Sepsis is a common, life-threatening medical emergency in which early recognition and treatment are cornerstones of management. Best practice guidelines recommend standardized sepsis screening in hospitals to facilitate early recognition. In contrast, very little is known about the efficacy and safety of standardized sepsis screening in the prehospital Emergency Medical Services (EMS) environment. To help address this knowledge gap, this study protocol will evaluate the impact of implementing an evidence-based sepsis protocol in ambulances. We plan to conduct a multicenter, stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial at 3 sites and enroll 984 participants over 24 months. EMS personnel will be trained to screen all eligible EMS patients using a sepsis screening and early notification protocol. Study inclusion criteria include all the following: (1) EMS systolic blood pressure < 110 mmHg, (2) EMS pulse > 90 beats/min, (3) EMS respiratory rate > 20 breaths/min, and (4) a positive sepsis screen based on the EMS sepsis protocol. To evaluate the clinical impact of the EMS sepsis protocol on patient care, the primary outcome is time to first antibiotic administration in the ED (emergency department) among patients with sepsis (a key treatment intervention in patients with sepsis). To evaluate the potential risk of the EMS sepsis protocol, the surrogate primary safety outcome is the total number of antibiotic DOT (days of therapy) during the first 7 days of hospitalization among patients without sepsis (i.e., false positive sepsis screens). Successful completion of this trial will expand our understanding of prehospital sepsis screening as a standardized approach to prehospital sepsis care. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT 05502107. Date of first posting: 08–16-2022. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05502107 .

ObjectivesSepsis is a time-sensitive condition, and many rural emergency department (ED) sepsis patients are transferred to tertiary hospitals. The objective of this study was to determine whether longer transport times during interhospital transfer are associated with higher sepsis mortality or increased hospital length-of-stay (LOS).Methods A cohort of rural adult (age >= 18 y) sepsis patients transferred between hospitals were identified in the TELEmedicine as a Virtual Intervention for Sepsis Care in Emergency Departments (TELEVISED) parent study. We collected data on the time spent between triage and disposition at the rural ED (ED LOS), time from rural ED disposition to arrival at the destination hospital (transport duration), and overall time from rural ED triage to arrival at the destination hospital (total transfer time). We used a zero inflated negative binomial model with log link for the primary outcome (28-day hospital-free days), and a logit model for secondary outcomes of Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) bundle adherence and in-hospital mortality. We included clinical and demographic covariates in model development.Results We included 359 transferred rural sepsis patients. There was no association between ED LOS (aRR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.98-1.02), transport duration (aRR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.99-1.07), or total transfer time (aRR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.99-1.03) and 28-day hospital free days. Similarly, we found no association between ED LOS, transport duration, and total transfer time with secondary outcomes.Conclusions Longer total transfer time showed no association with 28-day hospital free days in rural sepsis patients. Future work will seek to better understand how rural ED sepsis care can be optimized to maximize outcomes in transferred patients.

OBJECTIVES:Emergency medical services (EMS) clinicians express dissatisfaction with the quality and quantity of clinical feedback received from hospitals, which is exacerbated by the absence of standardized feedback processes. A reported lack of regular feedback impedes their ability to learn and improve care. We evaluated a newly implemented feedback tool's utilization and perceived impact on EMS clinicians and our health system. METHODS:We employed a mixed-methods study design in a single academic medical center emergency department. Quantitative data collected focused on patients' clinical characteristics and characteristics of utilizers of the feedback tool during implementation (September 2023-July 2024). Qualitative data involved semi-structured interviews with EMS clinicians who had diverse experiences with the feedback tool and years of EMS service Semi-structured interviews applied a phenomenological framework, and were videorecorded, transcribed, and independently coded to identify key themes surrounding the utilization and impact of the implemented tool. RESULTS:Among the 381 feedback requests, 139 (36.5%) pertained to patients aged ≥65 years, while 44 (11.5 %) included patients <18 years; 343 (90%) had an Emergency Severity Index score of ≥2. Major complaints included traumatic (n = 165; 43.3%), neurologic (n = 90; 23.6%), and cardiac (n = 82; 21.5%). Emergency responder agencies included ground ambulance 227 (59.6%), air medical 90 (23.6%), public safety answering points 37 (9.7%), and fire service 27 (7.1%). The primary response method was e-mail 353 (93.7%). There was an average of 35 feedback requests per month (interquartile range: 27-59). EMS clinicians from multiple agencies with varying levels of knowledge of the feedback mechanism provided qualitative insights regarding the feedback tool, which covered several key areas: application and technological design, utilization, utility of feedback provided, barriers, comparisons to other systems, and areas for improvement. CONCLUSIONS:The standardized feedback mechanism implemented for EMS clinicians showed engagement, especially among ground responders caring for high-acuity patients, highlighting its importance in patient care. The preference for email emphasizes the need for efficient communication channels. Clinicians found the system accessible and user-friendly. The feedback tool was perceived as crucial for professional development and personal growth, allowing clinicians to gain closure on patient cases and potentially improve future patient care practices.

