Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background -</p> <p>Prehospital care is classified into ALS- (advanced life support) and BLS- (basic life support) levels according to the methods used. ALS-level prehospital care uses invasive methods, such as intravenous fluids, medications and intu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ryynänen Olli-Pekka, Iirola Timo, Reitala Janne, Pälve Heikki, Malmivaara Antti
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2010-11-01
Series:Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
Online Access:http://www.sjtrem.com/content/18/1/62
_version_ 1818701721001525248
author Ryynänen Olli-Pekka
Iirola Timo
Reitala Janne
Pälve Heikki
Malmivaara Antti
author_facet Ryynänen Olli-Pekka
Iirola Timo
Reitala Janne
Pälve Heikki
Malmivaara Antti
author_sort Ryynänen Olli-Pekka
collection DOAJ
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background -</p> <p>Prehospital care is classified into ALS- (advanced life support) and BLS- (basic life support) levels according to the methods used. ALS-level prehospital care uses invasive methods, such as intravenous fluids, medications and intubation. However, the effectiveness of ALS care compared to BLS has been questionable.</p> <p>Aim -</p> <p>The aim of this systematic review is to compare the effectiveness of ALS- and BLS-level prehospital care.</p> <p>Material and methods -</p> <p>In a systematic review, articles where ALS-level prehospital care was compared to BLS-level or any other treatment were included. The outcome variables were mortality or patient's health-related quality of life or patient's capacity to perform daily activities.</p> <p>Results -</p> <p>We identified 46 articles, mostly retrospective observational studies. The results on the effectiveness of ALS in unselected patient cohorts are contradictory. In cardiac arrest, early cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation are essential for survival, but prehospital ALS interventions have not improved survival. Prehospital thrombolytic treatment reduces mortality in patients having a myocardial infarction. The majority of research into trauma favours BLS in the case of penetrating trauma and also in cases of short distance to a hospital. In patients with severe head injuries, ALS provided by paramedics and intubation without anaesthesia can even be harmful. If the prehospital care is provided by an experienced physician and by a HEMS organisation (Helicopter Emergency Medical Service), ALS interventions may be beneficial for patients with multiple injuries and severe brain injuries. However, the results are contradictory.</p> <p>Conclusions -</p> <p>ALS seems to improve survival in patients with myocardial infarction and BLS seems to be the proper level of care for patients with penetrating injuries. Some studies indicate a beneficial effect of ALS among patients with blunt head injuries or multiple injuries. There is also some evidence in favour of ALS among patients with epileptic seizures as well as those with a respiratory distress.</p>
first_indexed 2024-12-17T15:25:20Z
format Article
id doaj.art-8de6059901ac4805a3a5652a2165a371
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1757-7241
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-17T15:25:20Z
publishDate 2010-11-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
spelling doaj.art-8de6059901ac4805a3a5652a2165a3712022-12-21T21:43:18ZengBMCScandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine1757-72412010-11-011816210.1186/1757-7241-18-62Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic reviewRyynänen Olli-PekkaIirola TimoReitala JannePälve HeikkiMalmivaara Antti<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background -</p> <p>Prehospital care is classified into ALS- (advanced life support) and BLS- (basic life support) levels according to the methods used. ALS-level prehospital care uses invasive methods, such as intravenous fluids, medications and intubation. However, the effectiveness of ALS care compared to BLS has been questionable.</p> <p>Aim -</p> <p>The aim of this systematic review is to compare the effectiveness of ALS- and BLS-level prehospital care.</p> <p>Material and methods -</p> <p>In a systematic review, articles where ALS-level prehospital care was compared to BLS-level or any other treatment were included. The outcome variables were mortality or patient's health-related quality of life or patient's capacity to perform daily activities.</p> <p>Results -</p> <p>We identified 46 articles, mostly retrospective observational studies. The results on the effectiveness of ALS in unselected patient cohorts are contradictory. In cardiac arrest, early cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation are essential for survival, but prehospital ALS interventions have not improved survival. Prehospital thrombolytic treatment reduces mortality in patients having a myocardial infarction. The majority of research into trauma favours BLS in the case of penetrating trauma and also in cases of short distance to a hospital. In patients with severe head injuries, ALS provided by paramedics and intubation without anaesthesia can even be harmful. If the prehospital care is provided by an experienced physician and by a HEMS organisation (Helicopter Emergency Medical Service), ALS interventions may be beneficial for patients with multiple injuries and severe brain injuries. However, the results are contradictory.</p> <p>Conclusions -</p> <p>ALS seems to improve survival in patients with myocardial infarction and BLS seems to be the proper level of care for patients with penetrating injuries. Some studies indicate a beneficial effect of ALS among patients with blunt head injuries or multiple injuries. There is also some evidence in favour of ALS among patients with epileptic seizures as well as those with a respiratory distress.</p>http://www.sjtrem.com/content/18/1/62
spellingShingle Ryynänen Olli-Pekka
Iirola Timo
Reitala Janne
Pälve Heikki
Malmivaara Antti
Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
title Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title_full Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title_fullStr Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title_short Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title_sort is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care a systematic review
url http://www.sjtrem.com/content/18/1/62
work_keys_str_mv AT ryynanenollipekka isadvancedlifesupportbetterthanbasiclifesupportinprehospitalcareasystematicreview
AT iirolatimo isadvancedlifesupportbetterthanbasiclifesupportinprehospitalcareasystematicreview
AT reitalajanne isadvancedlifesupportbetterthanbasiclifesupportinprehospitalcareasystematicreview
AT palveheikki isadvancedlifesupportbetterthanbasiclifesupportinprehospitalcareasystematicreview
AT malmivaaraantti isadvancedlifesupportbetterthanbasiclifesupportinprehospitalcareasystematicreview