We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the airways characterized by increased sensitivity to irritating stimuli. Inflammatory episodes obstruct airflow due to bronchospasm, airway edema, bronchial smooth muscle contraction, and mucus plugs, leading to recurrent episodes of wheezing, shortness of breath, chest tightness, and coughing. The inflammatory episodes also lead to lung hyperinflation, increased work of breathing, and ventilation–perfusion mismatch. A hallmark of asthma is that the inflammatory episodes are reversible.
Many Emergency Medical Service (EMS) systems in the United States restrict albuterol therapy by scope of practice to Advanced Life Support (ALS). The State of Delaware has a two-tiered EMS system in which Basic Life Support (BLS) arrives on scene prior to ALS in the majority of respiratory distress calls.
Study Objective:
This study sought to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and expedience of albuterol administration by BLS compared to ALS.
Methods:
This retrospective observational study used data collected from July 2015 through January 2017 throughout a State BLS albuterol pilot program. Pilot BLS agencies participated in a training session on the indications and administration of albuterol, and were then authorized to carry and administer nebulized albuterol. Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), and pulse oximetry (spO2) were obtained before and after albuterol administration by BLS and ALS. The times from BLS arrival to the administration of albuterol by pilot BLS agencies versus ALS were compared. Study encounters required both BLS and ALS response. Data were analyzed using chi-square and t-test as appropriate.
Results:
Three hundred eighty-eight (388) incidents were reviewed. One hundred eighty-five (185) patients received albuterol by BLS pilot agencies and 203 patients received albuterol by ALS. Of note, the population treated by ALS was significantly older than the population treated by BLS (61.9 versus 51.6 years; P <.001). A comparison of BLS arrival time to albuterol administration time showed significantly shorter times in the BLS pilot group compared to the ALS group (3.50 minutes versus 8.00 minutes, respectively; P <.001). After albuterol administration, BLS pilot patients showed improvements in HR (P <.01), RR (P <.01), and spO2 (P <.01). Alternately, ALS treatment patients showed improvement in spO2 (P <.01) but not RR (P = .17) or HR (P = 1.00). Review by ALS or hospital staff showed albuterol was indicated in 179 of 185 BLS patients and administered correctly in 100% of these patients.
Conclusion:
Patients both received albuterol significantly sooner and showed superior improvements in vital signs when treated by BLS agencies carrying albuterol rather than by BLS agencies who required ALS arrival for albuterol. Two-tiered EMS systems should consider allowing BLS to carry and administer albuterol for safe, effective, and expedient treatment of respiratory distress patients amenable to albuterol therapy.
We sought to determine whether inhaled 3% hypertonic saline (HS) reduces admission to hospital in ambulatory children with moderately severe viral bronchiolitis. Secondary objectives compared changes in respiratory scores before and after treatment and assessed the need for unscheduled medical intervention within 7 days.
Methods:
Children under the age of 2 years presenting with moderately severe viral bronchiolitis to the emergency department of 4 general hospitals from November 2008 to March 2009 were randomly assigned to receive 3 consecutive 4-mL doses of nebulized 3% HS (treatment group) or 0.9% normal saline (NS; control group) in a double blind fashion, each coadministered with 1 mg salbutamol. Outcome measures included the difference in hospital admission rate and changes in respiratory distress scores.
Results:
A total of 81 children (mean age 8.9 mo, range 0.7–22 mo) were assessed over 88 visits on an intention-to-treat basis. No statistically significant differences were found between treatment groups. Children in the HS group had a nonsignificant trend toward greater improvement compared with NS controls with a same-day admission rate of 18% (95% confidence interval [CI] 9%–32%) versus 27% (95% CI 16%–42%), respectively. Respiratory Assessment Change Scores (RACS) favoured the HS group over NS controls (mean RACS 4.7 [95% CI 3.6–5.8] v. 3.7 [95% CI 2.5–4.9], respectively), although the CIs overlap and these differences were not statistically significant.
Conclusion:
The short-term use of nebulized 3% HS did not result in any statistically significant benefits, although a nonsignificant trend toward a decrease in admission rate and improvement in respiratory distress was found. A larger study would be required to determine whether these trends arise from a clinically relevant treatment effect.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.