On 21 September, 1999, an earthquake measuring 7.3 on the Richter scale, struck central Taiwan near the town of Chi-Chi. The event resulted in 2,405 deaths and 11,306 injuries. Ad hoc emergency medical assistance teams (EMATs) from Taiwan assumed the responsibility for initiating early assessments and providing medical care.

To determine whether the EMATs served a key role in assisting critically injured patients through the assessment of number and level of hospitals responding, training background, timeliness of response, and acuity of patient encounters.

Local and national health bureaus were contacted to identify hospitals that responded to the disaster. A comprehensive questionnaire was piloted and then, sent to those major medical centers that dispatched EMATs within the first 72 hours following the quake. In-depth interviews also were conducted with team leaders.

A total number of 104 hospitals/clinics responded to the disaster, including nine major medical centers and 12 regional hospitals. Each of the major medical centers/regional hospitals that dispatched EMATs during the first 72 hours following the quake were surveyed. Also, 20 individual team leaders were interviewed. Seventy-nine percent of the EMATs from the hospitals responded spontaneously to the scene, while only 21% were dispatched directly by national or local health authorities. Combining the phases of the disaster response, it is estimated that only 7% of EMATs were providing on-site care within the first 12 hours following the earthquake, 17% within <18 hours, and 20% within <24 hours. Thus, 80% of these EMATs required >24 hours to respond to the site. Based on a ED I-IV triage system (Level-I, highest acuity; Level-IV, lowest acuity), the vast majority of patient encounters consisted of Level-III and Level-IV patients. Fewer than 16% of teams encountered >10 Level-I patients, and <28% of teams evaluated >10 Level-II patients.

1. The response from EMATs was impressive, but largely uncoordinated in the absence of a pre-existing dispatching mechanism.

2. Most of the EMATs required >24 hours to reach the disaster sites, and generally, did not arrive in time to affect the outcome of victims with preventable deaths. Therefore, there is an urgent need to strengthen local prehospital care.

3. A central governmental body that ensures better horizontal and vertical integration, and a comprehensive emergency management system is required in order to improve future disaster response and mitigation efforts.

Post-injury hypothermia is a risk predictor in trauma patients whose physiology is deranged. The aim of the present study was to examine the effect of simple, in-field, hypothermia prevention to victims of penetrating trauma during long prehospital evacuations.

A total of 170 consecutively injured landmine victims were included in a prospective, clinical study in Northern Iraq and Cambodia. Thirty patients were provided with systematic prehospital hypothermia prevention, and for 140 patients, no preventive measures were provided.

The mean value for the time from injury to hospital admission was 6.6 hours (range: 0.2–72). The incidence of hypothermia (oral temperature <36°C) before prevention/rewarming was 21% (95% confidence interval: 15% to 28%). The Prevention Group had a statistically significant lower rate of hypothermia on hospital admission compared to the control group (95% confidence interval for difference: 6% to 24%).

Simple, preventive, in-field measures help to prevent hypothermia during protracted evacuation, and should be part of the trauma care protocol in rural rescue systems.

The New Injury Severity Score (NISS) was introduced in 1997 to improve outcome prediction based on anatomical severity scoring in trauma victims. Studies on populations of blunt trauma victims indicate that the NISS, predicts better than the Injury Severity Score (ISS) mortality post-injury, which is why the NISS has been recommended as the new “gold standard” for severity scoring. However, so far the accuracy of the NISS for penetrating injuries has not been validated against the ISS.

ISS and NISS scores were collected retrospectively for 1,787 war-and landmine victims in North Iraq. All victims only had penetrating injuries. The two tests were compared for prediction of short-term mortality and post-operative complications using Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) analysis.

Both the ISS and the NISS predicted mortality with high accuracy (ROC area under curve 0.9). There were no significant differences between the two tests. The predictive accuracy for post-operative complications was moderate for both tests (ROC-AUC <0.8), with the NISS performing significantly better than the ISS.

The NISS does not perform better than the ISS in penetrating injuries. However, this study was done on a low-risk trauma population, thus the results should not be extrapolated to high severity trauma. Due to statistical shortcomings in studies previously published, studies on far larger cohorts are necessary before the NISS should be adopted as the new “gold standard” for severity scoring.

The prehospital 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) has become a standard of care. For the prehospital 12-lead ECG to be useful clinically, however, cardiologists and emergency physicians (EP) must view the test as useful. This study measured physician attitudes about the prehospital 12-lead ECG.

This study tested the hypothesis that physicians had “no opinion” regarding the prehospital 12-lead ECG.

An anonymous survey was conducted to measure EP and cardiologist attitudes toward prehospital 12-lead ECGs. Hypothesis tests against “no opinion” (VAS = 50 mm) were made with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and intergroup comparisons were made with the Student-t-test.

