Cargando…

Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review

BACKGROUND -: Prehospital care is classified into ALS- (advanced life support) and BLS- (basic life support) levels according to the methods used. ALS-level prehospital care uses invasive methods, such as intravenous fluids, medications and intubation. However, the effectiveness of ALS care compared...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ryynänen, Olli-Pekka, Iirola, Timo, Reitala, Janne, Pälve, Heikki, Malmivaara, Antti
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3001418/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21092256
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-18-62
_version_ 1782193622324609024
author Ryynänen, Olli-Pekka
Iirola, Timo
Reitala, Janne
Pälve, Heikki
Malmivaara, Antti
author_facet Ryynänen, Olli-Pekka
Iirola, Timo
Reitala, Janne
Pälve, Heikki
Malmivaara, Antti
author_sort Ryynänen, Olli-Pekka
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND -: Prehospital care is classified into ALS- (advanced life support) and BLS- (basic life support) levels according to the methods used. ALS-level prehospital care uses invasive methods, such as intravenous fluids, medications and intubation. However, the effectiveness of ALS care compared to BLS has been questionable. AIM -: The aim of this systematic review is to compare the effectiveness of ALS- and BLS-level prehospital care. MATERIAL AND METHODS -: In a systematic review, articles where ALS-level prehospital care was compared to BLS-level or any other treatment were included. The outcome variables were mortality or patient's health-related quality of life or patient's capacity to perform daily activities. RESULTS -: We identified 46 articles, mostly retrospective observational studies. The results on the effectiveness of ALS in unselected patient cohorts are contradictory. In cardiac arrest, early cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation are essential for survival, but prehospital ALS interventions have not improved survival. Prehospital thrombolytic treatment reduces mortality in patients having a myocardial infarction. The majority of research into trauma favours BLS in the case of penetrating trauma and also in cases of short distance to a hospital. In patients with severe head injuries, ALS provided by paramedics and intubation without anaesthesia can even be harmful. If the prehospital care is provided by an experienced physician and by a HEMS organisation (Helicopter Emergency Medical Service), ALS interventions may be beneficial for patients with multiple injuries and severe brain injuries. However, the results are contradictory. CONCLUSIONS -: ALS seems to improve survival in patients with myocardial infarction and BLS seems to be the proper level of care for patients with penetrating injuries. Some studies indicate a beneficial effect of ALS among patients with blunt head injuries or multiple injuries. There is also some evidence in favour of ALS among patients with epileptic seizures as well as those with a respiratory distress.
format Text
id pubmed-3001418
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30014182010-12-15 Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review Ryynänen, Olli-Pekka Iirola, Timo Reitala, Janne Pälve, Heikki Malmivaara, Antti Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Review BACKGROUND -: Prehospital care is classified into ALS- (advanced life support) and BLS- (basic life support) levels according to the methods used. ALS-level prehospital care uses invasive methods, such as intravenous fluids, medications and intubation. However, the effectiveness of ALS care compared to BLS has been questionable. AIM -: The aim of this systematic review is to compare the effectiveness of ALS- and BLS-level prehospital care. MATERIAL AND METHODS -: In a systematic review, articles where ALS-level prehospital care was compared to BLS-level or any other treatment were included. The outcome variables were mortality or patient's health-related quality of life or patient's capacity to perform daily activities. RESULTS -: We identified 46 articles, mostly retrospective observational studies. The results on the effectiveness of ALS in unselected patient cohorts are contradictory. In cardiac arrest, early cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation are essential for survival, but prehospital ALS interventions have not improved survival. Prehospital thrombolytic treatment reduces mortality in patients having a myocardial infarction. The majority of research into trauma favours BLS in the case of penetrating trauma and also in cases of short distance to a hospital. In patients with severe head injuries, ALS provided by paramedics and intubation without anaesthesia can even be harmful. If the prehospital care is provided by an experienced physician and by a HEMS organisation (Helicopter Emergency Medical Service), ALS interventions may be beneficial for patients with multiple injuries and severe brain injuries. However, the results are contradictory. CONCLUSIONS -: ALS seems to improve survival in patients with myocardial infarction and BLS seems to be the proper level of care for patients with penetrating injuries. Some studies indicate a beneficial effect of ALS among patients with blunt head injuries or multiple injuries. There is also some evidence in favour of ALS among patients with epileptic seizures as well as those with a respiratory distress. BioMed Central 2010-11-23 /pmc/articles/PMC3001418/ /pubmed/21092256 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-18-62 Text en Copyright ©2010 Ryynänen et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Ryynänen, Olli-Pekka
Iirola, Timo
Reitala, Janne
Pälve, Heikki
Malmivaara, Antti
Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title_full Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title_fullStr Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title_short Is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? A systematic review
title_sort is advanced life support better than basic life support in prehospital care? a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3001418/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21092256
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-18-62
work_keys_str_mv AT ryynanenollipekka isadvancedlifesupportbetterthanbasiclifesupportinprehospitalcareasystematicreview
AT iirolatimo isadvancedlifesupportbetterthanbasiclifesupportinprehospitalcareasystematicreview
AT reitalajanne isadvancedlifesupportbetterthanbasiclifesupportinprehospitalcareasystematicreview
AT palveheikki isadvancedlifesupportbetterthanbasiclifesupportinprehospitalcareasystematicreview
AT malmivaaraantti isadvancedlifesupportbetterthanbasiclifesupportinprehospitalcareasystematicreview