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.
Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.
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.
Mass-casualty incidents (MCIs) and disasters are characterized by a high heterogeneity of effects and may pose important logistic challenges that could hamper the emergency rescue operations.
The main objective of this study was to establish the most frequent logistic challenges (red flags) observed in a series of Italian disasters with a problem-based approach and to verify if the 80-20 rule of the Pareto principle is respected.
Methods:
A series of 138 major events from 1944 through 2020 with a Disaster Severity Score (DSS) ≥ four and five or more victims were analyzed for the presence of twelve pre-determined red flags.
A Pareto graph was built considering the most frequently observed red flags, and eventual correlations between the number of red flags and the components of the DSS were investigated.
Results:
Eight out of twelve red flags covered 80% of the events, therefore not respecting the 80-20 rule; the number of red flags showed a low positive correlation with most of the components of the DSS score. The Pareto analysis showed that potential hazards, casualty nest area > 2.5km2, number of victims over 50, evacuation noria over 20km, number of nests > five, need for extrication, complex access to victims, and complex nest development were the most frequently observed red flags.
Conclusions:
Logistic problems observed in MCIs and disaster scenarios do not follow the 80-20 Pareto rule; this demands for careful and early evaluation of different logistic red flags to appropriately tailor the rescue response.
The dispatch of Advanced Life Support (ALS) teams in Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is still a hardly studied aspect of prehospital emergency logistics. In 2015, the dispatch algorithm of Emilia Est Emergency Operation Centre (EE-EOC) was implemented and the dispatch of ALS teams was changed from primary to secondary based on triage of dispatched vehicles for high-priority interventions when teams with Immediate Life Support (ILS) skills were dispatched.
Objectives:
This study aimed to evaluate the effects on the appropriateness of ALS teams’ intervention and their employment time, and to compare sensitivity and specificity of the algorithm implementation.
Design:
This was a retrospective before-after observational study.
Settings and Participants:
Primary dispatches managed by EE-EOC involving ambulances and/or ALS teams were included. Two groups were created on the basis of the years of intervention (2013-2014 versus 2017-2018).
Intervention:
A switch from primary to secondary dispatch of ALS teams in case of high-priority dispatches managed by ILS teams was implemented.
Outcomes:
Appropriateness of ALS team intervention, total task time of ALS vehicles, and sensitivity and specificity of the algorithm were reviewed.
Results:
The study included 242,501 emergency calls that generated 56,567 red code dispatches. The new algorithm significantly increased global sensitivity and specificity of the system in terms of recognition of potential need of ALS intervention and the specificity of primary ALS dispatch. The appropriateness of ALS intervention was significantly increased; total tasking time per day for ALS and the number of critical dispatches without ALS available were reduced.
Conclusion:
The revision of the dispatch criteria and the extension of the two-tiered dispatch for ALS teams significantly increased the appropriateness of ALS intervention and reduced both the global tasking time and the number of high-priority dispatches without ALS teams available.
Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a percutaneous transfemoral balloon technique used in select centers for resuscitation and temporary hemostasis of bleeding patients. Several animal studies demonstrated that its application in non-traumatic cardiac arrest could enhance cerebral and coronary perfusion during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR); despite this, there are few reports of its application in humans. This is a case report of REBOA application during a refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in a 50-year-old man where Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) alone was unable to maintain a stable return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and Extracorporeal Cardiac Life Support (ECLS) was not available.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.