MOVING THE NEEDLE ON TIME TO RESUSCITATION: AN EAST PROSPECTIVE MULTICENTER STUDY OF VASCULAR ACCESS IN HYPOTENSIVE INJURED PATIENTS USING TRAUMA VIDEO REVIEW

INTRODUCTION

Vascular access in hypotensive trauma patients is challenging. Little evidence exists on the time required and success rates of vascular access types. We hypothesized that intraosseous (IO) access would be faster and more successful than peripheral IV (PIV) and central venous catheter (CVC) access in hypotensive patients.

METHODS

An EAST prospective multicenter trial was performed; 19 centers provided data. Trauma video review (TVR) was used to evaluate the resuscitations of hypotensive (systolic blood pressure ≤ 90 mmHg) trauma patients. Highly granular data from video recordings were abstracted. Data collected included vascular access attempt type, location, success rate, and procedural time. Demographic and injury-specific variables were obtained from the medical record. Success rates, procedural durations, and time to resuscitation were compared among access strategies (IO vs PIV vs CVC).

RESULTS

1,410 access attempts occurred in 581 patients with a median age of 40[27-59] years and an ISS of 22[10-34]. 932 PIV, 204 IO and 249 CVC were attempted. 70% of access attempts were successful but were significantly less likely to be successful in females (64% vs. 71%, p = 0.01). Median time to any access was 5.0[3.2-8.0] minutes. IO had higher success rates than PIV or CVC (93% vs. 67% vs. 59%, p < 0.001) and remained higher after subsequent failures (second attempt 85% vs. 59% vs. 69%, p = 0.08; third attempt 100% vs 33% vs. 67%, p = 0.002). Duration varied by access type (IO 36[23-60]sec; PIV 44[31-61]sec; CVC 171[105-298]sec) and was significantly different between IO vs. CVC (p < 0.001) and PIV vs. CVC (p < 0.001) but not PIV vs. IO. Time to resuscitation initiation was shorter in patients whose initial access attempt was IO, 5.8 minutes vs. 6.7 minutes (p = 0.015). This was more pronounced in patients arriving to the hospital with no established access (5.7 minutes vs. 7.5 minutes, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

IO is as fast as PIV and more likely to be successful compared with other access strategies in hypotensive trauma patients. Patients whose initial access attempt was IO were resuscitated more expeditiously. IO access should be considered a first line therapy in hypotensive trauma patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II Therapeutic/Care Management.

The involvement of trauma survivors in hospital-based injury prevention, violence intervention and peer support programs: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Despite decades-long involvement of trauma survivors in hospital-based program delivery, their roles and impact on trauma care have not been previously described. We aimed to characterize the literature on trauma survivor involvement in hospital-based injury prevention, violence intervention and peer support programs to map what is currently known and identify future research opportunities.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. Articles were identified through electronic databases and gray literature. Included articles described hospital-based injury prevention programs, violence intervention programs and peer support programs that involved trauma survivors leveraging their injury experiences to counsel others. Studies were screened and data were abstracted in duplicate. Data were synthesized generally and by program type.

RESULTS

Thirty-six published articles and four program reports were included. Peer support programs were described in 21 articles, mainly involving trauma survivors as mentors or peer supporters. Peer support programs' most commonly reported outcome was participant satisfaction (n = 6), followed by participant self-efficacy (n = 5), depression (n = 4), and community integration (n = 3). Eleven injury prevention studies were included, all involving trauma survivors as speakers in youth targeted programs. Injury prevention studies commonly reported outcomes of participants' risk behaviors and awareness (n = 9). Violence intervention programs were included in four articles involving trauma survivors as intervention counsellors. Recidivism rate was the most commonly reported outcome (n = 3). Variability exists across and within program types when reporting on involved trauma survivors' gender, age, selection and training, duration of involvement and number of survivors involved. Outcomes related to trauma survivors' own experiences and the impacts to them of program involvement were under-studied.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant opportunity exists to fill current knowledge gaps in trauma survivors' involvement in trauma program delivery. There is a need to describe more fully who involved trauma survivors are to inform the development of effective future interventions.