Airway managed by emergency physicians or anaesthesiologists in trauma patients: A retrospective cohort analysis of outcomes

• Published in: Hong Kong journal of emergency medicine Vol. 28; no. 5; pp. 269 - 278
• Main Authors: Tang, Tsz Ha, Yang, Marc LC, Chan, On Yee, Chan, Lily PS, Ho, Hiu Fai
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hong Kong SAGE Publications 01-09-2021; Sage Publications Ltd
• Subjects: Administration; airway; Airway management; Anesthesiologists; Cardiopulmonary resuscitation; Care; Cohort analysis; CPR; Emergency medical care; emergency medicine; Emergency services; Hospitals; Intubation; Mortality; Outcome assessment (Medical care); Patients; Physicians (General practice); resuscitation; Trauma; Trauma centers; resuscitation; intubation; emergency medicine; Trauma; airway
• ISSN: 1024-9079; 2309-5407
• DOI: 10.1177/1024907920931719

Objectives: In some trauma centres, anaesthesiologists have the primary responsibility of managing airway in trauma resuscitation. However, as emergency physicians establish a separate specialty with airway management and endotracheal intubation being one of the core skills, role delineation within trauma members may vary. In this cohort study, we aim to determine the difference in mortality of trauma patients requiring intubation in the emergency department between emergency physicians and anaesthesiologists.
Methods: We screened all 1588 patients in the hospital trauma registry from 2015 to 2018. We included all patients requiring endotracheal intubation and aged 18 or above but excluded those with pregnancy, presented with cardiac arrest and secondarily transferred from other hospitals. A total of 349 eligible patients were sorted into two cohorts according to the physicians who performed intubations (anaesthesiologists = 205 patients, emergency physicians = 144 patients). Patients' baseline demographics, 30-day all-cause mortality and other predefined secondary outcomes were compared by statistical tests. Stepwise logistic regression of 30-day all-cause mortality was performed.
Results: Our study has shown that intubation by emergency physicians was not associated with higher 30-day all-cause mortality after potential confounders were controlled by logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio = 1.253, p = 0.607). Both groups also did not differ in other clinical important secondary outcomes, including proportion of successful intubations, use of surgical airway or rescue manoeuvres, respiratory and airway complications, mortality in intensive care or highdependency unit, post-intubation cardiac arrest, post-intubation hypotension and post-intubation hypoxia.
Conclusion: Endotracheal intubation by emergency physicians is not associated with increased 30-day all-cause mortality when compared to anaesthesiologists after accounting for confounders.