Recent terror attacks led the Norwegian government to develop a procedure for emergency and law enforcement services cooperation during Active Violent Incidents (AVI, abbreviated PLIVO in Norwegian). To address further national initiatives to improve preparedness for mass casualty events and penetrating injuries among emergency medical services (EMS) in Norway, training and equipment status were mapped.

All EMS regions in Norway were invited to participate in an electronic nation-wide survey about practical medical training in PLIVO scenario training and specific training in hemorrhage control and penetrating injuries.

Ninety percent (842/938) had attended at least 1 PLIVO training scenario. Of these, 76% (642/938) reported only evacuation training during the exercise, while only 20% (168/938) had practiced hemorrhage control. Eighty-one percent (760/938) respondents reported that they were equipped with tourniquets and 91% (853/938) were equipped with gauze to pack wounds. However, only 52% (487/938) and 48% (450/938) reported practical training in tourniquet application and wound packing, respectively, while 30% (280/938) reported that they had no training or only theoretical education in tourniquet application. Supervised practical training on penetrating thoracic injuries was reported by <20%, and <50% reported practical training in needle decompression of a tension pneumothorax.

Enhanced focus on training in hemorrhage control and penetrating injuries is needed. This supports the recent decision from the Norwegian government to strengthen the training for EMS in AVI (PLIVO) exercises, by focusing on medical procedures in addition to evacuation training. Although the estimated response rate is 17%, we believe the large number of respondents still make the results valuable.

Terrorist attacks and civilian mass-casualty events are frequent, and some countries have implemented tourniquet use for uncontrollable extremity bleeding in civilian settings. The aim of this study was to summarize current knowledge on the use of prehospital tourniquets to assess whether their use increases the survival rate in civilian patients with life-threatening hemorrhages from the extremities.

Systematic literature review in Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Library, and Epistemonikos was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines. The search was performed in January 2019.

All types of studies that examined use of tourniquets in a prehospital setting published after January 1, 2000 were included.

The primary outcome was mortality with and without tourniquet, while adverse effects of tourniquet use were secondary outcomes.

Among 3,460 screened records, 55 studies were identified as relevant. The studies were highly heterogeneous with low quality of evidence. Most studies reported increased survival in the tourniquet group, but few had relevant comparators, and the survival benefit was difficult to estimate. Most studies reported a reduced need for blood transfusion, with few and mainly transient adverse effects from tourniquet use.

Despite relatively low evidence, the studies consistently suggested that the use of commercial tourniquets in a civilian setting to control life-threatening extremity hemorrhage seemed to be associated with improved survival, reduced need for blood transfusion, and few and transient adverse effects.

There has been a shift towards conservative management of penetrating neck trauma in selected patients.

A retrospective case note review of the management of penetrating neck trauma (2007–2013) was undertaken at our large teaching hospital and compared against best-evidenced practice.

Sixty-three patients were admitted over six years. The incidence of penetrating neck trauma is reducing, contrary to our belief. Most cases were knife inflicted (33 out of 63), and of these most were attempted suicide. There was a high rate of negative findings for neck explorations under general anaesthesia (18 out of 22). Only nine cases had justification for general anaesthesia exploration according to best practice.

The rate of neck explorations under general anaesthesia has dramatically fallen, in line with best practice. The need for operative intervention in patients with penetration of the aerodigestive tract or a major vascular injury should be based on clinical features, and these have been shown to be reliable indicators prior to open exploration.

To report an unusual case of hypopharyngeal perforation in a sword-swallower, with emphasis on management options.

Case report and review of the English language literature concerning sword-swallowing injuries to the hypopharynx and oesophagus.

A 29-year-old male sword-swallower suffered hypopharyngeal perforation during a performance. The patient received conservative management, with intensive care unit admission, infectious disease consultation, intravenous antibiotics, discontinuation of oral intake and close observation. He progressed well, resumed oral intake on hospital day six, and was discharged home on hospital day eight.

Sword-swallowing is an unusual vocation which may lead to potentially devastating injuries. This case report and review of the literature illustrates the management options for such hypopharyngeal and oesophageal injuries.

The optimal approach to airway management in penetrating neck injuries (PNIs) remains controversial. The primary objective of this study was to review the method of endotracheal intubation in PNI at a Canadian tertiary trauma centre. Secondarily, we sought to determine the incidence of PNI in our trauma population and to describe the epidemiologic elements of this population.

We conducted a review of patients with PNIs who were enrolled in the Nova Scotia Trauma Registry database. We included all patients 16 years of age or under who presented between April 1, 1994 and March 31, 2005 with penetrating injuries of the neck and an Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 9 or less or who underwent Trauma Team activation at our Tertiary Trauma Centre (regardless of ISS) and/or who were identified upon admission as a “major” trauma case. The variables of interest were patient age and sex, injury mechanism, injury location, place of intubation and method of intubation.

There were 19 people who met inclusion criteria and they were enrolled in our study. The injury mechanisms involved knife (n = 13) or gunshot (n = 5) wounds (one patient's injuries were categorized as “other”). Three patients (15.8%) were not intubated. The remaining 16 patients were intubated during prehospital care (n = 5), in the emergency department (n = 6) or in the operating room (n = 5). Of these, 8 patients (42.1%) underwent awake intubation and 8 (42.1%) underwent rapid sequence intubation.

There is clear variability of airway management in PNI. We believe that such patients represent a heterogeneous group where the attending physician must have a conservative yet varied approach to airway management based on the individual clinical scenario.