A 12-month descriptive analysis of emergency intubations at Brooke Army Medical Center: a National Emergency Airway Registry study.

U.S. Army Medical Department journal Pub Date : 2017-10-01
Michael D April, Steven G Schauer, Calvin A Brown Rd, Patrick C Ng, Jessie Fernandez, Andrea E Fantegrossi, Joseph K Maddry, Shane Summers, Daniel J Sessions, Robert M Barnwell, Mark Antonacci
{"title":"A 12-month descriptive analysis of emergency intubations at Brooke Army Medical Center: a National Emergency Airway Registry study.","authors":"Michael D April,&nbsp;Steven G Schauer,&nbsp;Calvin A Brown Rd,&nbsp;Patrick C Ng,&nbsp;Jessie Fernandez,&nbsp;Andrea E Fantegrossi,&nbsp;Joseph K Maddry,&nbsp;Shane Summers,&nbsp;Daniel J Sessions,&nbsp;Robert M Barnwell,&nbsp;Mark Antonacci","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Emergency airway management is a critical skill for military healthcare providers. Our goal was to describe the Emergency Department (ED) intubations at Brooke Army Medical Center (BAMC) over a 12-month period.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Physicians performing endotracheal intubations in the BAMC ED complete data collection forms for each intubation event as part of the National Emergency Airway Registry, including patient demographics, intubation techniques, success and failure rates, adverse events, and patient disposition. We cross-referenced these forms against the numbers of intubation events reported in the ED nursing daily reports to ensure capture of all intubations. Providers completed forms for every intubation within 6 weeks of the procedure. We analyzed data from March 28, 2016, to March 27, 2017.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, providers performed 259 intubations in the BAMC ED. Reasons for intubation were related to trauma for 184 patients (71.0%) and medical conditions for 75 patients (29.0%). Overall, first-attempt success was 83.0%. Emergency medicine residents performed a majority of first attempts (95.0%). Most common devices chosen on first attempt were a video laryngoscope for 143 patients (55.2%) and a direct laryngoscope for 115 patients (44.4%). One patient underwent cricothyrotomy. The 2 most common induction agents were ketamine (59.8%; 95% CI, 55.2%-67.4%) and etomidate (19.3%; 95% CI, 14.7%-24.7%). The most common neuromuscular blocking agents were rocuronium (62.9%; 95% CI, 56.7%-68.8%) and succinylcholine (18.9%; 95% CI, 14.3%-24.2%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the BAMC ED, emergency intubation most commonly occurred for trauma indications using video laryngoscopy with a high first-pass success.</p>","PeriodicalId":88789,"journal":{"name":"U.S. Army Medical Department journal","volume":" 3-17","pages":"98-104"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"U.S. Army Medical Department journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Emergency airway management is a critical skill for military healthcare providers. Our goal was to describe the Emergency Department (ED) intubations at Brooke Army Medical Center (BAMC) over a 12-month period.

Material and methods: Physicians performing endotracheal intubations in the BAMC ED complete data collection forms for each intubation event as part of the National Emergency Airway Registry, including patient demographics, intubation techniques, success and failure rates, adverse events, and patient disposition. We cross-referenced these forms against the numbers of intubation events reported in the ED nursing daily reports to ensure capture of all intubations. Providers completed forms for every intubation within 6 weeks of the procedure. We analyzed data from March 28, 2016, to March 27, 2017.

Results: During the study period, providers performed 259 intubations in the BAMC ED. Reasons for intubation were related to trauma for 184 patients (71.0%) and medical conditions for 75 patients (29.0%). Overall, first-attempt success was 83.0%. Emergency medicine residents performed a majority of first attempts (95.0%). Most common devices chosen on first attempt were a video laryngoscope for 143 patients (55.2%) and a direct laryngoscope for 115 patients (44.4%). One patient underwent cricothyrotomy. The 2 most common induction agents were ketamine (59.8%; 95% CI, 55.2%-67.4%) and etomidate (19.3%; 95% CI, 14.7%-24.7%). The most common neuromuscular blocking agents were rocuronium (62.9%; 95% CI, 56.7%-68.8%) and succinylcholine (18.9%; 95% CI, 14.3%-24.2%).

Conclusion: In the BAMC ED, emergency intubation most commonly occurred for trauma indications using video laryngoscopy with a high first-pass success.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
布鲁克陆军医疗中心紧急插管12个月描述性分析:一项国家紧急气道登记研究。
紧急气道管理是军事医疗保健提供者的一项关键技能。我们的目标是描述布鲁克陆军医疗中心(BAMC)在12个月期间的急诊科(ED)插管。材料和方法:在BAMC ED进行气管插管的医生完成每个插管事件的数据收集表格,作为国家紧急气道登记处的一部分,包括患者人口统计学,插管技术,成功率和失败率,不良事件和患者处置。我们将这些表格与急诊科护理每日报告中报告的插管事件数量进行交叉参考,以确保捕获所有插管。提供者在手术后6周内完成了每次插管的表格。我们分析了2016年3月28日至2017年3月27日的数据。结果:在研究期间,提供者在BAMC急诊科进行了259次插管,插管原因与184例(71.0%)患者的创伤有关,75例(29.0%)患者的医疗条件有关。总体而言,首次尝试成功率为83.0%。急诊住院医师的首次尝试占绝大多数(95.0%)。143例(55.2%)患者选择视频喉镜,115例(44.4%)患者选择直接喉镜。1例患者行环甲环切开术。2种最常见的诱导药物是氯胺酮(59.8%);95% CI, 55.2%-67.4%)和依托咪酯(19.3%;95% ci, 14.7%-24.7%)。最常见的神经肌肉阻滞剂是罗库溴铵(62.9%;95% CI, 56.7%-68.8%)和琥珀酰胆碱(18.9%;95% ci, 14.3%-24.2%)。结论:在BAMC ED中,急诊插管最常用于创伤指征的视频喉镜检查,第一遍成功率高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
COMMANDER’S INTRODUCTION Fresh Frozen Plasma Animal Derived Thiol Induced Work Exacerbated Asthma: A Brief Case Report of a Unique Workplace Hazard. Motivational Guest Speaker Presentation as an Anti-Stigma Intervention for US Army Soldiers. Lessons Learned: Military Screening for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1