OBJECTIVE:To examine mental health and substance use dependence (MH/SUD) clinical risk factors for emergency medical services (EMS) or emergency department (ED) involvement among decedents of suicides by poisoning. METHODS:We used a multiyear cross-sectional study design (2013-2021) to identify single suicides by poisoning within the National Violent Death Reporting System. MH/SUD risk factors assessed included the history of attempting suicide, history of MH/SUD conditions and treatment and current MH/SUD condition recognition and treatment. We tested each MH/SUD risk factor for associations with EMS or ED involvement as outcomes using logistic regression, and whether urban/rural residency modified these relationships. FINDINGS:Of the 31 237 suicide decedents identified, 86.5% of decedents had EMS involvement and 22% had ED involvement. MH/SUD clinical risk factors associated with EMS involvement included current MH problem (aOR 1.15; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.30) and some evidence of increased history of attempted suicide (aOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.21) and current SUD problem (aOR 1.10; 95 CI 0.99 to 1.23). MH/SUD clinical risk factors associated with ED involvement included history of both attempting suicide (aOR 1.20; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.30) and MH/SUD treatment (aOR 0.80; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.86). Rural areas had lower EMS involvement (aOR 0.73; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.80) but higher ED involvement (aOR 1.09; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.18); however, there was no evidence of effect modification by rurality. CONCLUSIONS:Individuals with MH/SUD risk factors, especially prior suicide attempts, are more likely to require first responder involvement. Additionally, rural areas show some unique patterns in EMS and ED involvement that should be considered in public health and emergency medical planning.

OBJECTIVE:Emergency medical services (EMS) clinicians experience dissatisfaction with the quality and quantity of clinical feedback from hospitals. Satisfaction is further diminished by the lack of a standardized systems approach. The purpose of this study was to identify rural clinicians' perceptions and preferences regarding clinical feedback received from hospitals, the delivery mechanisms, and its impact on their relationships with health care organizations. METHODS:This was a qualitative study focused on EMS clinicians involved in rural prehospital care at a single Midwestern academic medical center. Using a phenomenological framework, semi-structured interviews were conducted with medical directors, service directors, fire captains, air medical personnel, emergency medical responders, emergency medical technicians, advanced emergency medical technicians, and paramedics, all of whom were selected through purposive sampling. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and independently coded by two trained reviewers. RESULTS:Twenty participants (11 frontline clinicians and 9 administrative staff members) with a wide range of clinical experience from 14 air and ground EMS agencies were interviewed. Emerging themes included: (1) the value or usefulness of feedback; (2) desired feedback system characteristics; (3) barriers to receiving feedback; (4) utilization and application of feedback; and (5) the feedback's impact on the relationship with health care organizations. Participants felt that clinical feedback from hospitals was especially important as a method of improving quality of care, though was rarely provided. Professional development was seen as a major benefit of receiving clinical feedback from hospitals. CONCLUSION:Our results suggest that consistent clinical feedback provided by hospitals was valued. Establishing a culture of providing organized feedback to practicing rural EMS clinicians is important for professional development and can strengthen the relationships between EMS clinicians and hospitals. These study findings can assist in the development and implementation of a standardized feedback instrument to benefit rural EMS clinicians, patients, and the health care system as a whole.

