Live from Prospect St: Dizzy at Hillcrest (part 2)

Continued from Part 1

While you chat, your partner helpfully places Ms. Smith on a nasal cannula running oxygen at 4 LPM.

You ask whether she lost consciousness when she fell, and she agrees that she may have briefly. When you ask why she fell, she states she simply tripped on the fringe of the rug. The fall was 3 hours ago, and she first vomited immediately afterwards. Until this morning, she was feeling normal, with nothing bothering her over the previous days. Her chief complaint seems to be her persistent inability to “find words,” although staff state that they called EMS mainly due to her dizziness.

When you pursue the “pressure” behind her eyes, she admits that it’s a pain of sorts, but it is obviously not too severe, and she refuses to quantify it with a number. She clarifies her dizziness by stating that although it may be worse when she stands or walks, it is continuous; she is experiencing it even as you speak.

Her pupils are equal, somewhat small, and react slightly to light. Her eyes track in all directions, with no appreciable nystagmus. When you ask her to show her teeth, she does so with no facial droop. When you ask her to hold her arms straight in front of her, palms up, with her eyes closed, she does so with no unilateral drift. She demonstrates good, equal grips, equal bilateral strength in finger-abduction and wrist flexion/extension, and equal bilateral strength in ankle dorsiflexion/plantarflexion. Her radial pulses are equal, as are her dorsalis pedis pulses, and she notes normal bilateral sensation when you pinch her hands and feet.

Throughout your conversation, she has demonstrated no slurring of speech, normal recall, and excellent orientation.

Consulting with the staff, you learn that her medications include Metoprolol, Simvastatin, Metformin, Lisinopril, Colace, Aspirin, and Coumadin for a recent hip surgery. She is allergic to Penicillin. They are unsure about her baseline BP, but Ms. Smith believes it is normally “in the 140s.” Staff believe her temperature has been recently normal, although they aren’t certain.

Your partner obtains her blood glucose at 149.

The nearest ALS is 15 minutes away.

At this point, what are the leading possibilities in your differential?

With that in mind, what is this patient’s priority?

What is your transport destination?

Is any treatment needed at this time?

Should you make any calls to mobilize further resources?

Live from Prospect St: Dizzy at Hillcrest (part 1)

Many moons ago, there was an enlightened discussion list run by Jeff Brosius and Valerie DeFrance called Live from Peachtree St. The format was this: Jeff would periodically present scenarios based on real-life calls, putting them out for debate on diagnosis and treatment; later he’d provide the outcomes, with a discussion of the relevant clinical issues. It was a great educational model, and I’ve always thought that scenario-based instruction was a fantastic way to learn to parse the details of a call, determine what matters, come up with a working diagnosis, and make your decisions. You can’t learn hands-on skills from scenarios, but you can exercise your noodle, and more noodle-exercise is what this business needs.

Sadly, Live from Peachtree St. closed its doors years ago, although its archives are available online and still a great read. In the same spirit, however, and with permission from the authors, I’d like to revive the tradition. With that in mind, and harkening from my own neck of the woods, I give you: Live from Prospect St!

To juggle the format a little, I’d like to break these cases up. Remember “Choose your Own Adventure” books? In a similar fashion, I’ll give you the first chunk of the call, let you analyze the facts and make some decisions, then go forward with another round of details, and finally present the outcome. Cases are either true to life (obviously edited for HIPAA) or closely based on reality with editorializing for educational purposes. Feel free to send in any cases of your own! We’re not only interested in intriguing or unusual calls, but also more run-of-the-mill cases that illustrate important fundamentals of assessment and care.

All levels are invited to play, but in keeping with our mission, we will assume a BLS scope of practice. Onward!

 

Dizzy at Hillcrest

You are the technician on A-8, a dual-EMT, transporting BLS ambulance. You are equipped with BLS epinephrine, aspirin, glucose, nebulized albuterol, pulse oximetry, and finger-stick glucometry. Intercepting ALS is available upon request. It is noon and the weather is fair.

The radio crackles: “Ambulance 8, respond cold to Hillcrest Manor, in the lobby, for the patient with dizziness.”

