CJEM Articles: Laurie J. Morrison
Displaying 1-5 of 5 results
-
January
2011
13
1
Blair L. Bigham, Ellen Bull, Janet Maher, Laurie J. Morrison, Merideth Morrison, Rob Burgess, Steven C. Brooks
Emergency medical services (EMS) personnel care for patients in challenging and dynamic environments that may contribute to an increased risk for adverse events. However, little is known about the risks to patient safety in the EMS setting. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a systematic review of the literature, including nonrandomized, noncontrolled studies, conducted qualitative interviews of key informants, and, with the assistance of a pan-Canadian advisory board, hosted a 1-day summit of 52 experts in the field of EMS patient safety. The intent of the summit was to review available research, discuss the issues affecting prehospital patient safety, and discuss interventions that might improve the safety of the EMS industry. The primary objective was to define the strategic goals for improving patient safety in EMS. Participants represented all geographic regions of Canada and included administrators, educators, physicians, researchers, and patient safety experts. Data were collected through electronic voting and qualitative analysis of the discussions. The group reached consensus on nine recommendations to increase awareness, reduce adverse events, and suggest research and educational directions in EMS patient safety: increasing awareness of patient safety principles, improving adverse event reporting through creating nonpunitive reporting systems, supporting paramedic clinical decision making through improved research and education, policy changes, using flexible algorithms, adopting patient safety strategies from other disciplines, increasing funding for research in patient safety, salary support for paramedic researchers, and access to graduate training in prehospital research.
-
September
2009
11
5
Hans-Richard Arntz, Katherine S. Allan, Laurie J. Morrison, Michelle Welsford, P. Richard Verbeek, Steven C. Brooks
Objective: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) appears to be superior to in-hospital fibrinolysis for most patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, few hospitals have PCI capability. The optimal prehospital strategy for facilitating rapid coronary reperfusion in STEMI patients is unclear. We sought to determine whether direct transport of adult STEMI patients by emergency medical services to primary PCI centres improves 30-day all-cause mortality when compared with a strategy of transportation to the closest hospital.
Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane "CENTRAL" database (1980-July 2007) and several other electronic databases. Two authors independently assessed citations for relevance. Two authors independently abstracted data from included studies. We included studies that, 1) transported patients directly to a PCI-capable centre for primary PCI, 2) had a control group that was transported to the closest hospital and 3) reported outcomes of treatment time intervals, all-cause mortality, reinfarction rate, stroke rate or the frequency of cardiogenic shock. We used a random effects model to provide pooled estimates of relative risk (RR) when data allowed.
Results: We identified 2264 citations with the search. Five studies, including 980 STEMI patients, met inclusion criteria, and were clinically heterogeneous and of variable quality. Most studies were European (3/5) and involved physician out-of-hospital care providers. There was a trend toward increased survival with direct transport to primary PCI but this was not statistically significant (RR 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.24-1.10). One study reported nonsignificant reductions in reinfarction (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.11-1.60) and stroke (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01-8.06) with direct transport for primary PCI.
Conclusion: There is insufficient evidence to support the effectiveness of direct transport of patients with STEMI for primary PCI when compared with transportation to the closest hospital. -
January
2009
11
1
Brian Schwartz, Laura M. Visentin, Laurie J. Morrison, Susan J. Bondy
Objective: We sought to assess the knowledge of, use of and barriers to the use of personal protective equipment for airway management among emergency medical technicians (EMTs) during and since the 2003 Canadian outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).
Methods: Using a cross-sectional survey, EMTs in Toronto, Ont., were surveyed 1 year after the SARS outbreak during mandatory training on the use of personal protective equipment in airway management during the outbreak and just before taking the survey. Practices that were addressed reflected government directives on the use of this equipment. Main outcome measures included the frequency of personal protective equipment use and, as applicable, why particular items were not always used.
Results: The response rate was 67.3% (n = 230). During the SARS outbreak, an N95-type particulate respirator was reported to be always used by 91.5% of respondents. Conversely, 72.9% of the respondents reported that they never used the open face hood. Equipment availability and vision impairment were often cited as impediments to personal protective equipment use. In nonoutbreak conditions, only the antimicrobial airway filter was most often reported to be always used (52.0%), while other items were used at an intermediate frequency. The most common reason for not always donning equipment was that paramedics deemed it unnecessary for the situation.
