SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Bucher J, dos Santos F, Frazier D, Merlin MA. West. J. Emerg. Med. 2015; 16(3): 453-458.

Affiliation

Newark Beth Israel Medical Center, Newark, New Jersey.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, California Chapter of the American Academy of Emergency Medicine)

DOI

10.5811/westjem.2015.1.21851

PMID

25987929

PMCID

PMC4427226

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The goal of this study was to compare application of the Kendrick Extrication Device (KED) versus rapid extrication (RE) by emergency medical service personnel. Our primary endpoints were movement of head, time to extrication and patient comfort by a visual analogue scale.

METHODS: We used 23 subjects in two scenarios for this study. The emergency medical services (EMS) providers were composed of one basic emergency medical technician (EMT), one advanced EMT. Each subject underwent two scenarios, one using RE and the other using extrication involving a commercial KED.

RESULTS: Time was significantly shorter using rapid extraction for all patients. Angles of head turning were all significantly larger when using RE. Weight marginally modified the effect of KED versus RE on the "angle to right after patient moved to backboard (p= 0.029) and on subjective movement on patient questionnaire (p=0.011). No statistical differences were noted on patient discomfort or pain.

CONCLUSION: This is a small experiment that showed decreased patient neck movement using a KED versus RE but resulted in increased patient movement in obese patients. Further studies are needed to determine if the KED improves any meaningful patient outcomes in the era of increased evidence-based medicine in emergency medical services.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print