ObjectivesSurvival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) remains lower in rural areas. Longer Emergency Medical Services (EMS) response times suggests that rural OHCA survival may need to rely more on early bystander intervention. This study compares the rates of bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) between rural and urban areas and examines societal factors associated with bystander CPR. MethodsThis study was a retrospective cohort study using merged county-level data from the National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS) sample from 2019 and 2020, the 2019 American Community Survey, and the Bureau of Health Care Workforce data. We included all adults (age >= 18) with OHCA who were treated by an EMS clinician reporting data to NEMSIS, with the primary exposure of OHCA rurality, and the primary outcome of bystander CPR by a member of the public. Rurality was assigned using the Rural Urban Commuting Area code associated with the OHCA location. Cases were excluded if there was an indication for witnesses identified as health care personnel, the incident occurred at a health care site, or geographical data were not available. The association between patient- and community-level covariates and bystander CPR were measured using generalized estimating equations to model the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), clustering on county. ResultsA total of 99,171 OHCA patients were identified and 60.9% (n = 60,380) received bystander CPR. Patients with OHCA living in isolated small rural towns (aOR: 1.57, 95%CI: 1.28-1.91) were more likely to have bystander CPR when compared to those living in urban cities. The odds of bystander CPR was lower in counties with larger populations of those without high school diplomas (e.g. >15% vs <= 6%, aOR: 0.56; 95%CI: 0.51-0.61), non-Caucasian populations (e.g. >40% vs <= 10%, aOR: 0.83; 95%CI: 0.76-0.91), and older populations (e.g. >14% vs <= 9%, aOR: 0.82; 95%CI: 0.74-0.91). ConclusionsWe observed lower rates of bystander CPR in communities with lower education, higher rates of non-Caucasian populations, and older populations. Our findings emphasize the need for public interventions in bystander CPR training to meet the needs of diverse community characteristics, and particularly in areas where EMS response times may be longer.

ObjectiveThere are over 300,000 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) annually in the United States (US) and despite many scientific advances in the field, the survival rate remains low. We seek to determine if return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) is higher when use of emergency medical dispatch (EMD) protocols is documented for OHCA calls compared to when no EMD protocol use is documented. We also seek identify care-related processes that differ in calls that use EMD protocols.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of U.S. adults with OHCA prior to emergency medical services (EMS) arrival using 2019 National EMS Information System data. The primary exposure was EMD usage during EMS call. The primary outcome was prehospital ROSC, and secondary outcomes included automated external defibrillator (AED) use before EMS arrival, bystander CPR, and end-of-event EMS survival (survival to the end of the EMS care at transport destination). Multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, primary insurance, rurality, initial rhythm, arrest etiology, and witnessed arrest.ResultsOf the 96,269 OHCA cases included, EMD use was documented in 73%. Overall, 26% of subjects achieved ROSC in EMS care. EMD subjects were more likely to achieve ROSC (27.2% vs. 23.5%, uOR 1.22, 95%CI 1.18 - 1.26) even after adjusting for subject and arrest characteristics (aOR 1.13, 95%CI 1.08 - 1.17). EMD subjects also had higher end-of-event survival (19.1% vs. 16.4%, aOR 1.20, 95%CI 1.15 - 1.25). AED use before EMS arrival was more common in the EMD group (28.3% vs. 26.3% %diff 2.0, 95%CI 1.4 to 2.6), as was CPR before EMS arrival (63.8% vs. 55.1%, difference 8.6%, 95%CI 7.9 to 9.3%).ConclusionsIn this retrospective analysis, the rate of ROSC was higher in adult OHCA patients when EMD protocol use was reported compared to when it was not reported. The group with documented EMD use also experienced higher rates of bystander AED use, bystander CPR, and end-of-event survival.