Driving non-emergently, you arrive several minutes later at an assisted living facility. In the lobby, you are met by staff, who direct you toward an elderly woman in a chair. A nurse informs you she has been feeling somewhat unwell all day, and 30 minutes ago began complaining of dizziness. She also states that she failed a finger-to-nose neurological test. They request that you transport her to Mount Doom Hospital, a high-quality community hospital several towns away (20 minute transport routinely; 13 with lights and sirens); it is a cath lab and stroke center, although not the nearest facility for either, and is not a trauma center. The nearest facility is a community hospital of similar size and capabilities (10 minutes routinely; 5 with lights and sirens).

You kneel in front of the patient, noting that she is alert and appears generally well, in no obvious distress. She introduces herself as Ms. Smith, is 68 years old and fully oriented, and tells this story:

“This morning when I was getting out of bed, I fell and bumped my head. After I got back up, I was trying to do my writing assignment for our group, but I kept finding that I just couldn’t seem to think of the words — I’d stare at a sentence for ten minutes without knowing how to finish it. I’ve been feeling a little dizzy most of the day, and a little sick — I vomited a few times. And I feel like there’s a pressure behind my eyes.”

While you talk, your partner obtains these vitals:

Skin: dry; unremarkable at the core; cool and slightly pale in the extremities
Pulse: 90 [at the radial, strong and regular]
Respirations: 14 [regular, normal depth and unlabored]
Blood pressure: 164/98
Oxygen saturation: 96%

When asked, staff report that Ms. Smith’s medical history includes coronary artery disease, diabetes, mild dementia, and hypertension.

What is your current impression of the patient’s priority?

What are the leading possibilities in your differential?

What further assessments or information would you like to better inform your decisions?

What actions or interventions, if any, would you like to take at this time?

Post responses to the comments.

Copy, Roger Roger

I took my original EMT class in Northern California, where I was taught by a firefighter/paramedic from Santa Clara County. My first job was with the 911 service from the adjacent county, where I worked for half a year before picking up roots and crossing the country to the Boston area; I’ve now worked here for several years.

Working in EMS on the two coasts has revealed some differences in equipment, protocols, and system operations, but one of the first things I noticed was the changes in lingo. This business may be similar across our big wide nation, but some of the words we use do differ; people will likely understand what you mean if you use the wrong one, but you’ll get some funny looks. Some examples:

West — Your ambulance is a rig
East — We drive a truck

West — The patient lies on a gurney
East — The patient lies on a stretcher

West — Trauma patients get c-spined
East — Trauma patients get backboarded

West — A mixed Paramedic/Basic crew is “1-and-1”
East — A mixed crew is “PB”

West — Traveling with lights and sirens is called Code 3. Incidentally, Code 2 is urgent but with the flow of traffic, and Code 4 is “all’s well.” Firefighters flash you four fingers as you drive up to cancel you…
East — Lights and sirens is Priority 1, a hot transport, or simply a response.

West — Patients who don’t want transport sign an AMA (Against Medical Advice)
East — Patients sign a refusal

West — When arriving on location, you are on scene; when leaving, you are transporting
East — When arriving, you are either on scene or going out; when transporting, you might be occupied

West — You call to alert the receiving hospital with a patch
East — You call in an entry note (short for “notification”)

West — EMT-Bs are usually EMTs
East — They’re more often called Basics, or just BLS

West — Working as a dedicated unit for a special event is a standby
East — You’re working a detail

West — Continuing education is CEUs
East — You take con ed

West — Your certification is a cert, card, or license
East — You earn your ticket

West — When acknowledging radio traffic, you copy
East — Traffic is received

West — Patients are ideally AOx4
East — Patients are at best, usually AOx3, with “event” omitted

These are certainly not representative of the entirety of the two edges of the US mainland, but just a couple regions where I’ve hung my own shingle. Anyone else want to share? What’s in the local dictionary in your area?

Get Up, Stand Up: Orthostatics

Orthostatic vital signs. Nurses think they’re a pain in the neck. Some doctors think they’re of marginal usefulness. Many providers simply think they’re a dying breed.

Like many old-school physical exam techniques, though, they’re dying only because high-tech imaging and laboratory techniques have largely replaced their role. And I don’t know about you, but my ambulance doesn’t come equipped for an ultrasound or serum electrolytes. Diagnostically, EMS lives in the Olden Days — the days of the hands-on physical, the stethoscope, the palpation and percussion, the careful and detailed history. For us, orthostatics have been and still are a valuable tool in patient assessment.

