TY - JOUR
T1 - Patient outcomes before and after implementation of a selective pre-hospital spinal immobilization protocol
T2 - A comparative cohort pilot study in a level 2 trauma center
AU - van de Breevaart, Otto J
AU - van der Waarden, Nancy W P L
AU - Schoonhoven, Lisette
AU - Ham, Wietske H W
AU - Schep, Niels W L
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors
PY - 2023/9
Y1 - 2023/9
N2 - BACKGROUND: A new selective preventive spinal immobilization (PSI) protocol was introduced in the Netherlands. This may have led to an increase in non-immobilized spinal fractures (NISFs) and consequently adverse patient outcomes.AIM: A pilot study was conducted to describe the adverse patient outcomes in NISF of the PSI protocol change and assess the feasibility of a larger effect study.METHODS: Retrospective comparative cohort pilot study including records of trauma patients with a presumed spinal injury who were presented at the emergency department of a level 2 trauma center by the emergency medical service (EMS). The pre-period 2013-2014 (strict PSI protocol), was compared to the post-period 2017-2018 (selective PSI protocol). Primary outcomes were the percentage of records with a NISF who had an adverse patient outcome such as neurological injuries and mortality before and after the protocol change. Secondary outcomes were the sample size calculation for a larger study and the feasibility of data collection.RESULTS: 1,147 records were included; 442 pre-period, and 705 post-period. The NISF-prevalence was 10% (95% CI 7-16, n = 19) and 8% (95% CI 6-11, n = 33), respectively. In both periods, no neurological injuries or mortality due to NISF were found, by which calculating a sample size is impossible. Data collection showed to be feasible.CONCLUSIONS: No neurological injuries or mortality due to NISF were found in a strict and a selective PSI protocol. Therefore, a larger study is discouraged. Future studies should focus on which patients really profit from PSI and which patients do not.
AB - BACKGROUND: A new selective preventive spinal immobilization (PSI) protocol was introduced in the Netherlands. This may have led to an increase in non-immobilized spinal fractures (NISFs) and consequently adverse patient outcomes.AIM: A pilot study was conducted to describe the adverse patient outcomes in NISF of the PSI protocol change and assess the feasibility of a larger effect study.METHODS: Retrospective comparative cohort pilot study including records of trauma patients with a presumed spinal injury who were presented at the emergency department of a level 2 trauma center by the emergency medical service (EMS). The pre-period 2013-2014 (strict PSI protocol), was compared to the post-period 2017-2018 (selective PSI protocol). Primary outcomes were the percentage of records with a NISF who had an adverse patient outcome such as neurological injuries and mortality before and after the protocol change. Secondary outcomes were the sample size calculation for a larger study and the feasibility of data collection.RESULTS: 1,147 records were included; 442 pre-period, and 705 post-period. The NISF-prevalence was 10% (95% CI 7-16, n = 19) and 8% (95% CI 6-11, n = 33), respectively. In both periods, no neurological injuries or mortality due to NISF were found, by which calculating a sample size is impossible. Data collection showed to be feasible.CONCLUSIONS: No neurological injuries or mortality due to NISF were found in a strict and a selective PSI protocol. Therefore, a larger study is discouraged. Future studies should focus on which patients really profit from PSI and which patients do not.
KW - Adverse patient outcome
KW - EMS
KW - Non-immobilized spinal fracture
KW - Pre-hospital
KW - Selective preventive spinal immobilization
KW - Spinal injury
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85171331098&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ienj.2023.101345
DO - 10.1016/j.ienj.2023.101345
M3 - Article
C2 - 37714056
SN - 1878-013X
VL - 70
JO - International emergency nursing
JF - International emergency nursing
M1 - 101345
ER -