The Association of Prehospital Intravenous Fluids and Mortality in Patients with Penetrating Trauma |
| |
Authors: | Sam A. Bores William Pajerowski Brendan G. Carr Daniel Holena Zachary F. Meisel C. Crawford Mechem Roger A. Band |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina;2. Wharton School of Business, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;3. Department of Emergency Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;4. Division of Traumatology, Surgical Critical Care, and Emergency Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;5. Philadelphia Fire Department, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania |
| |
Abstract: | BackgroundThe optimal approach to prehospital care of trauma patients is controversial, and thought to require balancing advanced field interventions with rapid transport to definitive care.ObjectiveWe sought principally to examine any association between the amount of prehospital IV fluid (IVF) administered and mortality.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of trauma registry data patients who sustained penetrating trauma between January 2008 and February 2011, as identified in the Pennsylvania Trauma Systems Foundation registry with corresponding prehospital records from the Philadelphia Fire Department. Analyses were conducted with logistic regression models and instrumental variable analysis, adjusted for injury severity using scene vital signs before the intervention was delivered.ResultsThere were 1966 patients identified. Overall mortality was 22.60%. Approximately two-thirds received fluids and one-third did not. Both cohorts had similar Trauma and Injury Severity Score?predicted mortality. Mortality was similar in those who received IVF (23.43%) and those who did not (21.30%) (p = 0.212). Patients who received IVF had longer mean scene times (10.82 min) than those who did not (9.18 min) (p < 0.0001), although call times were similar in those who received IVF (24.14 min) and those who did not (23.83 min) (p = 0.637). Adjusted analysis of 1722 patients demonstrated no benefit or harm associated with prehospital fluid (odds ratio [OR] 0.905, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47–1.75). Instrumental variable analysis utilizing variations in use of IVF across different Emergency Medical Services (EMS) units also found no association between the unit's percentage of patients that were provided fluids and mortality (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96–1.08).ConclusionsWe found no significant difference in mortality or EMS call time between patients who did or did not receive prehospital IVF after penetrating trauma. |
| |
Keywords: | resuscitation prehospital care |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|