Paramedics' and pre-hospital physicians' assessments of anatomic injury in trauma patients: a cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The pre-hospital assessment of a blunt trauma is difficult. Common triage tools are the mechanism of injury (MOI), vital signs, and anatomic injury (AI). Compared to the other tools, the clinical assessment of anatomic injury is more...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pitkäniemi Janne, Niemelä Mika, Handolin Lauri, Kirves Hetti, Randell Tarja
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/18/1/60
_version_ 1818212620676628480
author Pitkäniemi Janne
Niemelä Mika
Handolin Lauri
Kirves Hetti
Randell Tarja
author_facet Pitkäniemi Janne
Niemelä Mika
Handolin Lauri
Kirves Hetti
Randell Tarja
author_sort Pitkäniemi Janne
collection DOAJ
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The pre-hospital assessment of a blunt trauma is difficult. Common triage tools are the mechanism of injury (MOI), vital signs, and anatomic injury (AI). Compared to the other tools, the clinical assessment of anatomic injury is more subjective than the others, and, hence, more dependent on the skills of the personnel.</p> <p>The aim of the study was to estimate whether the training and qualifications of the personnel are associated with the accuracy of prediction of anatomic injury and the completion of pre-hospital procedures indicated by local guidelines.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Adult trauma patients met by a trauma team at Helsinki University Trauma Centre during a 12-month period (n = 422) were retrospectively analysed. To evaluate the accuracy of prediction of anatomic injury, clinically assessed pre-hospital injuries in six body regions were compared to injuries assessed at hospital in two patient groups, the patients treated by pre-hospital physicians (group 1, n = 230) and those treated by paramedics (group 2, n = 190).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The groups were comparable in respect to age, sex, and MOI, but the patients treated by physicians were more severely injured than those treated by paramedics [ISS median (interquartile range) 16 (6-26) vs. 6 (2-10)], thus rendering direct comparison of the groups ineligible. The positive predictive values (95% confidence interval) of assessed injury were highest in head injury [0,91 (0,84-0,95) in group 1 and 0,86 (0,77-0,92) in group 2]. The negative predictive values were highest in abdominal injury [0,85 (0,79-0,89) in group 1 and 0,90 (0,84-0,93) in group 2]. The measurements of agreement between injuries assessed pre- and in-hospitally were moderate in thoracic and extremity injuries. Substantial kappa values (95% confidence interval) were achieved in head injury, 0,67 (0,57-0,77) in group 1 and 0,63 (0,52-0,74) in group 2. The rate of performing the pre-hospital procedures as indicated by the local instructions was 95-99%, except for decompression of tension pneumothorax.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Accurate prediction of anatomic injury is challenging. No conclusive differences were seen in the ability of pre-hospital physicians and paramedics to predict anatomic injury in the respective patient populations.</p>
first_indexed 2024-12-12T05:51:18Z
format Article
id doaj.art-fb03d7f9ffbe4883ba51bb09efb7589e
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1757-7241
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-12T05:51:18Z
publishDate 2010-11-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
spelling doaj.art-fb03d7f9ffbe4883ba51bb09efb7589e2022-12-22T00:35:41ZengBMCScandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine1757-72412010-11-011816010.1186/1757-7241-18-60Paramedics' and pre-hospital physicians' assessments of anatomic injury in trauma patients: a cohort studyPitkäniemi JanneNiemelä MikaHandolin LauriKirves HettiRandell Tarja<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The pre-hospital assessment of a blunt trauma is difficult. Common triage tools are the mechanism of injury (MOI), vital signs, and anatomic injury (AI). Compared to the other tools, the clinical assessment of anatomic injury is more subjective than the others, and, hence, more dependent on the skills of the personnel.</p> <p>The aim of the study was to estimate whether the training and qualifications of the personnel are associated with the accuracy of prediction of anatomic injury and the completion of pre-hospital procedures indicated by local guidelines.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Adult trauma patients met by a trauma team at Helsinki University Trauma Centre during a 12-month period (n = 422) were retrospectively analysed. To evaluate the accuracy of prediction of anatomic injury, clinically assessed pre-hospital injuries in six body regions were compared to injuries assessed at hospital in two patient groups, the patients treated by pre-hospital physicians (group 1, n = 230) and those treated by paramedics (group 2, n = 190).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The groups were comparable in respect to age, sex, and MOI, but the patients treated by physicians were more severely injured than those treated by paramedics [ISS median (interquartile range) 16 (6-26) vs. 6 (2-10)], thus rendering direct comparison of the groups ineligible. The positive predictive values (95% confidence interval) of assessed injury were highest in head injury [0,91 (0,84-0,95) in group 1 and 0,86 (0,77-0,92) in group 2]. The negative predictive values were highest in abdominal injury [0,85 (0,79-0,89) in group 1 and 0,90 (0,84-0,93) in group 2]. The measurements of agreement between injuries assessed pre- and in-hospitally were moderate in thoracic and extremity injuries. Substantial kappa values (95% confidence interval) were achieved in head injury, 0,67 (0,57-0,77) in group 1 and 0,63 (0,52-0,74) in group 2. The rate of performing the pre-hospital procedures as indicated by the local instructions was 95-99%, except for decompression of tension pneumothorax.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Accurate prediction of anatomic injury is challenging. No conclusive differences were seen in the ability of pre-hospital physicians and paramedics to predict anatomic injury in the respective patient populations.</p>http://www.sjtrem.com/content/18/1/60
spellingShingle Pitkäniemi Janne
Niemelä Mika
Handolin Lauri
Kirves Hetti
Randell Tarja
Paramedics' and pre-hospital physicians' assessments of anatomic injury in trauma patients: a cohort study
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
title Paramedics' and pre-hospital physicians' assessments of anatomic injury in trauma patients: a cohort study
title_full Paramedics' and pre-hospital physicians' assessments of anatomic injury in trauma patients: a cohort study
title_fullStr Paramedics' and pre-hospital physicians' assessments of anatomic injury in trauma patients: a cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Paramedics' and pre-hospital physicians' assessments of anatomic injury in trauma patients: a cohort study
title_short Paramedics' and pre-hospital physicians' assessments of anatomic injury in trauma patients: a cohort study
title_sort paramedics and pre hospital physicians assessments of anatomic injury in trauma patients a cohort study
url http://www.sjtrem.com/content/18/1/60
work_keys_str_mv AT pitkaniemijanne paramedicsandprehospitalphysiciansassessmentsofanatomicinjuryintraumapatientsacohortstudy
AT niemelamika paramedicsandprehospitalphysiciansassessmentsofanatomicinjuryintraumapatientsacohortstudy
AT handolinlauri paramedicsandprehospitalphysiciansassessmentsofanatomicinjuryintraumapatientsacohortstudy
AT kirveshetti paramedicsandprehospitalphysiciansassessmentsofanatomicinjuryintraumapatientsacohortstudy
AT randelltarja paramedicsandprehospitalphysiciansassessmentsofanatomicinjuryintraumapatientsacohortstudy