Effect of placental transfusion on neonatal resuscitation attempts

Objective: Overall, neonatal mortality has been shown to be reduced by: placental transfusion (the transfer of blood from the placenta to the neonatal circulation after birth); delayed cord clamping (DCM) (waiting for the umbilical cord to stop pulsating before clamping and cutting the cord); and umbilical cord milking (UCM) (clamping and cutting the cord immediately before milking the cord towards the neonate to expel remaining volume). This systematic review aimed to determine whether placental transfusion negatively impacts resuscitation by delaying it or has any effect on infant mortality, and to identify any barriers to performing it. Methods: CINAHL, MEDLINE, AMED and the British Nursing Index were searched using key terms to identify relevant English language publications between 2017 and 2019. Results: Five papers were selected for critical analysis—three randomised control trials and two cohort studies. Conclusion: Placental transfusion was not found to have a negative impact on neonatal resuscitation but, equally, had no significant effect on Apgar at 5 minutes; however, Apgar is a crude measure of infant mortality. The question remains around the proven multifaceted benefit of placental transfusion in the prehospital environment, which requires further research. There is evidence to suggest prehospital clinicians should be looking to change practice. Further research, considerations and consultations are required to ascertain the best way to implement the procedure with a balanced and proportionate approach considering neonatal thermoregulation and maternal management. The main reported barrier to placental transfusion was a lack of appropriate equipment

Emergency medical service provider decision-making in out of hospital cardiac arrest: An exploratory study

© 2017 The Author(s). Background: There are approximately 60,000 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) in the United Kingdom (UK) each year. Within the UK there are well-established clinical practice guidelines that define when resuscitation should be commenced in OHCA, and when resuscitation should cease. Background literature indicates that decision-making in the commencement and cessation of resuscitation efforts in OHCA is complex, and not comprehensively understood. No relevant research from the UK has been published to date and this research study seeks to explore the influences on UK Emergency Medical Service (EMS) provider decision-making when commencing and ceasing resuscitation attempts in OHCA. The aim of this research to explore the influences on UK Emergency Medical Services provider decision-making when commencing and ceasing resuscitation attempts in OHCA. Methods: Four focus groups were convened with 16 clinically active EMS providers. Four case vignettes were discussed to explore decision-making within the focus groups. Thematic analysis was used to analyse transcripts. Results: This research found that there are three stages in the decision-making process when EMS providers consider whether to commence or cease resuscitation attempts in OHCA. These stages are: the call; arrival on scene; the protocol. Influential factors present at each of the three stages can lead to different decisions and variability in practice. These influences are: factual information available to the EMS provider; structural factors such as protocol, guidance and research; cultural beliefs and values; interpersonal factors; risk factors; personal values and beliefs. Conclusions: An improved understanding of the circumstantial, individual and interpersonal factors that mediate the decision-making process in clinical practice could inform the development of more effective clinical guidelines, education and clinical decision support in OHCA. These changes have the potential to lead to greater consistency. and EMS provider confidence, with the potential for improved patient outcome from OHCA

Cross-sectional study of the prehospital management of adult patients with a suspected seizure (EPIC1).

OBJECTIVES: Suspected seizures are a common reason for emergency calls to ambulance services. Prehospital management of these patients is an important element of good quality care. The aim of this study, conducted in a regional ambulance service in the UK, was to quantify the number of emergency telephone calls for suspected seizures in adults, the associated costs, and to describe the patients' characteristics, their prehospital management and their immediate outcomes. DESIGN: Quantitative cross-sectional study using routinely collected data and a detailed review of the clinical records of a consecutive series of adult patients (≥16 years). SETTING: A regional ambulance service within the National Health Service in England. PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional data from all 605 481 adult emergency incidents managed by the ambulance service from 1 April 2012 to 31 March 2013. We selected a consecutive series of 178 individual incidents from May 2012 for more detailed analysis (132 after exclusions and removal of non-seizure cases). RESULTS: Suspected seizures made up 3.3% of all emergency incidents. True medical emergencies were uncommon but 3.3% had partially occluded airways, 6.8% had ongoing seizure activity and 59.1% had clinical problems in addition to the seizure (29.1% involving injury). Emergency vehicles were dispatched for 97.2% of suspected seizures, the seizure had terminated on arrival in 93.2% of incidents, 75% of these patients were transported to hospital. The estimated emergency management cost per annum of suspected seizures in the English ambulance services is £45.2 million (€64.0 million, $68.6 million). CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with suspected seizures could potentially be treated more effectively and at lower cost by modifying ambulance call handling protocols. The development of innovative care pathways could give call handlers and paramedics alternatives to hospital transportation. Increased adoption of care plans could reduce 999 calls and could increase the rates of successful home or community treatment

