↓ Skip to main content

In-hospital airway management training for non-anesthesiologist EMS physicians: a descriptive quality control study

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
In-hospital airway management training for non-anesthesiologist EMS physicians: a descriptive quality control study
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13049-017-0386-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helmut Trimmel, Christoph Beywinkler, Sonja Hornung, Janett Kreutziger, Wolfgang G. Voelckel

Abstract

Pre-hospital airway management is a major challenge for emergency medical service (EMS) personnel. Despite convincing evidence that the rescuer's qualifications determine efficacy of tracheal intubation, in-hospital airway management training is not mandatory in Austria, and often neglected. Thus we sought to prove that airway management competence of EMS physicians can be established and maintained by a tailored training program. In this descriptive quality control study we retrospectively evaluated all in- and pre-hospital airway cases managed by EMS physicians who underwent a structured in-hospital training program in anesthesia at General Hospital Wiener Neustadt. Data was obtained from electronic anesthesia and EMS documentation systems. From 2006 to 2016, 32 EMS physicians with 3-year post-graduate education, but without any prior experience in anesthesia were trained. Airway management proficiency was imparted in three steps: initial training, followed by an ongoing practice schedule in the operating room (OR). Median and interquartile range of number of in-hospital tracheal intubations (TIs) vs. use of supra-glottic airway devices (SGA) were 33.5 (27.5-42.5) vs. 19.0 (15.0-27.0) during initial training; 62.0 (41.8-86.5) vs. 33.5 (18.0-54.5) during the first, and 64.0 (34.5-93.8) vs. 27 (12.5-56.0) during the second year. Pre-hospitaly, every physician performed 9.0 (5.0-14.8) TIs vs. 0.0 (0.0-0.0) SGA cases during the first, and 9.0 (7.0-13.8) TIs vs. 0.0 (0.0-0.3) SGA during the second year. Use of an SGA was mandatory when TI failed after the second attempt, thus accounting for a total of 33 cases. In 8 cases, both TI and SGA failed, but bag mask ventilation was successfully performed. No critical events related to airway management were noted and overall success rate for TI with a max of 2 attempts was 95.3%. Number of TIs per EMS physician is low in the pre-hospital setting. A training concept that assures an additional 60+ TIs per year appears to minimize failure rates. Thus, a fixed amount of working days in anesthesia seems crucial to maintain proficiency. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital training programs are mandatory for non-anesthetist EMS physicians to gain competence in airway management and emergency anesthesia.Our results might be helpful when discussing the need for regulation and financing with the authorities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 14 27%
Unknown 15 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Engineering 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 18 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 August 2019.
All research outputs
#5,466,416
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#465
of 1,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,772
of 309,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#6
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,263 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,828 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.