Human patients or simulators for teaching endotracheal intubation: whom are we fooling?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Donald M Yealy.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: Despite the development of evidence-based pneumonia guidelines, limited data exist on the most effective means to implement guideline recommendations into clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of 3 guideline implementation strategies. DESIGN: Cluster-randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: 32 emergency departments in Pennsylvania and Connecticut. PATIENTS: 3219 patients with a clinical and radiographic diagnosis of pneumonia. INTERVENTIONS: The authors implemented a project-developed guideline for the initial site of treatment based on the Pneumonia Severity Index and performance of evidence-based processes of care at the emergency department level. Guideline implementation strategies were defined as low (n = 8), moderate (n = 12), and high intensity (n = 12). MEASUREMENTS: Effectiveness outcomes were the rate at which low-risk patients were treated on an outpatient basis and the performance of recommended processes of care. Safety outcomes included death, subsequent hospitalization for outpatients, and medical complications for inpatients. RESULTS: More low-risk patients (n = 1901) were treated as outpatients in the moderate-intensity and high-intensity groups than in the low-intensity group (high-intensity group, 61.9%; moderate-intensity group, 61.0%; low-intensity group, 37.5%; P = 0.004). More outpatients (n = 1125) in the high-intensity group received all 4 recommended processes of care (high-intensity group, 60.9%; moderate-intensity group, 28.3%; low-intensity group, 25.3%; P < 0.001); more inpatients (n = 2076) in the high-intensity group received all 4 recommended processes of care (high-intensity group, 44.3%; moderate-intensity group, 30.1%; low-intensity group, 23.0%; P < 0.001). No statistically significant differences in safety outcomes were observed across interventions. LIMITATIONS: Twenty percent of eligible patients were not enrolled, and data on effectiveness outcomes were not collected before the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Both moderate-intensity and high-intensity guideline implementation strategies safely increased the proportion of low-risk patients with pneumonia who were treated as outpatients. The high-intensity strategy was most effective for increasing the performance of the recommended processes of care for outpatients and inpatients.
PURPOSE: We assessed the performance of 3 validated prognostic rules in predicting 30-day mortality in community-acquired pneumonia: the 20 variable Pneumonia Severity Index and the easier to calculate CURB (confusion, urea nitrogen, respiratory rate, blood pressure) and CURB-65 severity scores. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We prospectively followed 3181 patients with community-acquired pneumonia from 32 hospital emergency departments (January-December 2001) and assessed mortality 30 days after initial presentation. Patients were stratified into Pneumonia Severity Index risk classes (I-V) and CURB (0-4) and CURB-65 (0-5) risk strata. We compared the discriminatory power (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of these rules to predict mortality and their accuracy based on sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios. RESULTS: The Pneumonia Severity Index (risk classes I-III) classified a greater proportion of patients as low risk (68% [2152/3181]) than either a CURB score <1 (51% [1635/3181]) or a CURB-65 score <2 (61% [1952/3181]). Low-risk patients identified based on the Pneumonia Severity Index had a slightly lower mortality (1.4% [31/2152]) than patients classified as low-risk based on the CURB (1.7% [28/1635]) or the CURB-65 (1.7% [33/1952]). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was higher for the Pneumonia Severity Index (0.81) than for either the CURB (0.73) or CURB-65 (0.76) scores (P <0.001, for each pairwise comparison). At comparable cut-points, the Pneumonia Severity Index had a higher sensitivity and a somewhat higher negative predictive value for mortality than either CURB score. CONCLUSIONS: The more complex Pneumonia Severity Index has a higher discriminatory power for short-term mortality, defines a greater proportion of patients at low risk, and is slightly more accurate in identifying patients at low risk than either CURB score.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the agreement between prospectively and retrospectively determined variables comprising the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), assignment to PSI risk class, and designation as low risk, based on these two methods of data collection. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We analyzed data from a randomized trial of patients with community-acquired pneumonia managed in 32 hospital emergency departments (EDs). For all enrolled patients, the 20 PSI variables were collected prospectively by ED providers and retrospectively by medical record abstractors. We examined the agreement for each of the 20 PSI variables, assignment to the five PSI risk classes, and classification of patients as low (classes I-III) vs. high (classes IV and V) risk. Agreement was measured using total percent agreement and the kappa statistic. RESULTS: Among the 3,220 enrolled patients, percent agreement was >90% for 18 of the 20 variables comprising the PSI, with most unweighted kappa's being >0.6. Agreement was substantial for assignment to PSI risk class (percent agreement: 92.7%; weighted kappa: 0.79) and for classification as low vs. high risk (percent agreement: 88.5%; unweighted kappa: 0.74). CONCLUSION: There was substantial agreement between retrospective and prospective assignment to PSI risk class, classification as low vs. high risk, and the determination of most individual variables that constitute the PSI.