Conclusion: Personal protective equipment is not consistently employed as per medical directives. Reasons given for nonuse included nonavailability, judgment of nonnecessity or technical difficulties. There are important public health implications of noncompliance.
-
September
2002
4
5
Laurie J. Morrison, Marian J. Vermeulen, Michael J. Murray, Tim Waite
Introduction: The laryngeal mask airway (LMA™ airway) provides adequate ventilation and offers a suitable alternative for airway management in patients with cardiac arrest if primary care paramedics do not have intubation skills or are unable to intubate. Training in the use of the LMA usually occurs in the operating room.
Objective: To describe the use of the LMA by paramedics in prehospital adult non-traumatic cardiac arrest patients after classroom mannequin training. The study took place in a suburban rural emergency medical service.
Methods: This is a 2-phase observational study of the effect of paramedic training for LMA insertion using a mannequin and the success rate in the prehospital setting. All paramedics successfully completed classroom mannequin training. All subsequent prehospital adult non-traumatic cardiac arrest patients from mid-February 1999 to Mar. 31, 2000, were eligible. Subjective assessment of chest expansion, ease of ventilation and auscultation defined adequacy of ventilation. Data collected included the number of insertion attempts, reasons for failure, ease of insertion, adverse events and reasons for not attempting intubation. Statistical analysis comprised descriptive frequencies, chi-squared tests for comparison of categorical variables and analysis of variance for continuous variables.
Results: 208 paramedics (100%) successfully completed training. The mean number of attempts was 1, and only 4 (2.1%) paramedics required a second attempt with a mannequin. The paramedics' perception of ease of use comparing the LMA with a bag valve mask (BVM) was evenly distributed across the 3 descriptors: 70 (39%) scored the LMA as easier to use, 57 (31%) as more difficult, and 54 (30%) stated there would be no difference. Of the 291 arrests during the study period, insertion of the LMA was attempted in 283 (97.3%) and was successful in 199 (70%) patients. The LMA became dislodged in 5 (2.5%) cases and was removed in 12 (6%) to clear vomit from the airway. The overall success rate was 182 (64%). The incidence of regurgitation prior to attempted insertion of the LMA was 28% (79 patients). Success rates did not vary significantly with the incidence of vomiting prior to insertion (p = 0.11). The majority of the paramedics evaluated LMA insertion as Very easy 49/220 (22.3%) or Easy 87/220 (39.6%). Paramedic evaluation of ease of use varied with success (p = 0.001).
Conclusions: This study reports a 100% training success rate with a mannequin and a 64% success with LMA insertion and ventilation in the field by paramedics among adult out-of-hospital non-traumatic cardiac arrest patients. -
October
2000
2
4
Jonathan Sherbino, Laurie J. Morrison, P. Richard Verbeek, Veena Guru
Objectives: Our primary objectives were to estimate how frequently emergency medical technicians with defibrillation skills (EMT-Ds) are forced to deal with prehospital do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders, to assess their comfort in doing so, and to describe the prehospital care provided to patients with DNR orders in a system without a prehospital DNR policy (i.e., where resuscitation is mandatory).
Methods: Using Dillman methodology, the authors developed a 13-item survey and mailed it to 382 of 764 EMT-Ds in the metropolitan Toronto area. Responses were evaluated using 5-point Likert scales, limited-option and open-ended questions. Narrative responses were categorized. Two authors independently categorized narrative responses from 20 surveys, and kappa values for agreement beyond chance were determined.
Results: Among 382 EMT-Ds surveyed, 236 (62%) responded, of whom 221 (94%) answered the questionnaire. Overall, 126 of 219 (58%) indicated that they were called to resuscitate patients with DNR orders "sometimes," "frequently," or "all the time." In such situations, 22 of 207 (11%) stated they would honour the DNR order and 55 of 207 (27%) would honour the order but appear to provide basic resuscitation, in order to adhere to mandatory resuscitation regulations. Willingness to honour a DNR order did not vary by years of emergency medical service. EMT-Ds cited concern for the family and the patient, fear of repercussions and conflict with personal ethics as key factors contributing to this ethical dilemma. If legally allowed to honour DNR orders, 212 of 221 (96%) respondents would be comfortable with a written order and 137 of 220 (62%) with a verbal order.
Conclusions: Prehospital DNR orders are common, and a significant number of EMT-Ds disregard current regulations by honouring them. EMT-Ds would be more comfortable with written than verbal DNR orders. An ethical prehospital DNR policy should be developed and applied.
