Rapid sequence induction in the emergency department: a strategy for failure

S D Carley; C Gwinnutt; J Butler; I Sammy; P Driscoll

doi:10.1136/emj.19.2.109

Responses

PDF

Original Article

Rapid sequence induction in the emergency department: a strategy for failure

Free

Compose a Response to This Article

Compose Response

Title *

Author Information

Contributors
First Name and Middle Initial * First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'. Last Name * Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'. Email Address * Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com Occupation * Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'. Affiliation * Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.

Statement of Competing Interests

Competing interests? *

Yes

Please describe the competing interests

PLEASE NOTE:

A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.

I agree to and have read the terms and conditions for rapid responses and BMJ Privacy Notice *

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

RSI and crichothyrotomy success rates
Dominique S Brookes
Published on: 4 January 2005
Failed intubation drill: a necessity
Fiona J Macfarlane
Published on: 28 May 2002
RSI by non-anaesthetists in the UK - lower incidence of cricothyrotomy than in the US
Cliff Reid
Published on: 3 April 2002

Published on: 4 January 2005
RSI and crichothyrotomy success rates
- Dominique S Brookes, research assistant
Dear Editor
A paper by Mizelle et al. found that (in the USA)success rates for prehospital:
- RSI by non physicians varied from 76%-98%
- Crichothyrotomy by non physicians varied from 0%-4%
Are either of these procedures carried out by non-physicians in UK?

Conflict of Interest:
None declared.
- Back to top
Published on: 28 May 2002
Failed intubation drill: a necessity
- Fiona J Macfarlane, Anaesthetic Fellow
Dear Editor
As an anaesthetist, I read with interest the article by Carley and colleagues regarding the necessity of having a drill for failed intubation in the Emergency Department. A drill is essential and should be actively taught and practised.
The algorithm you have developed is very similar to those used in anaesthetic practice, but I wish to highlight a few points. The use of the gum-elastic bougie...
Show More

Dear Editor
As an anaesthetist, I read with interest the article by Carley and colleagues regarding the necessity of having a drill for failed intubation in the Emergency Department. A drill is essential and should be actively taught and practised.
The algorithm you have developed is very similar to those used in anaesthetic practice, but I wish to highlight a few points. The use of the gum-elastic bougie should feature earlier in the algorithm. There are groups that use it routinely for all intubations.[1,2] The gum-elastic bougie is a great asset and is often underrated as a piece of equipment by non-anaesthetists. Its routine use may decrease the frequency that the failed intubation drill is required. It is usual that the first laryngoscopic view is the best view so it is sensible to optimise the chance of success at this stage.
My second point involves your suggested use of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA). It has been shown to be a reasonable aid to airway management for non-anaesthetists or those inexperienced in its use in resuscitation. With appropriate education, its application is considered relatively easy to learn. It is a less invasive, simpler and considering the rarity of cricothyroidotomies, should routinely be used in the algorithm before proceeding to the cricothyroidotomy. The LMA has been shown to be a suitable choice for temporary airway control when intubation fails.[3]
The ProSeal, a new laryngeal airway device may have a place in the Emergency Department. It has a port to allow easy passage of an orogastric tube. It has been compared with the LMA in anaesthetised, non-paralyzed patients. The ProSeal is more difficult to insert but forms a better seal and does aid the prompt passage of an orogastric tube.[4,5] It may provide a temporary airway that allows the redirection of regurgitated fluid away from the respiratory tract.[6,7] The possibility of regurgitation cannot be excluded fully and thus the ProSeal cannot replace an endotracheal tube.
Finally, the BURP technique or optimal external laryngeal manipulation has been shown to be the most effective with pressure applied to the low thyroid cartilage.[8] It must not be confused with cricoid pressure.
It is essential to have a failed intubation drill in any location that tracheal intubation is being undertaken. More importantly, it is necessary to teach methods to optimise intubating conditions, including patient positioning, having appropriate personnel present, being proficient in the use of equipment and having all necessary equipment checked and available.
References
(1) London Helicopter Emergency Medical Service Standard Operating Procedures: Rapid sequence induction.
(2) Careflight Prehospital Trauma Course.
(3) Martin SE, Ochsner MG, Jarman RH, Agudelo WE, Davis FE. Use of the laryngeal mask airway in air transport when intubation fails. J Trauma 1999;47:352-7.
(4) Brimacombe J, Keller C, Fullekrug B, Argo F, Rosenblatt W, Dierdorf SE, Garcia de Lucas E, Capdevilla X, Brimacombe N. A multicentre study comparing the ProSeal and Classic laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized, nonparalyzed patients. Anesthesiol 2002;96: 289-95.
(5) Cook TM, Nolan JP, Verghese C, Strube PJ, Lees M, Millar JM, Baskett PJF. Randomized crossover comparison of the ProSeal with the classic laryngeal mask airway in unparalysed anaesthetized patients. BJA 2002;88:527-33.
(6) Keller C, Brimacombe J, Kleinsasser A, Loeckinger A. Does the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway prevent aspiration of regurgitated fluid? Anesth Analg 2000;91:1017-20.
(7) Brimacombe J, Keller C. Airway protection with the Proseal laryngeal mask airway. Anaesth Intensive Care 2001;29:288-91.
(8) Benumof JL, Cooper SD. Quantitative improvement in laryngoscopic view by optimal external laryngeal manipulation. J Clin Anesth 1996;8:136-40.
Show Less

Conflict of Interest:
None declared.
- Back to top
Published on: 3 April 2002
RSI by non-anaesthetists in the UK - lower incidence of cricothyrotomy than in the US
- Cliff Reid, Physician
- Other Contributors:
  Louisa Chan
Dear Editor
Dr Carley and colleagues have produced invaluable and highly practical failed intubation guidelines for emergency physicians using RSI. They highlight the emergency department cricothyrotomy rate in the United States of 0.5-1.2%, and the lack of comparative United Kingdom rates, which are thought to be lower.
As part of a prospective study of emergency airway management by intensive care doctors...
Show More

Dear Editor
Dr Carley and colleagues have produced invaluable and highly practical failed intubation guidelines for emergency physicians using RSI. They highlight the emergency department cricothyrotomy rate in the United States of 0.5-1.2%, and the lack of comparative United Kingdom rates, which are thought to be lower.
As part of a prospective study of emergency airway management by intensive care doctors in a large UK district general hospital, we examined 208 consecutive emergency rapid sequence intubations outside the operating theatre, of which 76 were performed in the emergency department. There were no cricothyrotomies, no failed intubations, and no deaths during the procedure even though the intubating physicians were of varying seniority, with career backgrounds in emergency medicine and general medicine as well as anaesthesia. This suggests that, with proper training and support, even junior doctors in A&E can undertake RSI with a low risk of failure requiring an emergency surgical airway.
We agree that as long as such crucial training and senior support are provided, UK emergency department patients will continue to experience lower rates of cricothyrotomy and failed intubation than in the United States. This will be necessary if RSI by non-anaesthetists is to become widely accepted in the UK. The guidelines by Dr Carley et al are an important contribution to this process.
Dr Cliff Reid
Registrar in Paediatric critical care
Childrens Hospital Westmead
New South Wales
Australia
Dr Louisa Chan
Registrar in emergency medicine
Gosford District Hospital
New South Wales
Australia
Show Less

Conflict of Interest:
None declared.
- Back to top

Main menu

Plain text

PLEASE NOTE:

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

Log in using your username and password

Main menu

Log in using your username and password

You are here

Plain text

PLEASE NOTE:

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

Read the full text or download the PDF:

Log in using your username and password