Seventy-one of 87 (81.6%) surveys were returned. Twenty-five (67.6%) cardiologists responded and 45 (90%) EPs responded. Both groups of physicians viewed prehospital 12-lead ECGs as beneficial (mean = 69 mm; 95% CI = 65–74mm). All physicians perceived that ECGs positively influence preparation of staff (mean = 63 mm; 95% CI = 60–72mm) and that ECGs transmitted to hospitals would be beneficial (mean = 66 mm; 95% CI = 60–72mm). Cardiologists had more favorable opinions than did EPs. The ability of paramedics to interpret ECGs was not seen as important (mean = 50 mm; 95% CI = 43–56mm). The justifiable increase in field time was perceived to be 3.2 minutes (95% CI = 2.7–3.8 minutes), with 23 (32.8%) preferring that it be done on scene, 46 (65.7%) during transport, and one (1.4%) not at all.

Prehospital 12-lead ECGs generally are perceived as worthwhile by cardiologists and EPs. Cardiologists have a higher opinion of the value and utility of field ECGs. Since the reduction in mortality from the 12-lead ECG is small, it is likely that positive physician attitudes are attributable to other factors.

To evaluate three prototype versions of semi-quantitative end-tidal CO2 monitors with different alarm features during prehospital or inter-facility use.

Subjects were 43 adult, non-pregnant patients requiring intubation, or who already were intubated and required transport. Teams at one AirEvac and seven Advanced Life Support (ALS) paramedic stations were trained in the use of the monitors. Team members at each station evaluated each model for eight days. Participants completed questionnaires following each use.

The monitors performed properly in all cases, but in one case, vomit in the airway adapter tube prevented obtaining a readout. The monitors aided management in 40 of 43 cases (93%); in one, the monitor reading was reported as variable (between 20 and 30 mmHg) although the teams knew the monitors were semi-quantitative; in another, the monitor was not required, but performed properly; and the third was the one in which vomit in the tube prevented a reading. In 26 of 43 cases (60.4%), the monitor was used to confirm endotracheal tube placement (there were no instances of incorrect placement). In all cases, the devices were used to monitor respiration and oxygen saturation. Alarms were audible in the environment, but only preferred in the AirEvac situation. The “breath beep” feature was useful, particularly in patients in whom chest movements during respiration were difficult to observe.

“Breath beeps” were clearly audible and were a useful feature in all prehospital and transport environments, while audible alarms were desired only in the AirEvac situation. Semi-quantitative CO2 detection is valuable in the ALS/AirEvac environment, even for teams with high intubation success rates.

Although every hospital needs a security plan for the support of immobile patients who do not possess autonomous escape capabilities, little information exists to assist in the development of practical patient evacuation methods.

1) In hospitals during disasters, incident leadership of the fire authorities can be supported effectively by hospital executives experienced in the management of mass casualties; and 2) As an alternative for canvas carry sheets, rescue drag sheets can be employed for emergency, elevator-independent, patient evacuation.

A hospital evacuation exercise was planned and performed to obtain experiences in incident command and to permit calculation of elevator-independent patient transport times. Performance of incident leadership was observed by means of pre-defined checklists. The effectiveness and efficiency of carrying teams with five persons each were compared to those with a rescue drag sheet employed by a single person.

Incident command for hospitals during a disaster is enhanced considerably by pre-defined and trained executives who are placed at the immediate disposal of the fire authorities. For elevator-independent patient transport, the rescue drag sheet was superior to conventional carrying measures because of a reduced number of transport personnel required to move each patient. With this method, patient transport times averaged 54 m/min. flat and 18 seconds for one floor descent.

Experiences from a hospital during an evacuation exercise provided decision criteria for changes in the disaster preparedness plan. Hospital incident leadership was assigned to executives-in-charge in close co-operation with the fire authorities. All beds were equipped with a rescue drag sheet. Both concepts may help to cope with an emergency evacuation of a hospital.

This study explores the value of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) experience for students applying to medical school. Methods: Surveys were sent to 67 medical schools in the eastern United States and Canada. Using a five-point Likert scale, the survey asked the respondent to rate the amount of consideration given to Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) or paramedic experience when making admissions decisions (1 = very little to 5 = strong), and to describe the influence of that experience (1 = very negative to 5 = very positive).

Usable responses were received from 21 schools. The median rating for the consideration given to EMS experience was “some consideration” for both EMT and paramedic experience, with 85.7% of respondents assigning that rating or higher. The median rating for the influence of that experience was “somewhat positive” for both EMT and paramedic experience. Only 14.3% of the returned surveys rated EMS experience as “neutral”, and no respondent reported EMS experience as a “negative”.

EMS experience receives at least some consideration during the admissions process at most of the responding institutions in the United States and Canada. Experiences at either the EMT or Paramedic level are viewed similarly. None of the responding institutions viewed EMS experience negatively.