PurposeSepsis is a common cause of death. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services severe sepsis/septic shock (SEP-1) bundle is focused on improving sepsis outcomes, but it is unknown which quality improvement (QI) practices are associated with SEP-1 compliance and reduced sepsis mortality. The objectives of this study were to compare sepsis QI practices in SEP-1 reporting and nonreporting hospitals and to measure the association between sepsis QI processes, SEP-1 performance, and sepsis mortality.Materials and MethodsThis study linked survey data on QI practices from Iowa hospitals to SEP-1 performance data and mortality. Characteristics of hospitals and sepsis QI practices were compared by SEP-1 reporting status. Univariable and multivariable logistic and linear regression estimated the association of QI practices with SEP-1 performance and observed-to-expected sepsis mortality ratios.ResultsOne hundred percent of Iowa's 118 hospitals completed the survey. SEP-1 reporting hospitals were more likely to have sepsis QI practices, including reporting sepsis quality to providers (64% versus 38%, P = 0.026) and using the case review process to develop sepsis care plans (87% versus 64%, P = 0.013). Sepsis QI practices were not associated with increased SEP-1 scores. A sepsis registry was associated with decreased odds of being in the bottom quartile of sepsis mortality (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.14 to 0.96, P = 0.041), and presence of a sepsis committee was associated with lower hospital-specific mortality (observed-to-expected ratio, -0.11; 95% confidence interval, -0.20 to 0.01).ConclusionsHospitals reporting SEP-1 compliance conduct more sepsis QI practices. Most QI practices are not associated with increased SEP-1 performance or decreased sepsis mortality. Future work could explore how to implement these performance improvement practices in hospitals not reporting SEP-1 compliance.

Introduction: Ketamine is commonly used to treat profound agitation in the prehospital setting. Early in ketamine's prehospital use, intubation after arrival in the emergency department (ED) was frequent. We sought to measure the frequency of ED intubation at a Midwest academic medical center after prehospital ketamine use for profound agitation, hypothesizing that intubation has become less frequent as prehospital ketamine has become more common and prehospital dosing has improved. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients receiving ketamine in the prehospital setting for profound agitation and transported to a midwestern, 60,000-visit, Level 1 trauma center between January 1, 2017-March 1, 2021. We report descriptive analyses of patient-level prehospital clinical data and ED outcomes. The primary outcome was proportion of patients intubated in the ED. Results: A total of 78 patients received ketamine in the prehospital setting (69% male, mean age 36 years). Of the 42 (54%) admitted patients, 15 (36% of admissions) were admissions to the intensive care unit. Overall, 12% (95% confidence interval [CI]), 4.5-18.6%)] of patients were intubated, and indications included agitation (n = 4), airway protection not otherwise specified (n = 4), and respiratory failure (n = 1). Conclusion: Endotracheal intubation in the ED after prehospital ketamine use for profound agitation in our study sample was found to be less than previously reported.

Objective: Sepsis is a common cause of death in hospitalized patients. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service (CMS) Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Bundle (SEP-1) is an evidence-based early management bundle focused on improving sepsis outcomes. It is unknown which quality improvement (QI) practices are associated with SEP-1 compliance and if those practices reduce sepsis mortality. The objectives of this study were to compare sepsis QI practices in SEP-1 reporting and non-reporting hospitals and to measure the association between specific elements of sepsis QI processes and SEP-1 performance and hospital-specific risk-adjusted sepsis mortality. Design, Setting, and Patients: This mixed methods study linked telephone survey data on QI practices from Iowa hospitals to SEP-1 performance data and risk-adjusted mortality from statewide all-payer administrative claims database. The survey assessed sepsis QI practices in eight categories. Characteristics of hospitals and sepsis QI practices were compared by SEP-1 reporting status. Univariable and multivariable logistic and linear regression estimated the association of QI practices with hospital SEP-1 performance and observed-to-expected sepsis mortality ratios. Interventions: None Measurements and Main Results: All 118 Iowa hospitals completed the survey (100% response rate). SEP-1 reporting hospitals were more likely to have sepsis QI practices, including reporting sepsis quality to providers (64% vs. 38%, p = 0.026) and using the case review process to develop sepsis care plans (87% vs. 64%, p = 0.013). Sepsis QI practices were not associated with increased SEP-1 scores. Two were associated with reduced mortality: having a sepsis committee B= -0.11, p = 0.036) and using case review results for sepsis care plans (B= -0.10, p = 0.049). Conclusions: Hospitals reporting SEP-1 compliance to CMS conduct more sepsis QI practices. Most QI practices are not associated with increased SEP-1 performance or decreased sepsis mortality. Future work could explore how to implement these performance improvement practices in hospitals not reporting SEP-1 compliance.

