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

Chang CD, Crowe RP, Bentley MA, Janezic AR, Leonard JC. Prehosp. Emerg. Care 2016; 21(3): 344-353.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2016, National Association of EMS Physicians, Publisher Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/10903127.2016.1254696

PMID

27918863

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Describe prehospital Emergency Medical Services (EMS) providers' beliefs regarding spinal precautions for pediatric trauma transport.

METHODS: We randomly surveyed nationally certified EMS providers. We assessed providers' beliefs about specific precautions, and preferred precautions given a child's age (0-4 or 5-18 years) and presence of specific cervical spine injury (CSI) risk factors.

RESULTS: We received 5,400 responses (17%). Most were Paramedics (36%) or EMTs (22%) and worked at fire-based services (42%). A total of 47% endorsed responding to pediatric calls more than once per month. Consensus beliefs (>66% agreement) were that rigid cervical collars (68%) and long backboards with soft conforming surfaces (79%) maintain an injured pediatric spine in optimal position. Only 39% believed in the utility of the rigid long backboard to protect the pediatric spine. For most risk factors in both age categories, a rigid cervical collar with a long backboard with a soft conforming surface was the most common response (28-40% depending on age group and risk factor); however, there were no consensus beliefs. Provider-level experience, working as a patient care provider, less education, and parent status were associated with endorsing the rigid cervical collar. Factors associated with endorsing the rigid long backboard included provider level, working as a patient care provider, low pediatric call volume, and less education.

CONCLUSIONS: EMS providers believe that rigid cervical collars and long backboards with soft conforming surfaces provide optimal spinal precautions. There were no consensus beliefs, however, for use of particular precautions based on age and risk factors.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


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