OBJECTIVE: Out-of-hospital rescuers likely need regular clinical experience to perform endotracheal intubation (ETI) in a safe and effective manner. We sought to determine the frequency of ETI performed by individual out-of-hospital rescuers. DESIGN: Analysis of an administrative database of all emergency medical services (EMS) patient care reports in Pennsylvania. SETTING: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from January 1 to December 31, 2003. SUBJECTS: EMS advanced life support rescuers (paramedics, prehospital nurses, and EMS physicians) who reported at least one patient contact during the study period. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: We calculated individual rescuer ETI frequency and opportunity. We evaluated relationships between ETI frequency and the number of patient contacts. We also examined the relationship with practice setting (air medical vs. ground rescuers and urban vs. rural rescuers). MAIN RESULTS: In 1,544,791 patient care reports, 11,484 ETIs were reported by 5,245 out-of-hospital rescuers. The median ETI frequency was one (interquartile range, 0-3; range, 0-23). Of 5,245 rescuers, >67% (3,551) performed two or fewer ETIs, and >39% (2,054) rescuers did not perform any ETIs. The median number of ETI opportunities was three (interquartile range, 0-6; range, 0-76). ETI frequency was associated with patient volume (Spearman's rho = 0.67) and was higher for air medical (p = .006) and urban (p < .0001) rescuers. ETI frequency was not associated with response (Spearman's rho = -0.01) or transport (Spearman's rho = -0.06) times. CONCLUSIONS: Out-of-hospital ETI, an important and difficult resuscitation intervention, is an uncommon event for most rescuers.
OBJECTIVES: To derive a prediction rule using data available in the emergency department (ED) to identify a group of patients hospitalized for the treatment of heart failure who are at low risk of death and serious complications. METHODS: The authors analyzed data for all 33,533 patients with a primary hospital discharge diagnosis of heart failure in 1999 who were admitted from EDs in Pennsylvania. Candidate predictors were demographic and medical history variables and the most abnormal examination or diagnostic test values measured in the ED (vital signs only) or on the first day of hospitalization. The authors constructed classification trees to identify a subgroup of patients with an observed rate of death or serious medical complications before discharge < 2%; the tree that identified the subgroup with the lowest rate of this outcome and an inpatient mortality rate < 1% was chosen. RESULTS: Within the entire cohort, 4.5% of patients died and 6.8% survived to hospital discharge after experiencing a serious medical complication. The prediction rule used 21 prognostic factors to classify 17.2% of patients as low risk; 19 (0.3%) died and 59 (1.0%) survived to hospital discharge after experiencing a serious medical complication. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical prediction rule identified a group of patients hospitalized from the ED for the treatment of heart failure who were at low risk of adverse inpatient outcomes. Model performance needs to be examined in a cohort of patients with an ED diagnosis of heart failure and treated as outpatients or hospitalized.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Community-acquired pneumonia causes more than 4 million episodes of illness each year and has high morbidity, mortality, and total cost of care. Nationwide, nearly 75% of community-acquired pneumonia patients are initially evaluated and treated in hospital-based emergency departments (EDs). Substantial variation exists in illness severity assessment, hospital admission decisions, and performance of recommended processes of care. We designed an ED-based quality improvement trial focused on the initial care of patients with community-acquired pneumonia. We used the Pneumonia Severity Index and level of arterial oxygenation to identify patients at low risk for 30-day mortality and to guide admission decisionmaking. We assessed the performance of recommended "best practices," consisting of assessment of arterial oxygenation, the collection of blood cultures for inpatients, and the timely initiation of appropriate empiric antibiotic therapy for inpatients and outpatients. We conducted a 32-site, cluster-randomized trial in Pennsylvania and Connecticut, comparing the effectiveness and safety of 3 guideline implementation strategies of increasing intensity. The multifaceted implementation plans were carried out in conjunction with each state's quality improvement organization. This article describes the background, objectives, and methodology of this trial to translate evidence-based knowledge on the quality and efficiency of care for community-acquired pneumonia into clinical practice.