PURPOSE:Early recognition and prompt prehospital care is a cornerstone of acute stroke treatment. Residents of rural areas have worse access to stroke services than urban residents. The purpose of this study was to (1) describe US trends in rural-urban stroke mortality and (2) identify possible factors associated with rural-urban stroke case-fatality disparities.METHODS:This study was a nationwide retrospective cohort study of stroke admissions. The primary exposure was rurality of patient's residence. The primary outcome was death during hospital encounter. The secondary outcome was discharge to a care facility or home healthcare. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions estimated the odds of mortality by subject rurality among stroke subjects.FINDINGS:Rural stroke subjects had higher mortality than nonrural counterparts (18.6% rural vs 16.9% nonrural). After adjustment for patient and hospital factors, patient rurality was associated with increased odds of mortality (aOR = 1.11; 95% CI: 1.06-1.15; P < .001). For the secondary outcome of discharge to home, rural stroke subjects were less likely to be discharged to a care facility than nonrural stroke visits (aOR 0.94; 95% CI: 0.91-0.97; P < .001). Results were similar after adjusting for thrombolytics administration and transfer status.CONCLUSIONS:Rural stroke patients have higher mortality than their urban counterparts likely due to their increased burden of chronic disease, lower health literacy, and reduced access to prompt prehospital care. There may be an opportunity for emergency medical services systems to assist in increasing stroke awareness for both patients and clinicians and to establish response patterns to expedite emergency care.

BACKGROUND:It is challenging to detect posterior circulation strokes in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute dizziness. The current approach uses a combinatorial head-impulse, nystagmus, and test-of-skew method and is sensitive enough to differentiate central causes from peripheral ones. However, it is difficult to perform and underused. Further, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain is not always available and can have low sensitivity for detecting posterior circulation strokes. OBJECTIVES:We evaluated the feasibility and utility of the bucket test (BT), which measures the difference between patient's subjective perception of the visual vertical and the true vertical, as a screening tool for stroke in patients presenting to the ED with acute dizziness. METHODS:In this work, we prospectively enrolled 81 patients that presented to our academic medical center ED with dizziness as their chief complaint. The BT was performed 3 times for every patient. RESULTS:Seventy-one patients met the study criteria and were included in the analysis. Ten patients were excluded because of a history of drug-seeking behavior. There were no reported difficulties performing the BT. Six patients (8%) were diagnosed with ischemic stroke on MRI and 1 additional patient was diagnosed with transient ischemic attack and found to have a stroke on subsequent MRI. All 7 patients with dizziness attributed to cerebrovascular etiology had an abnormal BT, resulting in a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 59-100%). The specificity of the BT was 38% (95% CI 24-52%). The positive predictive value of the BT for detecting stroke was 18% (95% CI 15-21%). CONCLUSIONS:The BT is an easy, cheap, safe, and quick test that is feasible and sensitive to screen acutely dizzy patients for stroke in the ED.