How are they performed? Orthostatic vital signs are essentially multiple sets of vitals taken from the patient in different positions. (They’re also sometimes known as the tilt test or tilt table, which is indeed another way to perform them — if you have a big, pivoting table available. Postural vitals is yet another name.) They usually include blood pressure and pulse, and are taken in two to three positions — supine (flat on the back) and standing are the most common, but a sitting position is sometimes also included, or used instead of standing. This is useful when a patient is unable to safely stand, although it’s not quite as diagnostically sensitive.

Why would we do such a dance? The main badness that orthostatics reveal is hypovolemia. With a full tank of blood, what ordinarily happens when I stand up? Gravity draws some of my blood into the lower portion of my body (mostly these big ol’ legs). This reduces perfusion to the important organs upstairs, especially my brain, so my body instantly compensates by increasing my heartrate a bit and tightening up my vasculature. No problem. However, what if my circulating volume is low — whether due to bleeding, dehydration, or even a “relative” hypovolemia (in distributive shocks such as sepsis or anaphylaxis)? In that case, when my smaller volume of blood is pulled away by gravity, my body will have a harder time compensating. If it’s not fully able to, then my blood pressure will drop systemically.

“But,” you cry, “surely this is all just extra steps. Can’t I recognize hypovolemia from basic vital signs — no matter what position you’re in?”

Well, yes and no. If it’s severe enough, then it will be readily apparent even if I’m standing on my head. But we routinely take baseline vitals on patients who are at least somewhat horizontal, and this is the ideal position to allow the body to compensate for low volume. By “challenging” the system with the use of gravity, we reveal the compensated hypovolemias… rather than only seeing the severely decompensated shock patients, who we can easily diagnose from thirty paces anyway. Like a cardiac stress test, we see more by pushing the body until it starts to fail; that’s how you discover the cracks beneath the surface.

Do we run on patients with hypovolemia? Oh, yes. External bleeding is a gimme, but how about GI bleeds? Decreased oral fluid intake? Increased urination due to diuretics? How about the day after a frat party kegger? Any of this sound familiar? It would be foolish to take the time to do this when it won’t affect patient care — such as in the obviously shocked patient — but there are times when what it reveals can be important, such as in patients who initially appear well and are considering refusing transport.

Here’s the process I’d recommend for taking orthostatics:

  1. Start with your initial, baseline set of vitals. Whatever position your patient is found in, that’s fine. Deal with your initial assessment in the usual fashion.
  2. Once you’re starting to go down a diagnostic pathway that prominently includes hypovolemic conditions in the differential, start thinking about orthostatics. If your initial vitals were taken while seated, try lying the patient flat and taking another pulse and BP. If possible, wait a minute or so between posture change and obtaining vitals; this will allow their system to “settle out” and avoid capturing aberrant numbers while they reestablish equilibrium.
  3. Ask yourself: can the patient safely stand? Even in altered or poorly-ambulatory individuals, the answer might be “yes” with your assistance, up to and including a burly firefighter supporting them from behind with a bearhug. (Caution here is advised even in basically well patients, because significant orthostatic hypotension may result in a sudden loss of consciousness upon standing. You don’t want your “positive” finding to come from a downed patient with a fresh hip fracture.) If safe to do so, stand the patient and take another pulse and BP. Again, waiting at least a minute is ideal, but if that’s not possible, don’t fret too much.
  4. For totally non-ambulatory patients, substitute sitting upright for standing. Ideally, this should be in a chair (or off the side of the stretcher) where their legs can hang, rather than a Fowler’s position with legs straight ahead.
  5. For utterly immobile patients who can’t even sit upright, or if attempting orthostatics in the truck while already transporting, you’ll need to do your best to position them with the stretcher back itself. Fully supine will be your low position, full upright Fowler’s will be your high position, and a semi-Fowler’s middle ground can be included if desired.

On interpretation: healthy, euvolemic patients can exhibit small orthostatic changes, so hypovolemia is only appreciable from a significant drop in BP or increase in heart rate. From supine to standing, a drop in the systolic blood pressure of over 20 is usually considered abnormal, as is an increase in pulse of over 30. (Changes from supine to sitting, or sitting to standing, will obviously be smaller, and therefore harder to distinguish from ordinary physiological fluctuations.) A drop in diastolic pressure of over 10 is also considered aberrant. You can remember this as the “10–20–30” rule.

