New care paradigms are required to enable remote life-saving interventions (RLSIs) in extreme environments such as disaster settings. Informatics may assist through just-in-time expert remote-telementoring (RTM) or video-modelling (VM). Currently, RTM relies on real-time communication that may not be reliable in some locations, especially if communications fail. Neither technique has been extensively developed however, and both may be required to be performed by inexperienced providers to save lives. A pilot comparison was thus conducted.

Procedure-naïve Search-and-Rescue Technicians (SAR-Techs) performed a tube-thoracostomy (TT) on a surgical simulator, randomly allocated to RTM or VM. The VM group watched a pre-prepared video illustrating TT immediately prior, while the RTM group were remotely guided by an expert in real-time. Standard outcomes included success, safety, and tube-security for the TT procedure.

There were no differences in experience between the groups. Of the 13 SAR-Techs randomized to VM, 12/13 (92%) placed the TT successfully, safely, and secured it properly, while 100% (11/11) of the TT placed by the RTM group were successful, safe, and secure. Statistically, there was no difference (P = 1.000) between RTM or VM in safety, success, or tube security. However, with VM, one subject cut himself, one did not puncture the pleura, and one had barely adequate placement. There were no such issues in the mentored group. Total time was significantly faster using RTM (P = .02). However, if time-to-watch was discounted, VM was quicker (P = .000).

Random evaluation revealed both paradigms have attributes. If VM can be utilized during “travel-time,” it is quicker but without facilitating “trouble shooting.” On the other hand, RTM had no errors in TT placement and facilitated guidance and remediation by the mentor, presumably avoiding failure, increasing safety, and potentially providing psychological support. Ultimately, both techniques appear to have merit and may be complementary, justifying continued research into the human-factors of performing RLSIs in extreme environments that are likely needed in natural and man-made disasters.

Pneumothorax remains an important cause of preventable trauma death. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize the recent evidence on the efficacy, patient outcomes, and adverse events of different chest decompression approaches relevant to the out-of-hospital setting.

A comprehensive literature search was performed using five databases (from January 1, 2014 through June 15, 2020). To be considered eligible, studies required to report original data on decompression of suspected or proven traumatic pneumothorax and be considered relevant to the prehospital context. They also required to be conducted mostly on an adult population (expected more than ≥80% of the population ≥16 years old) of patients. Needle chest decompression (NCD), finger thoracostomy (FT), and tube thoracostomy were considered. No meta-analysis was performed. Level of evidence was assigned using the Harbour and Miller system.

A total of 1,420 citations were obtained by the search strategy, of which 20 studies were included. Overall, the level of evidence was low. Eleven studies reported on the efficacy and patient outcomes following chest decompression. The most studied technique was NCD (n = 7), followed by FT (n = 5). Definitions of a successful chest decompression were heterogeneous. Subjective improvement following NCD ranged between 18% and 86% (n = 6). Successful FT was reported for between 9.7% and 32.0% of interventions following a traumatic cardiac arrest. Adverse events were infrequently reported. Nine studies presented only on anatomical measures with predicted failure and success. The mean anterior chest wall thickness (CWT) was larger than the lateral CWT in all studies except one. The predicted success rate of NCD ranged between 90% and 100% when using needle >7cm (n = 7) both for the lateral and anterior approaches. The reported risk of iatrogenic injuries was higher for the lateral approach, mostly on the left side because of the proximity with the heart.

Based on observational studies with a low level of evidence, prehospital NCD should be performed using a needle >7cm length with either a lateral or anterior approach. While FT is an interesting diagnostic and therapeutic approach, evidence on the success rates and complications is limited. High-quality studies are required to determine the optimal chest decompression approach applicable in the out-of-hospital setting.

The primary goal of this study was to determine if ultrasound (US) use after brief point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) training on cardiac and lung exams would result in more paramedics correctly identifying a tension pneumothorax (TPTX) during a simulation scenario.

A randomized controlled, simulation-based trial of POCUS lung exam education investigating the ability of paramedics to correctly diagnose TPTX was performed. The US intervention group received a 30-minute cardiac and lung POCUS lecture followed by hands-on US training. The control group did not receive any POCUS training. Both groups participated in two scenarios: right unilateral TPTX and undifferentiated shock (no TPTX). In both scenarios, the patient continued to be hypoxemic after verified intubation with pulse oximetry of 86%-88% and hypotensive with a blood pressure of 70/50. Sirens were played at 65 decibels to mimic prehospital transport conditions. A simulation educator stated aloud the time diagnoses were made and procedures performed, which were recorded by the study investigator. Paramedics completed a pre-survey and post-survey.

