Success rates of pre-hospital difficult airway management: a quality control study evaluating an in-hospital training program.

Background: Competence in emergency airway management is key in order to improve patient safety and outcome. The scope of compulsory training for emergency physicians or paramedics is quite limited, especially in Austria. The purpose of this study was to review the difficult airway management performance of an emergency medical service (EMS) in a region that has implemented a more thorough training program than current regulations require, comprising 3 months of initial training and supervised emergency practice and 3 days/month of on-going in-hospital training as previously reported.Methods: This is a subgroup analysis of pre-hospital airway interventions performed by non-anesthesiologist EMS physicians between 2006 and 2016. The dataset is part of a retrospective quality control study performed in the ground EMS system of Wiener Neustadt, Austria. Difficult airway missions recorded in the electronic database were matched with the hospital information system and analyzed.Results: Nine hundred thirty-three of 23060 ground EMS patients (4%) required an airway intervention. In 48 cases, transient bag-mask-valve ventilation was sufficient, and 5 patients needed repositioning of a pre-existing tracheostomy cannula. Eight hundred thirty-six of 877 patients (95.3%) were successfully intubated within two attempts; in 3 patients, a supraglottic airway device was employed first line. Management of 41 patients with failed tracheal intubation comprised laryngeal tubes (<italic>n</italic> = 21), intubating laryngeal mask (<italic>n</italic> = 11), ongoing bag-mask-valve ventilation (<italic>n</italic> = 8), and crico-thyrotomy (<italic>n</italic> = 1). There was no cannot intubate/cannot ventilate situation. Blood gas analysis at admission revealed hypoxemia in 2 and/or hypercapnia in 11 cases.Conclusion: During the 11-year study period, difficult airways were encountered in 5% but sufficiently managed in all patients. Thus, the training regime presented might be a feasible and beneficial model for training of non-anesthesiologist emergency physicians as well as paramedics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]