambulance personnel following the standard protocol [111.5 μg (95% CI 110.7–112.4), P = 0.0001]. The number of patient with sufficient pain relief at hospital arrival was higher in the liberal treatment group than the standard treatment group [44.0% (95% CI 41.8–46.1) vs. 37.4% (95% CI 35.2–39.6), adjusted odds ratio 1.47 (95% CI 1.17–1.84)]. The relative decrease in NRS scores during transport was less evident [adjusted odds ratio 1.18 (95% CI 0.95–1.48)]. The occurrences of abnormal vital parameters were similar in both groups.

Conclusions

Liberalising an intravenous fentanyl treatment protocol applied by ambulance personnel slightly increased the number of patients with sufficient pain relief at hospital arrival without compromising patient safety. Future efforts of training ambulance personnel are needed to further improve protocol adherence and quality of treatment.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02914678). Date of registration: 26th September, 2016.

Differences in pain treatment between surgeons and anaesthesiologists in a physician staffed prehospital emergency medical service: a retrospective cohort analysis

Background

Although pain treatment is an important objective in prehospital emergency medicine the incidence of oligoanalgesia is still high in prehospital patients. Given that prehospital emergency medicine in Germany is open for physicians of any speciality, the prehospital pain treatment may differ depending on the primary medical education. Aim of this study was to explore the difference in pain treatment between surgeons and anaesthesiologists in a physician staffed emergency medical service.

Methods

Retrospective single centre cohort analysis in a physician staffed ground based emergency medical service from January 2014 until December 2016. A total of 8882 consecutive emergency missions were screened. Primary outcome measure was the difference in application frequency of prehospital analgesics by anaesthesiologist or surgeon. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used for statistical analysis including subgroup analysis for trauma and acute coronary syndrome.

Results

A total of 8238 patients were included in the analysis. There was a significant difference in the application frequency of analgesics between surgeons and anaesthesiologists especially for opioids (p < 0.001, OR 0.68 [0.56–0.82]). Fentanyl was the most common administered analgesic in the trauma subgroup, but significantly less common used by surgeons (p = 0.005, OR 0.63 [0.46–0.87]). In acute coronary syndrome cases there was no significant difference in morphine administration between anaesthesiologists and surgeons (p = 0.49, OR 0.88 [0.61–1.27]).

Conclusions

Increased training for prehospital pain treatment should be implemented, since opioids were administered notably less frequent by surgeons than by anaesthesiologists.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12871-019-0683-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Délégation de l’évaluation et du traitement de la douleur à l’infirmier de Service mobile d’urgence et de réanimation : étude avant–après monocentrique

Introduction : La prise en charge de la douleur en médecine d’urgence préhospitalière est encore insuffisante. Cette étude a pour objectif d’évaluer les effets d’une délégation de l’évaluation et du traitement de la douleur à l’infirmier diplômé d’État (IDE) en Service mobile d’urgence et de réanimation (Smur) sur le suivi des recommandations de la Société française de médecine d’urgence (SFMU).

Méthode : Étude rétrospective de type avant–après réalisée au Smur du centre hospitalier universitaire (CHU) de Nîmes de janvier à mai 2017. Les IDE ont été formés, entre les deux phases, à un protocole de délégation de l’évaluation et du traitement de la douleur fondé sur les dernières recommandations.

Résultats : Cent quatre-vingt-un patients ont été inclus dans chaque groupe, 74 (40 %) femmes (âge moyen de 60 ± 18 ans). Les groupes étaient comparables à l’exception de la proportion d’interventions traumatologiques (11 % dans le groupe « avant » vs 20 % dans le groupe « après » ; p = 0,02). Les recommandations ont été respectées pour 12 (7 %) patients dans le groupe « avant », 21 (12 %) dans le groupe « après » (p = 0,10). Le seul facteur indépendant de respect des recommandations est le type d’intervention traumatologique (odds ratio = 9,7 ; intervalle de confiance à 95 % : [2,3–53,3] ; p < 0,01). Le nombre de patients ayant bénéficié d’une administration d’antalgique était respectivement de 55 (30 %) dans le groupe « avant » et de 73 (40 %) dans le groupe « après » (p = 0,05). La réévaluation de l’intensité douloureuse en fin de prise en charge a été consignée dans 11 (6 %) cas de la phase avant vs 38 (21 %) dans la phase après (p < 0,01). Dans le sous-groupe des patients n’ayant pas bénéficié de trinitrine, les recommandations ont été respectées respectivement pendant les phases « avant » et « après » chez 7 (6 %) patients vs 17 (14 % ; p = 0,03).

Conclusion : Malgré une augmentation du taux de prescription d’antalgiques et de réévaluation de la douleur, le protocole de délégation IDE n’a pas permis un meilleur respect des recommandations. L’établissement de protocoles spécifiques en fonction du type d’intervention, notamment traumatologique, pourrait être une piste de réflexion.

Acute pain in the prehospital setting: a register-based study of 41.241 patients

BACKGROUND

Acute pain is a frequent symptom, but little is known about the frequency and causes of acute pain in the prehospital population. The objectives of this study were to investigate the frequency of moderate to severe pain among prehospital patients and the underlying causes according to primary hospital diagnose codes.

METHODS

This was a register-based study on 41.241 patients transported by ambulance. Information on moderate to severe pain [Numeric Rating Scale (NRS, 0-10) > 3 or moderate pain or higher on 4-point likert scale] was extracted from a national electronic prehospital patient record. Patient information was merged with primary hospital diagnose codes based on the 10th version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) to investigate underlying causes of pain.

RESULTS

11.430 patients (27.7%) reported moderate to severe pain during ambulance transport. As a measure of opioid demanding acute pain, 3.275 of 41.241 patients (7.9%) were treated with intravenous fentanyl. Underlying causes of pain were heterogenic according to ICD-10 chapters with injuries being the largest group of patients with moderate to severe pain (XIX: 42.8% of 8.041 patients), followed by non-specific diagnoses (XVIII: 28.5% of 7.101 patients and XXI: 31.6% of 5.148 patients), diseases of the circulatory system (IX: 22.1% of 4.812 patients) and other (20.3% of 16.139 miscellaneous patients).

DISCUSSION

Due to the high frequency of moderate to severe pain affecting a wide range of patients, more attention on acute pain is necessary. Whether ambulance personnel have sufficient options for treating various pain conditions might be a subject of future evaluation. Non-specific diagnoses accounted for surprisingly many patients with moderate to severe pain, of which many were treated with intravenous fentanyl. This may be substance of further investigation.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate to severe pain is a highly frequent and probably underestimated symptom among patients transported by ambulance. Underlying causes of pain are heterogenic as described by primary hospital diagnose codes. More focus on the treatment of acute pain is needed.