Thirty paramedics were randomized to the control group; 30 paramedics were randomized to the US intervention group. Most paramedics had not received prior US training, had not previously performed a POCUS exam, and were uncomfortable with POCUS. Point-of-care US use was significantly higher in the US intervention group for both simulation cases (P <.001). A higher percentage of paramedics in the US intervention group arrived at the correct diagnosis (77%) for the TPTX case as compared to the control group (57%), although this difference was not significantly different (P = 0.1). There was no difference in the correct diagnosis between the control and US intervention groups for the undifferentiated shock case. On the post-survey, more paramedics in the US intervention group were comfortable with POCUS for evaluation of the lung and comfortable decompressing TPTX using POCUS (P <.001). Paramedics reported POCUS was within their scope of practice.

Despite being novice POCUS users, the paramedics were more likely to correctly diagnose TPTX during simulation after a brief POCUS educational intervention. However, this difference was not statistically significant. Paramedics were comfortable using POCUS and felt its use improved their TPTX diagnostic skills.

There is limited data describing the characteristics of paediatric post-operative cardiac surgery patients who develop pneumothoraces after chest tube removal. Patient management after chest tube removal is not standardised across paediatric cardiac surgery programmes. The purposes of this study were to describe the frequency of pneumothorax after chest tube removal in paediatric post-operative cardiac surgical patients and to describe the patient and clinical characteristics of those patients who developed a clinically significant pneumothorax requiring intervention.

A single-institution retrospective descriptive study (1 January, 2010–31 December, 2018) was utilised to review 11,651 paediatric post-operative cardiac surgical patients from newborn to 18 years old.

Twenty-five patients were diagnosed with a pneumothorax by chest radiograph following chest tube removal (0.2%). Of these 25 patients, 15 (1.6%) had a clinically significant pneumothorax and 8 (53%) did not demonstrate a change in baseline clinical status or require an increase in supplemental oxygen, 14 (93%) required an intervention, 9 (60%) were <1 year of age, 4 (27%) had single-ventricle physiology, and 5 (33%) had other non-cardiac anomalies/genetic syndromes.

In our cohort of patients, we confirmed the incidence of pneumothorax after chest tube removal is low in paediatric post-operative cardiac surgery patients. This population does not always exhibit changes in clinical status despite having clinically significant pneumothoraces. We suggest the development of criteria, based on clinical characteristics, for patients who are at increased risk of developing a pneumothorax and would require a routine chest radiograph following chest tube removal.

Needle thoracostomy is the prehospital treatment for tension pneumothorax. Sufficient catheter length is necessary for procedural success. The authors of this study determined minimum catheter length needed for procedural success on a percentile basis.

A meta-analysis of existing studies was conducted. A Medline search was performed using the search terms: needle decompression, needle thoracentesis, chest decompression, pneumothorax decompression, needle thoracostomy, and tension pneumothorax. Studies were included if they published a sample size, mean chest wall thickness, and a standard deviation or confidence interval. A PubMed search was performed in a similar fashion. Sample size, mean chest wall thickness, and standard deviation were found or calculated for each study. Data were combined to create a pooled dataset. Normal distribution of data was assumed. Procedural success was defined as catheter length being equal to or greater than the chest wall thickness.

The Medline and PubMed searches yielded 773 unique studies; all study abstracts were reviewed for possible inclusion. Eighteen papers were identified for full manuscript review. Thirteen studies met all inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Pooled sample statistics were: n=2,558; mean=4.19 cm; and SD=1.37 cm. Minimum catheter length needed for success at the 95th percentile for chest wall size was found to be 6.44 cm.

A catheter of at least 6.44 cm in length would be required to ensure that 95% of the patients in this pooled sample would have penetration of the pleural space at the site of needle decompression, and therefore, a successful procedure. These findings represent Level III evidence.

ClemencyBM , TanskiCT , RosenbergM , MayPR , ConsiglioJD , LindstromHA . Sufficient Catheter Length for Pneumothorax Needle Decompression: A Meta-Analysis. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2015;30(3):1 5