Why the study?
Evidence regarding prehospital emergency anaesthesia techniques and outcomes is mixed, and heterogeneity in systems, providers, and procedures complicates data interpretation.
Standardizing prehospital emergency anaesthesia with videolaryngoscopy, bougies, and invasive monitoring improves intubation success and physiological stability.
Broader PHEA strategies may improve safety; leaves open need for prospective trials across systems.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Evidence regarding various aspects of prehospital emergency anaesthesia (PHEA) - including techniques and outcomes - is mixed. The heterogeneity of systems, providers, and procedures complicates interpretation of data on individual interventions. This review aims to identify recent literature that offers strategies to improve the quality and safety of PHEA. RECENT FINDINGS: Current literature supports a broader perspective on PHEA, moving beyond rapid sequence intubation alone. The adoption of videolaryngoscopy and bougies has improved intubation success, shifting focus toward maintaining physiological stability. Invasive blood pressure monitoring and arterial blood gas analysis have proven both feasible and beneficial in the prehospital setting. Consensus-based quality indicators now facilitate more consistent evaluation and comparison of practices. SUMMARY: PHEA is a complex and high-risk intervention. Recent evidence supports standardizing the process, including methods to optimize first-pass success and enhance physiological stability. Robust clinical governance is essential to ensure safety.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nurmi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: