Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T05:41:43.228Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Needle Thoracostomy: Does Changing Needle Length and Location Change Patient Outcome?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2018

Lori A. Weichenthal*
Affiliation:
Emergency Medicine, University of California – San Francisco (UCSF) Fresno, Fresno, CaliforniaUSA
Scott Owen
Affiliation:
Emergency Medicine, University of California – San Francisco (UCSF) Fresno, Fresno, CaliforniaUSA
Geoffory Stroh
Affiliation:
Emergency Medicine, University of California – San Francisco (UCSF) Fresno, Fresno, CaliforniaUSA
John Ramos
Affiliation:
Emergency Medicine, University of California – San Francisco (UCSF) Fresno, Fresno, CaliforniaUSA
*
Correspondence: Lori A. Weichenthal, MD, FACEP Professor Clinical Emergency Medicine UCSF Fresno 155 N. Fresno St. Fresno, California 93701 USA E-mail: lweichenthal@fresno.ucsf.edu

Abstract

Background

Needle thoracostomy (NT) is a common prehospital intervention for patients in extremis or cardiac arrest due to trauma. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes, efficacy, and complications after a change in policy related to NT in a four-county Emergency Medical Services (EMS) system with a catchment area of greater than 1.6 million people.

Methods

This is a before and after observational study of all patients who had NT performed in the Central California (USA) EMS system. The before, anterior midclavicular line (MCL) group consisted of all patients who underwent NT from May 7, 2007 through February 28, 2013. The after, midaxillary line (MAL) axillary group consisted of all patients who underwent NT from March 1, 2013 through January 30, 2016, after policy revisions changed the timing, needle size, and placement location for NT. All prehospital and hospital records where NT was performed were queried for demographics, mechanism of injury, initial status and post-NT clinical change, reported complications, and final outcome. The trauma registry was accessed to obtain Injury Severity Scores (ISS). Information was manually abstracted by study investigators and examined utilizing univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

Three-hundred and five trauma patients treated with NT were included in this study, of which, 169 patients (the MCL group) were treated with a 14-guage intravenous (IV) catheter at least 5.0-cm long at the second intercostal space (ICS), MCL after being placed in the ambulance; and 136 patients (the MAL group) were treated with a 10-guage IV catheter at least 9.5-cm long at the fifth ICS, MAL on scene. The mean ISS was lower in the MAL cohort (64.5 versus 69.2; P=.007). The mortality rate was 79% in both groups. The multivariate model with regard to survival supported that a lower ISS (P<.001) and reported clinical change after NT (P=.003) were significant indicators of survival. No complications from NT were reported.

Conclusions

Changing the timing, length of needle, and location of placement did not change mortality in patients requiring NT. Needle thoracostomy was used more frequently after the change in policy, and the MAL cohort was less injured. No increase in reported complications was noted.

WeichenthalLA, OwenS, StrohG, RamosJ. Needle Thoracostomy: Does Changing Needle Length and Location Change Patient Outcome?Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(3):237–244.

Type
Original Research
Copyright
© World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Conflicts of interest: none