Background Emergency department utilization and crowding is increasing, putting additional pressure on emergency medicine (EM) residency programs to train efficient residents who can meet these demands. Specific practices associated with resident efficiency have yet to be identified. The objective of this study was to identify practices associated with enhanced efficiency in EM residents. Methods A mixed-methods study design was utilized to identify behaviors associated with resident efficiency. In Stage 1, eight EM faculty provided 61 efficiency behaviors during semistructured interviews, which were prioritized into eight behaviors by independent ranking. A total of 31 behaviors were tested, including additions from previous literature and the study team. In Stage 2, two 4-hour observations during separate shifts of 27 EM residents were performed to record minute-by-minute timing and frequency of each behavior. In Stage 3, the association between resident efficiency and each of the behaviors was estimated using multivariable regression models adjusted for training year and clustered on resident. The primary efficiency outcome was 6-month average relative value units/hour. A sensitivity analysis was performed using patients/hour. Results Seven practices were positively associated with efficiency: average patient load, taking initial patient history with nurse present (number/hour, number/new patient), running the board (number/hour), conversations with other care team members (number/hour, % time), dictation use (number/hour, % time), smartphone text communication (number/hour, % time), and nonwork tasks (number/hour). Three practices were negatively associated with efficiency: visits to patient room (number/patient), conversations with attending physicians (% time), and reviewing electronic medical record (number/hour). Conclusion Several discrete behaviors were found to be associated with enhanced resident efficiency. These results can be utilized by EM residency programs to improve resident education and inform evaluations by providing specific, evidence-based practices for residents to develop and improve upon throughout training.

PURPOSE:This study aimed to describe the care provide by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) to severe sepsis patients being transferred between acute care hospitals and identify how that care contributes to sepsis care goals.METHODS:This was a single-center retrospective cohort study conducted at a 60,000-visit Midwestern academic emergency department, using run reports from 13 ambulance services transferring from 9 hospitals.RESULTS:39 patients were included in the final cohort, transferred by 13 ambulance services from 9 hospitals. Included patients were adults with severe sepsis transferred by ambulance between 2009 and 2014. Thirty-nine patients were included in this cohort. 41% (n = 12) of patients received an adequate fluid bolus of 30 mL/kg (median 42.9 mL/kg crystalloid fluid, IQR 8.0 mL/kg) prior to tertiary care arrival. Seventeen percent (n = 2) of patients completed the adequate bolus during transfer time. Broad-spectrum antibiotics were initiated during transfer in 2 patients.CONCLUSIONS:EMS sepsis care during transfer was limited. EMS crews primarily continued treatments previously initiated and did not take additional steps toward resuscitation targets. Data suggests the inter-emergency department transfer period may provide an opportunity to continue working toward treatment targets, though the time is currently underutilized.

Background: Analgesics, sedatives, and neuromuscular blockers are commonly used medications for mechanically ventilated air medical transport patients. Prior research in the emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) has demonstrated that depth of sedation is associated with increased mechanical ventilation duration, delirium, increased hospital length-of-stay (LOS), and decreased survival. The objectives of this study were to evaluate current sedation practices in the prehospital setting and to determine the impact on clinical outcomes. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of mechanically ventilated patients transferred by air ambulance to a single 812-bed Midwestern academic medical center from July 2013 to May 2018 was conducted. Prehospital sedation medications and depth of sedation [Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score (RASS)] were measured. Primary outcome was hospital LOS. Secondary outcomes were delirium, length of mechanical ventilation, in-hospital mortality, and need for neurosurgical procedures. Univariate analyses were used to measure the association between sedatives, sedation depth, and clinical outcomes. Multivariable models adjusted for potentially confounding covariates to measure the impact of predictors on clinical outcomes. Results: Three hundred twenty-seven patients were included. Among those patients, 79.2% of patients received sedatives, with 41% of these patients achieving deep sedation (RASS = -4). Among patients receiving sedation, 58.3% received at least one dose of benzodiazepines. Moderate and deep sedation was associated with an increase in LOS of 59% (aRR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.40-1.81) and 24% (aRR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.10-1.40), respectively. Benzodiazepines were associated with a mean increase of 2.9 days in the hospital (95% CI, 0.7-5.1). No association existed between either specific medications or depth of sedation and the development of delirium. Conclusions: Prehospital moderate and deep sedation, as well as benzodiazepine administration, is associated with increased hospital LOS. Our findings point toward sedation being a modifiable risk factor and suggest an important need for further research of sedation practices in the prehospital setting.