Impact of prehospital rapid sequence intubation and mechanical ventilation on prehospital vital signs and outcome in trauma patients

0Citations
Citations of this article
30Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Introduction. Medications during rapid sequence intubation (RSI) have known detrimental side effects. Prehospital mechanical ventilation after successful endotracheal intubation also increases mortality due to hyperventilation and positive pressure ventilation. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to determine the impact of RSI on prehospital hemodynamic parameters and prehospital ventilation status on mortality rate and functional outcome in trauma patients. Methods. Charts of 73 trauma patients, who underwent prehospital RSI over a 12- year period, were retrospectively reviewed. Prehospital vital signs, before and after RSI, were compared. Patients were divided, according to ventilation status, into three groups based on initial PaCO2: hypocarbic/ hyperventilated (PaCO2<35mmHg), normocarbic/normoventilated (PaCO2 35-45 mmHg) and hypercarbic/hypoventilated (PaCO2>45mmHg). Results. Seventy-three patients were enrolled in the retrospective analysis. There was a significant difference in respiratory rate (p=0.046), arterial oxygen saturation (p<0.001), mean arterial pressure (p<0.001) and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) (p<0.001) before and after RSI. GCS at discharge (p=0.003) and arterial oxygen saturation (p=0.05) were significantly higher in the normoventilated group. There was no significant difference in survival to hospital discharge among compared groups. Conclusion. Our retrospective analysis suggests that prehospital RSI has no detrimental hemodynamic side effects and that normoventilation leads to a favorable neurological outcome.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pelcl, T., Lesjak, V. B., Vujanović, V., & Strnad, M. (2017). Impact of prehospital rapid sequence intubation and mechanical ventilation on prehospital vital signs and outcome in trauma patients. Signa Vitae, 13(1), 51–55. https://doi.org/10.22514/SV131.042017.23

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free