References

1. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS). http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Atlanta, Georgia USA. Accessed January 22, 2014.Google Scholar
2. American College of Surgeons. Advanced Trauma Life Support. 9th ed. Chicago, Illinois USA: American College of Surgeons; 2012.Google Scholar
3. Lockey, D, Crewdson, K, Davies, G. Traumatic cardiac arrest: who are the survivors? Ann Emerg Med. 2006;48(3):240-244.Google Scholar
4. Leis, CC, Hernandez, CC, Blanoc, MJ, Paterna, PC, Hernandez, RE, Torres, EC. Traumatic cardiac arrest: should Advanced Life Support be initiated? J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;74(2):634-638.Google Scholar
5. Weichenthal, L, Crane, D, Rond, L. Needle thoracostomy in the prehospital setting: a retrospective observational study. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2016;20(3):399-403.Google Scholar
6. Butler, FK Jr., Giebner, SD, McSwain, NE. Prehospital Trauma Life Support Manual. 7th ed. Chicago, Illinois USA: American College of Surgeons and National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians; 2010.Google Scholar
7. Bulger, EM, Nathens, AB, Rivara, FP, MacKenzie, E, Sabath, DR, Jurkovich, GJ. National variability in out-of-hospital treatment after traumatic injury. Ann Emerg Med. 2007;49(3):293-301.Google Scholar
8. Eckstein, M, Suyehara, D. Needle thoracostomy in the prehospital setting. Prehosp Emerg Care. 1998;2(2):132-135.Google Scholar
9. Warner, KJ, Copass, MK, Bulger, EM. Paramedic use of needle thoracostomy in the prehospital environment. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2008;12(2):162-168.Google Scholar
10. Schroeder, E, Valdez, C, Krauthamer, A, et al. Average chest wall thickness at two anatomic locations in trauma patients. Injury. 2013;44(9):1183-1185.Google Scholar
11. Ball, CG, Wyrzykowski, AD, Kirkpatrick, AW, et al. Thoracic needle decompression for tension pneumothorax: clinical correlation with catheter length. Can J Surg. 2010;53(3):184-188.Google Scholar
12. Zengerink, I, Brink, PR, Laupland, KB, Raber, EL, Zygun, D, Kortbeek, JB. Needle thoracostomy in the treatment of a tension pneumothorax in trauma patients: what size needle? J Trauma. 2008;64(1):111-114.Google Scholar
13. Inaba, K, Branco, BC, Eckstein, M, et al. Optimal positioning for emergent needle thoracostomy: a cadaver-based study. J Trauma. 2011;71(5):1099-1103; discussion 1103.Google Scholar
14. Inaba, K, Ives, C, McClure, K, et al. Radiologic evaluation of alternative sites for needle decompression of tension pneumothorax. Arch Surg. 2012;147(9):813-818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Haldun, A, Ebru, UA, Evmanb, S, et al. Determination of the appropriate catheter length and place for needle thoracostomy by using computed tomography scans of pneumothorax patients. Injury. 2013;44(9):1177-1182.Google Scholar
16. Wax, DB, Leibowitz, AB. Radiologic assessment of potential sites for needle decompression of a tension pneumothorax. Anesth Analg. 2007;105(5):1385-1388.Google Scholar
17. Rawlins, R, Brown, KM, Carr, CS, Cameron, CR. Life threatening haemorrhage after anterior needle aspiration of pneumothoraces. A role for lateral needle aspiration in emergency decompression of spontaneous pneumothorax. Emerg Med J. 2003;20(4):383-384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Sanchez, LD, Straszewski, S, Saghir, A, et al. Anterior versus lateral needle decompression of tension pneumothorax: comparison by computed tomography chest wall measurement. Acad Emerg Med. 2011;18(10):1022-1026.Google Scholar
19. Clemency, BM, Tanski, CT, Rosenberg, M, May, PR, Consiglio, JD, Lindstrom, HA. Sufficient catheter length for pneumothorax needle decompression: a meta-analysis. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2015;30(3):249-253.Google Scholar
20. National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians. TCCC guidelines and curriculum. https://www.naemt.org/education /TCCC/guidelines_curriculum. Accessed April 20, 2017.Google Scholar
21. Chang, SJ, Ross, SW, Kiefer, DJ, et al. Evaluation of 8.0-cm needle at the fourth anterior axillary line for needle chest decompression of tension pneumothorax. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;76(4):1029-1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Aho, JM, Thiels, CA, El Khatib, MM, et al. Needle thoracostomy: clinical effectiveness is improved using a longer angiocatheter. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2016;80(2):272-277.Google Scholar
23. US Census Bureau. 2010; State & County Quickfacts: California. http://quickfacts.census.gov. Accessed May 1, 2014.Google Scholar
24. Mistry, N, Bleetman, A, Roberts, KJ. Chest decompression during the resuscitation of patients in prehospital traumatic cardiac arrest. Emerg Med J. 2009;26(10):738-740.Google Scholar
25. Champion, HR, Copes, WS, Sacco, WJ, et al. The major trauma outcome study: establishing national norms for trauma care. J Trauma. 1990;30(11):1356-1365.Google Scholar
26. Willis, CD, Cameron, PA, Bernard, SA, Fitzgerald, M. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation after traumatic cardiac arrest is not always futile. Int J Care Injured. 2006;37(5):448-454.Google Scholar
27. Minei, JP, Schmicker, RH, Kerby, JD, et al. Severe traumatic injury: regional variation in incidence and outcome. Ann Surg. 2010;252(1):149-157.Google Scholar
28. Inaba, K, Branco, BC, Eckstein, M, et al. Optimal positioning for emergent needle thoracostomy: a cadaver-based study. J Trauma. 2011;71(5):1099-1103; discussion 1103.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Weichenthal et al. supplementary material

Weichenthal et al. supplementary material 1

Download Weichenthal et al. supplementary material(File)
File 16.8 KB