Try to remember what’s going on here. As the patient shifts upright, their available volume is decreasing, for which their body attempts to compensate — in part by increasing their heart rate. It’s a truism that younger, healthier, less medicated patients are more able to compensate than older and less well individuals. So for the same volume status, you would be more likely to see an increase in pulse from the younger patient, perhaps with no change in pressure; whereas the older patient might have less pulse differential but a greater drop in pressure. (On the whole, the pulse change tends to be a more sensitive indicator than pressure, since almost everyone is able to compensate somewhat for orthostatic effects. As always, if you look for the compensation rather than the decompensation — the patch, rather than the hole it’s covering — you’ll see more red flags and find them sooner.)

Are substantial orthostatic changes definitive proof of hypovolemia? No, nothing’s certain in this world. Another possible cause is autonomic dysregulation, which essentially means that the normal compensating mechanisms (namely baroreceptors that detect the drop in pressure and stimulate vasoconstriction, chronotropy, and inotropy) fail to function properly. You do have enough juice, but your body isn’t doing its job of keeping it evenly circulating. Vasovagal syncope is one common example of this; I’ve got it myself, in fact, and hence have a habit of passing out while squatting. This sort of thing is not related to volume status, although if you combine the two the effect can be synergistic. A good history can help distinguish them: ask the patient if they have a prior history of dizziness upon standing.

Finally, pulse and pressure are not the only changes you can assess. One of the best indicators of orthostatic hypotension is simply a subjective feeling of light-headedness reported by the patient. Although sudden light-headedness upon standing can have other causes (the other big possibility is benign paroxysmal positional vertigo — although strictly speaking, BPPV tends to cause “dizziness,” which is not the same as “lightheadedness”), hypovolemia is certainly one of the most likely. So stand ’em up when it’s safe and reasonable, ask how they feel, grab the vitals if you can, and maybe even take the opportunity to see how well they walk (a nice, broad neurological test — the total inability to ambulate in a normally ambulatory patient is a very ominous sign).

Orthostatics are usually recorded on documentation by drawing little stick figures of the appropriate postures. For those who find this goofy, or are documenting on computers without “stick figure” keys, a full written description will do.

Managing STEMI Mimics in the Prehospital Environment

Here’s one for the medics in the audience, or anyone interested in the box with the squiggly lines.

ST elevation means acute MI. Or does it? Most medics understand that this isn’t always the case, but many don’t recognize how often it’s not, and looking deeper — sorting out true STEMI from the many non-MI pathologies that also produce ST-elevation — is not the easiest task.

The following is a PowerPoint presentation I produced for use in either continuing education coursework or merely as a standalone reference. The main intended audience is EMS providers at the paramedic level, but most of the information is at least somewhat relevant to all levels of care.

The topic is the recognition and management of “STEMI mimics,” to steal Tom Bouthillet‘s phrase: non-ACS conditions that nevertheless present with signs and symptoms resembling acute MI, particularly ECG changes such as ST segment elevation.

This is best taught by a knowledgeable instructor, but it’s designed to be usable as a self-contained reference for ambitious students; these are info-rich slides, not just graphical accompaniments to a lecture. It does assume a foundational paramedic-level education, as well as a basic understanding of ideas like sensitivity and specificity — a review of our tutorial may be in order. The illustrative ECGs are labeled with “answers” in the slide notes of the PowerPoint versions, although not on the PDF, so that’s probably the best version if this material is new to you.

Although fairly comprehensive, it’s intended as a practical guide for field assessment and treatment, rather than an in-depth examination of the etiology and course of care for every pathology discussed. For additional information, the sources for most of the contentious claims and data are listed on the slides; sources for the more everyday material are available by request. And remember to follow your service’s protocols and understand exactly where and how far you have flexibility to make some of these calls; in many cases, the decisions will be made for you.

There are 192 slides in the full presentation; the most common feedback is that this can make for a very dense and potentially drawn-out class. There is one natural “intermission” point for a break at about the halfway mark, between the introductory discussion on general ideas and before diving into specific and individual mimics. If desired, the course can be broken up further into multiple units or even multiple days.

Feel free to share, redistribute, or use for your own purposes; this is educational material made available without charge or obligation.

[Edit 10/28/12] This presentation was later enhanced into a narrated video lecture

Reading Research: Outcomes

Some folks say that our business is “saving lives.”

