Schwerverletztenversorgung durch Notärzte aus unterschiedlichen Fachgebieten

Background and objective!#!The level 3 guidelines on treatment of patients with severe/multiple injuries provide a defined framework for an appropriate treatment of these patients. It is presumed that prehospital diagnostic and therapeutic decisions are affected by the clinical expertise and the medical disciplines of the emergency physicians.!##!Methods!#!Retrospective, multicenter study based on data from the ADAC Air Recue Service and the TraumaRegister DGU®. In the study period 2011-2015, a total of 11,019 seriously injured patients were included. They were treated by emergency physicians from the following disciplines: anesthesiology (ANÄ), internal medicine (INN) and surgery (CHIR).!##!Results!#!Of the patients 81.9% were treated by ANÄ, 7.6% by INN and 10.5% by CHIR. Preclinically, 40.5% of patients were intubated (ANÄ 43.0%, INN 31.2%, CHIR 28.3%; p < 0.001), 5.5% received pleural decompression (ANÄ 5.9%, INN 4.2%, CHIR 2.8%; p = 0.004),and 10.8% were treated with catecholamines (ANÄ 11.3%, INN 8.3%, CHIR 8.3%; p = 0.022). Unconscious patients were intubated in 96.0% (ANÄ 96.1%, INN 97.7%, CHIR 93.9%; p = 0.205). The mortality was not influenced by the medical specialty of the emergency physician.!##!Conclusion!#!In this air rescue cohort differences in indications for invasive procedures were observed between the groups. This may be caused by their clinical background. Using the example of intubation, it has been shown that guideline recommendations were closely followed irrespective of the medical specialty of the emergency physician

Changes in anaesthetic use for trauma patients in German HEMS – a retrospective study over a ten-year period

Abstract Background Airway management and use of intravenous anaesthetics to facilitate tracheal intubation after major trauma remains controversial. Numerous agents are available and used for pre-hospital rapid-sequence induction (RSI). The aim was to investigate usage and potential changes in administration of intravenous anaesthetics for pre-hospital RSI in trauma patients over a ten-year period. Methods Based on a large helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) database in Germany between 2006 and 2015, a total of 9720 HEMS missions after major trauma leading to RSI on scene were analysed. Administration practice of sedatives and opioids were investigated, while neuromuscular blocking agents were not documented in the database. Results With respect to administration of sedatives, independent from trauma mechanism and specific injury patterns the use of Etomidate decreased dramatically (52 to 6%) in favour of a more frequent use of Propofol (3 to 32%) and Ketamine (9 to 24%; all p  1 at initial contact, the administration rate of Etomidate dropped significantly as well. This decline was mainly substituted by Ketamine and particularly Propofol. In patients with GCS ≤ 8 upon initial contact, a similar distribution compared to the general trauma population could be observed. With respect to opioids, mainly Fentanyl has been administered for RSI in trauma patients (2006: 69,6% to 2015: 60.2%; p < 0.001), while the use of sufentanyl showed a significant increase (0.2 to 8.8%; p < 0.001). Conclusions This large study analysed prehospital administration of anaesthetics in trauma patients, showing a substantial change from 2006 to 2015 despite the lack of any high-level evidence. Etomidate has shifted from the main sedative substance to virtual absence, indicating that the recommendation of an established national guideline was transferred into clinical practice, although based on weak evidence as well. The pre-hospital use of Propofol showed a particular increase. Fentanyl has been the main opioid drug for RSI in trauma, however Sufentanyl has become increasingly popular. The mechanisms and advantages of the different substances still have to be elucidated, especially in head injury and bleeding trauma