Cargando…

Burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualties

OBJECTIVE: Decontamination protocols for victims of mass casualty events are well documented and emphasized to protect physicians, nurses and facilities. Decontamination practices outside of mass casualty events are unknown. This pilot study was undertaken to assess the current practices of burn pat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davidson, Scott B., Brunken, Nathan, Naughton, Shannon, VandenBerg, Sheri L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7771729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33392529
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12280
_version_ 1783629729769717760
author Davidson, Scott B.
Brunken, Nathan
Naughton, Shannon
VandenBerg, Sheri L.
author_facet Davidson, Scott B.
Brunken, Nathan
Naughton, Shannon
VandenBerg, Sheri L.
author_sort Davidson, Scott B.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Decontamination protocols for victims of mass casualty events are well documented and emphasized to protect physicians, nurses and facilities. Decontamination practices outside of mass casualty events are unknown. This pilot study was undertaken to assess the current practices of burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualty events within level I and II trauma center emergency departments in the state of Michigan. METHODS: Using the Michigan Trauma Quality Improvement Project membership, a 10‐question online survey was sent to trauma program managers at all level I and II trauma centers in Michigan. Survey questions focused on institutional decontamination protocols and consistency of use. RESULTS: Survey response was 50%. Of the responding facilities, 31% did not decontaminate burn patients. Of the centers who indicated that they did decontaminate burn patients, 31% did not follow a standardized protocol. Our survey revealed that 69% of facilities used a protocol for decontamination: 45% used the protocol consistently on all burns, and 55% at physician discretion. Products used most frequently to decontaminate burn patients included water (100%) followed by soap (44%). CONCLUSION: This pilot survey of level I and II trauma centers in the state of Michigan revealed variability in the use of burn patient decontamination protocols and consistency of use. Additional research is warranted to determine if our results are reflective of trauma centers nationally.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7771729
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77717292020-12-31 Burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualties Davidson, Scott B. Brunken, Nathan Naughton, Shannon VandenBerg, Sheri L. J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open Emergency Medical Services OBJECTIVE: Decontamination protocols for victims of mass casualty events are well documented and emphasized to protect physicians, nurses and facilities. Decontamination practices outside of mass casualty events are unknown. This pilot study was undertaken to assess the current practices of burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualty events within level I and II trauma center emergency departments in the state of Michigan. METHODS: Using the Michigan Trauma Quality Improvement Project membership, a 10‐question online survey was sent to trauma program managers at all level I and II trauma centers in Michigan. Survey questions focused on institutional decontamination protocols and consistency of use. RESULTS: Survey response was 50%. Of the responding facilities, 31% did not decontaminate burn patients. Of the centers who indicated that they did decontaminate burn patients, 31% did not follow a standardized protocol. Our survey revealed that 69% of facilities used a protocol for decontamination: 45% used the protocol consistently on all burns, and 55% at physician discretion. Products used most frequently to decontaminate burn patients included water (100%) followed by soap (44%). CONCLUSION: This pilot survey of level I and II trauma centers in the state of Michigan revealed variability in the use of burn patient decontamination protocols and consistency of use. Additional research is warranted to determine if our results are reflective of trauma centers nationally. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-10-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7771729/ /pubmed/33392529 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12280 Text en © 2020 The Authors. JACEP Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of the American College of Emergency Physicians. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Emergency Medical Services
Davidson, Scott B.
Brunken, Nathan
Naughton, Shannon
VandenBerg, Sheri L.
Burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualties
title Burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualties
title_full Burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualties
title_fullStr Burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualties
title_full_unstemmed Burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualties
title_short Burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualties
title_sort burn patient decontamination outside of mass casualties
topic Emergency Medical Services
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7771729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33392529
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12280
work_keys_str_mv AT davidsonscottb burnpatientdecontaminationoutsideofmasscasualties
AT brunkennathan burnpatientdecontaminationoutsideofmasscasualties
AT naughtonshannon burnpatientdecontaminationoutsideofmasscasualties
AT vandenbergsheril burnpatientdecontaminationoutsideofmasscasualties