Sometimes they’re kidding, sometimes not. Either way, the problem with this kind of attitude is simple: whenever you’re not saving lives, you won’t feel like you’re doing your job. And it takes about ten seconds into an EMS career before you discover that most of what we do isn’t saving lives.

Because most of our patients aren’t in danger of dying. And many of the ones who actually are will die in days, weeks, or years — which doesn’t mean that our care doesn’t matter, but it’s hard to call it a “save” when they were going to survive your time together no matter what you did. That’s just not what’s going on.

I realised that my training was useful in less than ten percent of the calls, and saving lives was rarer than that. After a while, I grew to understand that my role was less about saving lives than about bearing witness. I was a grief mop. It was enough that I simply turned up. (Bringing Out the Dead)

In the field, we usually understand this fact. But for some reason, when we conduct research, we forget. Read ten studies on prehospital medicine, where interventions, methods, or systems are tested, and in nine of them, the primary outcome examined will be mortality. Did more patients survive than otherwise would have? Did the thing we’re examining save any lives?

Obviously, this is an important consideration. Saving lives is good! But as we’ve already agreed, most of our care isn’t lifesaving, no matter what happens. Lives are simply not at stake. Asking about mortality improvements in ankle fracture patients is like asking how we can reduce the number of car thefts on the moon.

If someone’s not calling us because they’re dying, what’s their problem? Usually, they’re ill or injured, but not so badly that their life is endangered. They still need medical care, but its purpose will be to reduce their long-term morbidity, as well as their short-term pain and discomfort. It will be to maintain the optimal function of their limbs, the greatest cardiac output, the most neurological capacity — to make sure the person who walks out of the hospital can still do most of the things he wants to do, needs the fewest meds, is fated for the fewest procedures, and experiences the least chronic agony.

And when someone’s lying in front of us, moaning from a broken femur, or turning green from nausea, we can help with that too. Many, many of our patients have a chief complaint involving pain or some sort of discomfort, and although we typically look at it as a diagnostic sign suggesting an underlying problem — which it is — odds are good that the patient is more interested in feeling better than in a diagnosis. We can help with that (at least, the medics can). Hell, even us BLS fellas can relieve some stress, grief, and psychological distress with a calming demeanor and sympathetic word.

The fact is, it’s shortsighted and wrong to only see mortality when we’re talking about our work, and it leaves out a huge amount of what we do. If we never did anything but relieve terrible pain, and never saved a single life, we’d still be performing a wonderful service. Our mortality myopia has gotten so bad that many providers need to be told that pain is associated with greater morbidity and mortality (which it is) before they’ll even consider managing it as a priority! Pain is the ultimate subjective experience; when it’s yours, nothing could be worse, but when it’s someone else’s, it’s hard to give two craps. As Dr. Jeff Guy likes to quote,

We must all die. But that I can save him from days of torture, that is what I feel is my great and ever-new privilege. Pain is a more terrible lord of mankind than even death itself. (Albert Schweizer)

What this all means when it comes to medical research is you’re going to see many, many studies that determine a certain intervention “no better than placebo,” when what they really mean is it didn’t save anybody’s life. But that doesn’t mean it didn’t help anybody. There could have been profound effects on short- and long-term morbidity, and you could have made someone far more comfortable and happy. That won’t be reflected in those numbers. The fact is, it’s difficult to study these things, because they’re harder to quantify than mortality, and they seem less important (perhaps they are), so you just don’t see as much research that seriously examines such outcomes.

So although I’m a strong proponent of evidence-based medicine and turning to research to further our standard of care, the answers won’t always be there. Partly this is the fault of the folks who do the studies, and partly it’s an inherent limitation to the scientific method. Either way, it means that the literature needs to be supplemented with our personal experience and the experience of our colleagues, and even then, we may not have the whole picture. It’s a drag, but that’s how it is.

Personally, I like to see my job as first to reduce acute suffering, second to manage permanent or long-term morbidity, and lastly to reduce mortality. This is a ranking born of frequency, not of urgency; obviously, if someone’s actually dying on me, saving their life takes precedence. But it’s no sweat off my back if they’re not, because there’s still a great deal more to be done. And it’s a shame that the research can’t always help get us there.

More on Reading Research: Diagnostics

The Tough Ones

People can be pills.

That is, EMS is the business of dealing with people. Even at their best, some homo sapiens will not be your favorite; you’d have to be a saint to love every single person you’ve ever met. And unfortunately, the patients we’re handed in this job are rarely at their best. That’s why they’re in an ambulance. Expecting someone to present a winning smile while they’re dying may be unreasonable.

