Background: It is argued that many older trauma patients are under-triaged in prehospital care which may adversely affect their outcomes. This systematic review aimed to assess prehospital under-triage rates for older trauma patients, the accuracy of the triage criteria, and the impact of prehospital triage decisions on outcomes. Methods: A computerised literature search using MEDLINE, Scopus, and CINHAL databases was conducted for studies published between 1966 and 2021 using a list of predetermined index terms and their associated alternatives. Studies which met the inclusion criteria were included and critiqued using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. Due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, narrative synthesis was used in this systematic review. Results: Of the 280 identified studies, 23 met the inclusion criteria. Current trauma triage guidelines have poor sensitivity to identify major trauma and the need for TC care for older adults. Although modified triage tools for this population have improved sensitivity, they showed significantly decreased specificity or were not applied to all older people. The issue of low rates of TC transport for positively triaged older patients is not well understood. Furthermore, the benefits of TC treatment for older patients remain uncertain. Conclusions: This systematic review showed that under-triage is an ongoing issue for older trauma patients in prehospital care and its impact on their outcomes is still uncertain. Further high-quality prospective research is needed to assess the accuracy of prehospital triage criteria, the factors other than the triage criteria that affect transport decisions, and the impact of under-triage on outcomes.

Confirming proper placement of an endotracheal tube (ETT) is important, as accidental misplacements may occur and lead to critical injuries, potentially leading to adverse outcomes. Multiple methods are available for determining the correct ETT placement in prehospital care. To assess the accuracy and reliability of the different methods used to confirm endotracheal intubation in prehospital settings. A comprehensive literature search was performed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for studies that were published between 1-June-1992 and 12-June-2022 using a combination of predetermined search terms. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were included and assessed for risk of bias using “Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Intervention” tool. Of the 1016 identified studies, nine met the inclusion criteria. Capnography and point-of-care ultrasound showed high sensitivity and specificity rates when applied to confirm ETT placement in prehospital care. Other methods including capnometry, colorimetric detectors, ODDs, and auscultation showed varied sensitivity and specificity. Patient comorbidities and device failure contributed to decreased accuracy rates in prehospital care. Capnography was less reliable in distinguishing between endotracheal intubation and right main stem intubation, which is known as a complication in out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation. Point-of-care ultrasound was more accurate and reliable in detecting oesophageal and endobronchial misplacements. ETCO₂ monitors, i.e., capnometry and colorimetric detectors, were less reliable in patients with low perfusion states. This systematic review showed that there is no single method with 100% accuracy in confirming the correct ETT placement and detecting the occurrence of accidental oesophageal or endobronchial misplacements in prehospital care. Further studies with a larger sample size are needed to assess the accuracy of multiple confirmatory methods in prehospital settings.

Caring for older people is an important part of prehospital practice, including appropriate triage and transportation decisions. However, prehospital triage criteria are designed to predominantly assess injury severity or high-energy mechanism which is not the case for older people who often have injuries compounded by multimorbidity and frailty. This has led to high rates of under-triage in this population. This narrative review aimed to assess aspects other than triage criteria to better understand and improve prehospital triage decisions for older trauma patients. This includes integrating frailty assessment in prehospital trauma triage, which was shown to predict adverse outcomes for older trauma patients. Furthermore, determining appropriate outcome measures and the benefits of Major Trauma Centers (MTCs) for older trauma patients should be considered in order to direct accurate and more beneficial prehospital trauma triage decisions. It is still not clear what are the appropriate outcome measures that should be applied when caring for older trauma patients. There is also no strong consensus about the benefits of MTC access for older trauma patients with regards to survival, in-hospital length of stay, discharge disposition, and complications. Moreover, looking into factors other than triage criteria such as distance to MTCs, patient or relative choice, training, unfamiliarity with protocols, and possible ageism, which were shown to impact prehospital triage decisions but their impact on outcomes has not been investigated yet, should be more actively assessed and investigated for this population. Therefore, this paper aimed to discuss the available evidence around frailty assessment in prehospital care, appropriate outcome measures for older trauma patients, the benefits of MTC access for older patients, and factors other than triage criteria that could adversely impact accurate prehospital triage decisions for older trauma patients. It also provided several suggestions for the future.