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Previous studies disagree about the effect of out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation on traumatic brain injury. This study compares the effects of out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation versus emergency department (ED) endotracheal intubation on mortality and neurologic and functional outcome after severe traumatic brain injury. METHODS: From the 2000 to 2002 Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study (a registry of all patients treated at trauma centers in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania), adult patients with head/neck Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater and undergoing out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation or ED endotracheal intubation were included. Transferred patients were excluded. The primary outcome was death (on hospital discharge). The secondary outcomes were neurologic (good versus poor, inferred from discharge to home versus long-term care facility) and functional outcome (determined from a Functional Impairment Score). The key exposure was endotracheal intubation (out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation versus ED endotracheal intubation). Using multivariate logistic regression, odds estimates for out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation were adjusted using age, sex, head/neck Abbreviated Injury Scale score, Injury Severity Score, mechanism of injury (penetrating versus blunt), admission systolic blood pressure, mode of transport (ground only versus helicopter or helicopter + ground), and the use of out-of-hospital neuromuscular blocking agents. A propensity score adjustment accounted for the potential effects of preexisting conditions, inhospital complications, and social factors (drug and alcohol use, race, and insurance coverage). RESULTS: There were 4,098 patients with head/neck Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater who received either out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation (n=1,797, 43.9%) or ED endotracheal intubation (n=2,301, 56.1%). Adjusted odds of death were higher for out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation than ED endotracheal intubation (odds ratio [OR] 3.99; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.21 to 4.93). Out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation was associated with an increased adjusted odds of poor neurologic outcome (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.15 to 2.26), moderate or severe functional impairment (Functional Impairment Score 6 to 15; OR 1.92; 95% CI 1.40 to 2.64), and severe functional impairment (Functional Impairment Score 11 to 15; OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.29 to 2.52). CONCLUSION: Out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation was associated with adverse outcomes after severe traumatic brain injury. The implications for current clinical care remain undefined.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Previous out-of-hospital airway management data are limited by small, single-site designs. We sought to evaluate the feasibility of performing a prospective, multi-centered evaluation of out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) using a standardized data collection tool. METHODS: We designed a prospective multi-centered observational study involving 45 advanced life support (ALS) services from a mid-Atlantic state. Using a standardized data form, prehospital personnel reported details of each attempted ETI, including patient demographics, methods used, difficulties encountered, and initial patient outcomes. We calculated and assessed data form return rates (using independent queries of the number of ETI attempted by each EMS service) and missing data entry rates. We also performed preliminary cross-sectional assessments of factors of current interest in out-of-hospital ETI. Accuracy and validity of responses were not evaluated. Data were stored centrally and analyzed using descriptive techniques. RESULTS: Participants included 8 urban, 15 suburban, 20 rural, and 2 air medical services. Data forms were received on 783 adults receiving ETI attempts during the study period June 1, 2001-November 30, 2001. The pooled data form return rate was 72.7%. Per-service return rates ranged from 0 to 100% and the median per-service return rate was 75%. Non-response (data form not returned for attempted intubation) was problematic, with nine services demonstrating data return rates less than 50%. Data return rates could not be calculated for an additional nine services. The missing data entry rate was 0.5-22.2%. The overall reported ETI success rate was 86.8% (92.8% for cardiac arrests and 76.8% for non-arrests) and did not appear to vary between population settings. There were two cases of delayed recognition of esophageal intubation, one case of unrecognized esophageal intubation, and 22 cases of tube dislodgement during patient care or transport. Bag-valve-mask ventilation was used as the rescue airway technique in the majority of failed ETI. When stratified for cardiac arrests vs. non-arrests, ETI success was not associated with field or initial ED survival. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully obtained complete data for the majority of ETI attempted across multiple EMS services. Our data also indicate the need to address problems with non-response. Preliminary cross-sectional data highlight areas of current interest in out-of-hospital airway management.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.