Rapid Sequence Intubation in the Korean Emergency Department.
- Author:
Keun Jeong SONG
;
Byeong Cheol KIM
;
Moo Eob AHN
- Publication Type:Original Article
- MeSH:
Blood Pressure Monitors;
Emergencies*;
Emergency Service, Hospital*;
Humans;
Hypnotics and Sedatives;
Intubation*;
Intubation, Intratracheal;
Neuromuscular Blockade;
Neuromuscular Blocking Agents;
Postal Service;
Thiopental
- From:Journal of the Korean Society of Emergency Medicine
1999;10(3):386-392
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Assessing and securing airway is the beginning of the treatment for emergency patients. Rapid Sequence Intubation is a technique that uses sedatives and neuromuscular blockers to perform endotracheal intubation. This is a basic technique that all emergency physicians must master. Therefore, we investigated the recent circumstance of Rapid Sequence Intubation in patients at the emergency department. METHODS: Ten-item surveys were mailed to the board certified emergency physicians in the emergency department of 45 hospitals. Among the 45 surveys, 37 surveys were returned. The rate of reply was 82.2%. RESULTS: Throughout the hospital, 35/37 of the endotracheal intubation was performed in the emergency department. Anesthesiologists were not called for endotracheal intubation in 34/37 emergency department, and anesthesiologists were not called for the use of neuromuscular blockers in 36/37 emergency departments. 35 emergency departments used sedatives. The sedatives used were as follows : midazolam(48.6%), diazepam(25.7%), thiopental sodium(22.9%), and ketamine(2.9%). 30 emergency departments used neuromuscular blockers. The neuromuscular blockers used were as fallows : succinylcholine(46.7%), vecuronium(43.3%), and pancuronium(10.0%). The rate of Rapid Sequence Intubation was 33.8%. Various monitoring devices were used during Rapid Sequence Intubation ; cardiac monitors 90.5%, pulse oximeters 80.4%, noninvasive blood pressure monitors 64.9% and ETCO2/ 12.8%. Only 6 of 37 hospitals had the assessment program far endotracheal intubations and 60% was the assessment rate in these hospitals, however, there was no proctocol for the quality assurance assessment. CONCLUSION: Emergency endotracheal intubation was performed independently by the physician of the emergency department. The Rapid Sequence Intubation was effective and had low adverse effect. We recommended that Rapid Sequence Intubation should be used more aggressively in patients. Also, applying these assessment proctocol in patients, we could improve the quality of assurance assessment.