An exploration of the views of paramedics regarding airway management

© 2016 Brandling et al. Background: Paramedics are a skilled group of clinicians with expertise in airway management. Our research group has completed a trial comparing supraglottic airway devices with tracheal intubation during out of hospital cardiac arrest. This is a contentious topic amongst paramedics in the United Kingdom (UK). We explored the customs and beliefs of UK paramedics in relation to airway management, and whether tracheal intubation contributes to and sustains paramedic professional identity. Methods: The study took place within South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust. We used a qualitative approach, conducting interviews and focus groups with paramedics. The themes arising from interviews were discussed in focus groups, developing a deeper understanding and providing insight and recommendations for future research and policy. Purposive sampling accounted for differing training and for participation in the main trial. There were 17interviews and five focus groups with a further 17 participants. Data saturation was achieved. Results: Four domains were identified. Pride - The ability to use a life-saving skill in austere conditions. Utility - Different training routes and experience have led to different attitudes towards airway management. Inconsistent expectations - Paramedics felt that there were different perceptions of their abilities amongst hospital staff and the general public. Professionalization - Debate over airway management is not founded on good evidence. Conclusion: We have demonstrated that UK paramedics have a wide range of views regarding airway management, and that these are based on evidence and experience rather than dogma. Airway management contributes to paramedics' professional identity, but is not reliant on this

Prehospital randomised assessment of a mechanical compression device in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC): a pragmatic, cluster randomised trial and economic evaluation

Background: Mechanical chest compression devices may help to maintain high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), but little evidence exists for their effectiveness. We evaluated whether or not the introduction of Lund University Cardiopulmonary Assistance System-2 (LUCAS-2; Jolife AB, Lund, Sweden) mechanical CPR into front-line emergency response vehicles would improve survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Objective: Evaluation of the LUCAS-2 device as a routine ambulance service treatment for OHCA. Design: Pragmatic, cluster randomised trial including adults with non-traumatic OHCA. Ambulance dispatch staff and those collecting the primary outcome were blind to treatment allocation. Blinding of the ambulance staff who delivered the interventions and reported initial response to treatment was not possible. We also conducted a health economic evaluation and a systematic review of all trials of out-of-hospital mechanical chest compression. Setting: Four UK ambulance services (West Midlands, North East England, Wales and South Central), comprising 91 urban and semiurban ambulance stations. Clusters were ambulance service vehicles, which were randomly assigned (approximately 1 : 2) to the LUCAS-2 device or manual CPR. Participants: Patients were included if they were in cardiac arrest in the out-of-hospital environment. Exclusions were patients with cardiac arrest as a result of trauma, with known or clinically apparent pregnancy, or aged < 18 years. Interventions: Patients received LUCAS-2 mechanical chest compression or manual chest compressions according to the first trial vehicle to arrive on scene. Main outcome measures: Survival at 30 days following cardiac arrest; survival without significant neurological impairment [Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) score of 1 or 2]. Results: We enrolled 4471 eligible patients (1652 assigned to the LUCAS-2 device and 2819 assigned to control) between 15 April 2010 and 10 June 2013. A total of 985 (60%) patients in the LUCAS-2 group received mechanical chest compression and 11 (< 1%) patients in the control group received LUCAS-2. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 30-day survival was similar in the LUCAS-2 (104/1652, 6.3%) and manual CPR groups [193/2819, 6.8%; adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 1.15]. Survival with a CPC score of 1 or 2 may have been worse in the LUCAS-2 group (adjusted OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.99). No serious adverse events were noted. The systematic review found no evidence of a survival advantage if mechanical chest compression was used. The health economic analysis showed that LUCAS-2 was dominated by manual chest compression. Limitations: There was substantial non-compliance in the LUCAS-2 arm. For 272 out of 1652 patients (16.5%), mechanical chest compression was not used for reasons that would not occur in clinical practice. We addressed this issue by using complier average causal effect analyses. We attempted to measure CPR quality during the resuscitation attempts of trial participants, but were unable to do so. Conclusions: There was no evidence of improvement in 30-day survival with LUCAS-2 compared with manual compressions. Our systematic review of recent randomised trials did not suggest that survival or survival without significant disability may be improved by the use of mechanical chest compression. Future work: The use of mechanical chest compression for in-hospital cardiac arrest, and in specific circumstances (e.g. transport), has not yet been evaluated