- Email: [email protected]
The European Trauma Course development from 2006 to 2015
Abstracts / Resuscitation 106S (2016) e23–e95
AP175 The European Trauma Course development from 2006 to 2015 Michael Huepfl 1,∗ , Ileana Lulic 2 , Birgit Roessner 3 , Florian Trummer 2 , Adi Deixler 2 , Katja Kalan Ustar 2 , Victor Tregubov 2 , Markus Brucke 4 , Christian Schreiber 2 1
Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria European Trauma Course Austria, Vienna, Austria 3 European Trauma Course Switzerland, Burgdorf, Switzerland 4 European Trauma Course Ulm, Ulm, Germany 2
Introduction: The European trauma course was developed in the pilot phase between 2006 and 2008. A group of experts from all over Europe designed it because it was necessary to create a flexible course on trauma management that can be used in all the different systems in Europe. Additionally, working in a team is not included in the available traditional courses. The goal was to create a course that focuses on team approach and is flexible to adapt to local protocols. On the basis of up-to-date adult learning models, 85% is practical simulation-based team training. Material and methods: A database search of the ERC course database (courses.erc.edu) was performed. Data were shown according to country and month of the course. Results: The courses started in 2006 with an inaugural course in Malta followed by 3 pilot courses. Subsequently, there were courses in 2008 (3), 2009 (11), 2010 (17), 2011 (18), 2012 (34), 2013 (41) and 2014 (62) in 3 (2008), 8 (2009), 10 (2010, 2011), 11 (2012), 13 (2013), 17 (2014) and 19 countries in 2015. The most courses were conducted in Germany (51), followed by Austria (37), UK (36), Egypt (28), Italy (21), Croatia (11), Malta (10), Poland (8), Slovenia (7), Portugal (6), Belgium, Finland, Denmark (5), Hungary (4), Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland and Romania (3), Jordan (2) and Norway, Netherland, Ireland and Greece (1). Conclusion: The project “European Trauma Course” was piloted with four courses and started in 2008. The courses are already available in 24 countries and were quickly developed from 2008 to 2015 [1]. Reference
e93
not usually initiated in MCI to avoid delaying potentially effective treatment for salvageable victims.1 Lightning MCIs are very rare, usually affecting small groups of tourists. Patients struck by lightning are most likely to die without immediate cardiac or respiratory support. If CPR is needed, resuscitative attempts may have higher success rates in lightning victims than in patients with cardiac arrest from other causes. This case report shows a lightning MCI during a Holy Mass attended by 500 people with two CPRs. Materials and methods: On 25 July, 2015, during a Holy Mass under the sky, the lightning hit a tree under which people were praying. Nine people were injured and were moved inside the church. Six were unconscious but breathing, while one had cardiac arrest. Lay CPR was started. Results: Until the first EMS unit arrived, one patient was triaged black because of a massive bleeding from the lungs and ears and CPR effort was stopped. Meanwhile, another unconscious patient developed cardiac arrest. The actual resources were evaluated, and ALS was started immediately. ROSC occurred after 25 min of CPR, and the patient was transported to the hospital. After 3 days, he was discharged home with CPC1. Conclusions: Though CPR is seldom started in MCIs, the organization of medical care on the scene during this MCI allowed enough facilities to start CPR. This is in line with the ERC 2015 Guidelines for lightning injury, as rescuers should give highest priority to patients in respiratory or cardiac arrest after the lightning injury. This decision proved to be a benefit to the above-mentioned patient as he developed ROSC, and is presently suffering only from mild consequences in the form of myalgia and chronic fatigue. Reference 1. Truhláˇr A, Alessandro B, et al. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation. Resuscitation 2015;95:148–201.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.07.224 AP177 Are prehospital deaths from trauma and accidental injury preventable? A direct historical comparison to assess what has changed in two decades Govind Oliver ∗ , Darren Walter, Anthony Redmond
1. Thies KC, Deakin CD, Voiglio EJ, et al. The European Trauma Course: trauma teaching goes European. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2014.
Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.07.223
Background and objectives: In 1994, Hussain and Redmond revealed that up to 39% of prehospital deaths from accidental injury might have been preventable had basic first-aid care been given.1 Since then, there have been significant advances in trauma systems and care, but the current exclusion of prehospital deaths from the analysis of trauma registries is a limitation to prehospital research.2 We aimed to repeat the study in order to identify any changes and consider potential developments to improve patient outcomes. Methods: We examined the full Coroner’s inquest files for prehospital deaths from trauma and accidental injury over a 3-year period in Cheshire. Injuries were scored using the AbbreviatedInjury-Scale (AIS1990), Injury Severity Score (ISS) was calculated and the probability of survival was estimated using Bull’s probits to match the original protocol. Results: A total of 134 deaths met our inclusion criteria; 79% were male, average age at death was 53.8 years. 62 were found dead (FD), 58 died at scene (DAS) and 14 were dead on arrival
AP176 Lightning mass casualty incident with a successful CPR Miroslav Humaj 1 , Eva Havlíková 1,∗ , Marián Hojstric 2 , Peter Jurcenko 3 , Michal Chyla 2 , Kamila Bolanovská 4 , Lubica Bajerovská 5 , Volodymyr Kizyma 1 1
Falck Zachranna a.s., Kosice, Slovakia Krompachy Hospital, Krompachy, Slovakia 3 Prievidza Hospital in Bojnice, Bojnice, Slovakia 4 EMS Dispatch Center, Preˇ sov, Slovakia 5 Záchranná sluˇ zba Koˇsice, Koˇsice, Slovakia 2
Introduction: Mass casualty incidents (MCIs) are characterized by greater demand for medical care than available resources. CPR is
AP175 The European Trauma Course development from 2006 to 2015 Michael Huepfl 1,∗ , Ileana Lulic 2 , Birgit Roessner 3 , Florian Trummer 2 , Adi Deixler 2 , Katja Kalan Ustar 2 , Victor Tregubov 2 , Markus Brucke 4 , Christian Schreiber 2 1
Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria European Trauma Course Austria, Vienna, Austria 3 European Trauma Course Switzerland, Burgdorf, Switzerland 4 European Trauma Course Ulm, Ulm, Germany 2
Introduction: The European trauma course was developed in the pilot phase between 2006 and 2008. A group of experts from all over Europe designed it because it was necessary to create a flexible course on trauma management that can be used in all the different systems in Europe. Additionally, working in a team is not included in the available traditional courses. The goal was to create a course that focuses on team approach and is flexible to adapt to local protocols. On the basis of up-to-date adult learning models, 85% is practical simulation-based team training. Material and methods: A database search of the ERC course database (courses.erc.edu) was performed. Data were shown according to country and month of the course. Results: The courses started in 2006 with an inaugural course in Malta followed by 3 pilot courses. Subsequently, there were courses in 2008 (3), 2009 (11), 2010 (17), 2011 (18), 2012 (34), 2013 (41) and 2014 (62) in 3 (2008), 8 (2009), 10 (2010, 2011), 11 (2012), 13 (2013), 17 (2014) and 19 countries in 2015. The most courses were conducted in Germany (51), followed by Austria (37), UK (36), Egypt (28), Italy (21), Croatia (11), Malta (10), Poland (8), Slovenia (7), Portugal (6), Belgium, Finland, Denmark (5), Hungary (4), Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland and Romania (3), Jordan (2) and Norway, Netherland, Ireland and Greece (1). Conclusion: The project “European Trauma Course” was piloted with four courses and started in 2008. The courses are already available in 24 countries and were quickly developed from 2008 to 2015 [1]. Reference
e93
not usually initiated in MCI to avoid delaying potentially effective treatment for salvageable victims.1 Lightning MCIs are very rare, usually affecting small groups of tourists. Patients struck by lightning are most likely to die without immediate cardiac or respiratory support. If CPR is needed, resuscitative attempts may have higher success rates in lightning victims than in patients with cardiac arrest from other causes. This case report shows a lightning MCI during a Holy Mass attended by 500 people with two CPRs. Materials and methods: On 25 July, 2015, during a Holy Mass under the sky, the lightning hit a tree under which people were praying. Nine people were injured and were moved inside the church. Six were unconscious but breathing, while one had cardiac arrest. Lay CPR was started. Results: Until the first EMS unit arrived, one patient was triaged black because of a massive bleeding from the lungs and ears and CPR effort was stopped. Meanwhile, another unconscious patient developed cardiac arrest. The actual resources were evaluated, and ALS was started immediately. ROSC occurred after 25 min of CPR, and the patient was transported to the hospital. After 3 days, he was discharged home with CPC1. Conclusions: Though CPR is seldom started in MCIs, the organization of medical care on the scene during this MCI allowed enough facilities to start CPR. This is in line with the ERC 2015 Guidelines for lightning injury, as rescuers should give highest priority to patients in respiratory or cardiac arrest after the lightning injury. This decision proved to be a benefit to the above-mentioned patient as he developed ROSC, and is presently suffering only from mild consequences in the form of myalgia and chronic fatigue. Reference 1. Truhláˇr A, Alessandro B, et al. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation. Resuscitation 2015;95:148–201.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.07.224 AP177 Are prehospital deaths from trauma and accidental injury preventable? A direct historical comparison to assess what has changed in two decades Govind Oliver ∗ , Darren Walter, Anthony Redmond
1. Thies KC, Deakin CD, Voiglio EJ, et al. The European Trauma Course: trauma teaching goes European. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2014.
Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.07.223
Background and objectives: In 1994, Hussain and Redmond revealed that up to 39% of prehospital deaths from accidental injury might have been preventable had basic first-aid care been given.1 Since then, there have been significant advances in trauma systems and care, but the current exclusion of prehospital deaths from the analysis of trauma registries is a limitation to prehospital research.2 We aimed to repeat the study in order to identify any changes and consider potential developments to improve patient outcomes. Methods: We examined the full Coroner’s inquest files for prehospital deaths from trauma and accidental injury over a 3-year period in Cheshire. Injuries were scored using the AbbreviatedInjury-Scale (AIS1990), Injury Severity Score (ISS) was calculated and the probability of survival was estimated using Bull’s probits to match the original protocol. Results: A total of 134 deaths met our inclusion criteria; 79% were male, average age at death was 53.8 years. 62 were found dead (FD), 58 died at scene (DAS) and 14 were dead on arrival
AP176 Lightning mass casualty incident with a successful CPR Miroslav Humaj 1 , Eva Havlíková 1,∗ , Marián Hojstric 2 , Peter Jurcenko 3 , Michal Chyla 2 , Kamila Bolanovská 4 , Lubica Bajerovská 5 , Volodymyr Kizyma 1 1
Falck Zachranna a.s., Kosice, Slovakia Krompachy Hospital, Krompachy, Slovakia 3 Prievidza Hospital in Bojnice, Bojnice, Slovakia 4 EMS Dispatch Center, Preˇ sov, Slovakia 5 Záchranná sluˇ zba Koˇsice, Koˇsice, Slovakia 2
Introduction: Mass casualty incidents (MCIs) are characterized by greater demand for medical care than available resources. CPR is