Purpose: Time is critical when dealing with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients in the Emergency Department (ED), as 90 min is crucial for overall health. Using non-EMS transportation for critical patients, such as patients with acute myocardial infarction, to a hospital might delay the rapid identification of the underlying medical disease and initiating definitive treatment. We aim to evaluate the association between the mode of transportation and the D2B time in patients presenting at the ED with AMI. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study with patients who presented at ED with AMI and underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The participants were patients with confirmed AMI at the ED of King Abdullah Medical City (KAMC) from January 2019 to December 2019. Results: In total, 162 AMI patients were enrolled in the study and divided based on the method of transportation. Less than half (n=65, 40.1%) were transported with an ambulance and 97 (59.9%) patients with a private car. The door-to-balloon (D2B) time for the ambulance group was 93.6± 38.31 minutes, and the private car group was 93.8± 30.88 minutes. Conclusion: There was no statistical significance when comparing the D2B time between the private car group and the ambulance group (P = 0.1870). Finally, ambulance transport significantly shortened the time to first ED physician contact. However, it was not associated with shortened D2B time when compared to private vehicle transport.

The proportion of older adults is increasing worldwide. Frailty assessment in prehospital care was suggested to improve triage decisions and paramedics’ judgment. This study aimed to assess the scope and nature of available evidence around frailty identification in prehospital care. A systematic search of the literature was performed using MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINHAL, and Web of Science to identify relevant articles published from January 2022 downwards. A list of indexed terms and their associated alternatives were pre-determined. Of the 71 identified and reviewed articles after removing duplicates, six articles were included in the review. Due to the heterogeneity of the included articles, the findings were described narratively. The findings of this review showed that the available evidence is limited and heterogenic. Two themes emerged from the findings of the included articles: 1) Paramedics’ Perceptions about Frailty Assessment in Prehospital Care and 2) Frailty Scores for Application in Prehospital Care. Paramedics recognised frailty assessment in pre-hospital care to be feasible and important. They highlighted the need for a simple and clear frailty score that could be used and mentioned to other healthcare professionals when handing over patients. Six frailty scores were reported to be used in prehospital care. The evidence around each frailty score is very limited. Overall, frailty assessment in prehospital care was shown to be important and feasible. Different frailty scores have been assessed for use in prehospital care. Further research investigating frailty identification in prehospital care is needed.

Introduction Frailty is characterised by vulnerability to adverse health outcomes and increases with age. Many frailty risk scores have been developed. One important example is the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) which has the potential to be widely used and automatically calculated which will provide accurate assessment of frailty in a time/cost-effective manner. This systematic review, therefore, seeks to describe the HFRS use since its publication in 2018. Methods and analysis The proposed systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We will include published original peer-reviewed articles, preprints, conference proceedings and letters to the editor reporting primary data where there is an English language abstract available from 1 January 2018 to 30 June 2022. Databases to be searched are MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science. Additional studies from, for example, the reference of the included studies will be identified and assessed for potential inclusion. Two independent reviewers will perform and assess the following: (1) eligibility of the included studies, (2) critical appraisal using the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool, and (3) data extraction using a predefined form. Disagreements will be resolved through discussions or by involvement of a third reviewer. It may be possible to undertake a meta-analysis if there are sufficient studies reporting effect measures in homogenous populations and/or settings. Effect sizes will be calculated using meta-analysis methods and expressed as risk ratios or ORs with 95% CIs. Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval is required for this systematic review as it will use secondary data only. The results of the systematic review will be submitted for publication in recognised peer-reviewed journals related to frailty and geriatric care and will be widely disseminated through conferences, congresses, seminars, symposia and scientific meetings.