Evaluation of triage performance during a disaster simulation utilizing four techniques

✍ Scribed by AI Bern; JR Krohmer

• Publisher: Elsevier Science
• Year: 1984
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 140 KB
• Volume: 13
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 1097-6760
• DOI: 10.1016/s0196-0644(84)80155-9

✦ Synopsis

UAEM ABSTRACTS 14TH ANNUAL MEETING

the Paceaid (Cardiac Resuscitator Corporation) in patients with asystole, pulseless idioventricular rhythm (PIVR), and complete heart block (CHB) with hemodynamic compromise. Pacemaker units were carried by EMS physicians and specially trained personnel in a busy urban mobile intensive care unit service. The pacemaker was applied as soon as possible in cases of asystole and PIVR, but was used in CHB only after drug therapy was unsuccessful. Patients were followed to determine hospital course and outcome. Seventy-three patients were included in the study. Of these, 35 were asystolic, 35 had PIVR, and 3 were in CHB. Electrical capture was achieved in 63% (22/35) of asystolic patients, 55% (19/35) of those with PIVR, and 100% (3/3) of those in CHB. Mechanical capture (development of a palpable pulse) was effected in 18% (6/35) of the asystolic group and 18% (6/35) of the PIVR group. None of the patients with CHB demonstrated any mechanical effect of the pacing. There were no long-term survivors. The average time-to-scene of paramedic units from receipt of dispatch was 6.75 min. The average delay from receipt-of-call to application of the pacemaker was 19.3 min. Our data strongly suggest that delayed use of transcutaneous pacing does not improve the dismal survival rates of patients with bradyasystolic arrest. Further studies should be directed toward investigating survival rates in patients paced immediately after the onset of cardiac arrest.