Reporting Helicopter Emergency Medical Services in Major Incidents: A Delphi Study

Peer reviewe

Hemodynamic, respiratory and neorophysiological reactions after high : Velocity behind armor blunt trauma

This thesis is addressing Behind Armor Blunt Trauma (BABT), defined as the nonpenetrating injury resulting from a ballistic impact on personal body armor. The protective vest may impede the projectile, but some of the kinetic energy is transferred to the body, causing effects such as pulmonary contusion, apnea, hypotension and occasionally death. Our aims of these studies have been to investigate physiological responses after highvelocity BABT, including EEG (study I). Furthermore, the safety criterion of 44 mm for protective vests (study II), effects of vagotomy (study III), and fluid resuscitation (study IV) has been evaluated. Anaesthetized pigs, wearing body armor on the right side of thorax, were shot with a standard 7.62 mm assault rifle (velocity approx. 800 m/s). We used body armors corresponding to 28 mm impression in clay placed behind the vest (study I and III), 34 mm and 40 mm (study II), and 42 mm (study IV). Several physiological parameters were thereafter monitored during two hours after the shot. Experimental protocol was similar in all studies, except from study III (in which one group received bilateral cervical vagotomy) and study IV, in which 2 groups received Ringer´s acetate (RA) or hypertonic saline with dextrane (HSD). In all studies we observed an immediate drop of blood pressure, desaturation, increased pressure in the lung circulation, suppressed EEG-pattern and pulmonary contusion. In study II and IV, severe hyperkalemia was seen early after the trauma and several animals had serious arrhythmias. Our observed EEG-changes indicate that high-velocity BABT induces brain dysfunction, for at least a couple of minutes. Based on our results, the safety criteria of 44 mm should be considered insufficient when a vest is exposed to highvelocity bullets. Our results show that apnea after BABT is a vagally mediated reflex, that can be inhibited by vagotomy. Fluid resuscitation has limited effects on physiological parameters in our model, although HSD induces less edema formation and a tendency to improved saturation compared to RA

Essential key indicators for disaster medical response suggested to be included in a national uniform protocol for documentation of major incidents : a Delphi study

BACKGROUND: Registration of data from a major incident or disaster serves several purposes such as to record data for evaluation of response as well as for research. Data needed can often be retrieved after an incident while other must be recorded during the incident. There is a need for a consensus on what is essential to record from a disaster response. The aim of this study was to identify key indicators essential for initial disaster medical response registration. By this is meant nationally accepted processes involved, from the time of the emergency call to the emergency medical communication centre until medical care is provided at the emergency department. METHODS: A three round Delphi study was conducted. Thirty experts with a broad knowledge in disaster and emergency response and medical management were invited. In this study we estimated 30 experts to be approximately one third of the number in Sweden eligible for recruitment. Process, structure and outcome indicators for the initial disaster medical response were identified. These were based on previous research and expressed as statements and were grouped into eight categories, and presented to the panel of experts. The experts were instructed to score each statement, using a five point Likert scale, and were also invited to include additional statements. Statements reaching a predefined consensus level of 80% were considered as essential to register. RESULTS: In total 97 statements were generated, 77 statements reached consensus. The 77 statements covered parts of all relevant aspects involved in the initial disaster medical response. The 20 indicators that did not reach consensus mostly concerned patient related times in hospital, types of support systems and security for health care staff. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi technique can be used for reaching consensus of data, comprising process, structure and outcome indicators, identified as essential for recording from major incidents and disasters

Combining performance and outcome indicators can be used in a standardized way: a pilot study of two multidisciplinary, full-scale major aircraft exercises

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Disaster medicine is a fairly young scientific discipline and there is a need for the development of new methods for evaluation and research. This includes full-scale disaster exercisers. A standardized concept on how to evaluate these exercises, could lead to easier identification of pitfalls caused by system-errors in the organization. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of using a combination of performance and outcome indicators so that results can be compared in standardized full-scale exercises.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Two multidisciplinary, full-scale exercises were studied in 2008 and 2010. The panorama had the same setup. Sets of performance indicators combined with indicators for unfavorable patient outcome were recorded in predesigned templates. Evaluators, all trained in a standardized way at a national disaster medicine centre, scored the results on predetermined locations; at the scene, at hospital and at the regional command and control.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>All data regarding the performance indicators of the participants during the exercises were obtained as well as all data regarding indicators for patient outcome. Both exercises could therefore be compared regarding performance (processes) as well as outcome indicators. The data from the performance indicators during the exercises showed higher scores for the prehospital command in the second exercise 15 points and 3 points respectively. Results from the outcome indicators, patient survival and patient complications, demonstrated a higher number of preventable deaths and a lower number of preventable complications in the exercise 2010. In the exercise 2008 the number of preventable deaths was lower and the number of preventable complications was higher.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Standardized multidisciplinary, full-scale exercises in different settings can be conducted and evaluated with performance indicators combined with outcome indicators enabling results from exercises to be compared. If exercises are performed in a standardized way, results may serve as a basis for lessons learned. Future use of the same concept using the combination of performance indicators and patient outcome indicators may demonstrate new and important evidence that could lead to new and better knowledge that also may be applied during real incidents.</p

Evaluation of Disaster Preparedness Based on Simulation Exercises : A Comparison of Two Models

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to highlight 2 models, the Hospital Incident Command System (HICS) and the Disaster Management Indicator model (DiMI), for evaluating the in-hospital management of a disaster situation through simulation exercises. METHODS: Two disaster exercises, A and B, with similar scenarios were performed. Both exercises were evaluated with regard to actions, processes, and structures. After the exercises, the results were calculated and compared. RESULTS: In exercise A the HICS model indicated that 32% of the required positions for the immediate phase were taken under consideration with an average performance of 70%. For exercise B, the corresponding scores were 42% and 68%, respectively. According to the DiMI model, the results for exercise A were a score of 68% for management processes and 63% for management structure (staff skills). In B the results were 77% and 86%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both models demonstrated acceptable results in relation to previous studies. More research in this area is needed to validate which of these methods best evaluates disaster preparedness based on simulation exercises or whether the methods are complementary and should therefore be used together