The trouble is that showing compassion and doing your very best for people is a lot easier when you like them. It’s just human nature; we’re always nicer to the people we identify with, get along with, and find affable and likable.

. . . a lot of ordinary people look totally uncool, especially in their BVDs. In fact, they’re pretty ugly without their clothes on, or at least a little make-up. Some of them are fairly dim bulbs, actually. And on the worst days of their lives, a lot more have BO, bad breath, wrinkles, loose skin, irregular teeth, big bellies, short penises, hair where there shouldn’t be hair, and no hair where there should be. They’re inarticulate, clumsy and, well, kind of ordinary. They don’t match any of those pictures of perfectly proportioned people you’ve seen in your textbooks or on TV.

And guess what? Their families love them dearly, just the way they are!

. . . What you are is a caregiver. What you’re not is a judge. . . . You can be one or the other, but you can’t be both — not at the same time, anyway. As a caregiver, you can’t let yourself slip into the trap of judging people you don’t know anything about, because it does bad things to you. (People Care, 16)

See, the tough thing is that although it’s very human to treat the likable people better, that’s not how this job works. You’re allowed to like whomever you want; that’s your right as a person. But your responsibility as a caregiver is to do your best for all of them, like or loathe. It’s a learned skill, because it’s not at all natural. But it helps if you remember that your standards for likability are far from the ultimate test of someone’s personal worth. Everyone’s fighting their own battles, and patients shouldn’t be expected to look pretty for you in the midst of theirs. You’re not here to add to their burdens.

We have a built-in bias that tells us that people who are smelly or fat or dumb are overall bad people. It’s hard to overcome it. And because people who are choking, or incontinent, or hospitalized tend to be especially rough around the edges, it’s very easy indeed to file them under the category of “unpleasant objects.”

Special mention should be given to patients who are, to put it simply, jerks. Even those of us who can look past physical and mental defects may have trouble treating the world’s biggest asshole like our own dear mother. Once again, we have to remember that we’re not playing this game on a personal level, and the question isn’t whether the patient will be invited to our birthday party. The question’s whether they deserve our best care — and whether or not that’s difficult, whether or not we want to give it, the answer is “yes.” That’s how this works. If they’re a patient, they get our best. Some nasty physical ailments are harder to treat than others; some personalities are likewise harder to tolerate. But we don’t get to pick and choose, so we just have to suck it up and be compassionate professionals across the board.

Try to develop the mindset that to be human carries an inherent sacredness, value, and dignity. And that even the most despicable and worn-out creature on your stretcher has the same needs and feelings, and likely the same sense of self-worth, as any CEO or socialite. To quote Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, “I have no right to say or do anything that diminishes a man in his own eyes. What matters is not what I think of him, but what he thinks of himself. Hurting a man in his dignity is a crime.” (From How to Win Friends and Influence People, 214.)

All of this isn’t easy. Striving toward it is a constant effort. But if you can take a patient who you truly loathe, and treat him just the same as you would your own child — or your partner — or yourself — then that’s something to celebrate. Because quite frankly, the patient is somebody’s child, or somebody’s partner, and odds are good that their opinions of his human worth may differ from yours.

. . . until the curtain was rung down on the last act of the drama (and it might have no last act!) he wished the intellectual cripples and the moral hunchbacks not to be jeered at; perhaps they might turn out to be the heroes of the play. (George Santayana on William James [from Linda Simon’s William James Remembered])

The Rhythm Method


One two three — five six seven

What’s the missing number?

If you said four, congratulations. You have a basic human ability to recognize patterns — one of the best tools we have to separate us from the monkeys and sea-slugs.

One of the simplest types of pattern is a rhythm, and the simplest rhythm is a steady cadence. Ba-dump, ba-dump, ba-dump. Imagine a metronome or a drummer tapping out a fixed, continuous pace at an unchanging rhythm.

This is also one of the most basic and useful tricks you’ll ever use when taking vitals!

See, measuring vitals involves feeling, hearing, or observing a series of fairly subtle blips over a period of time. Unfortunately, interference is common in the field, and it’s a rare day when bumps in the road and bangs in the cabin don’t eat up at least one of those blips.

When taking a radial pulse, if over 15 seconds you count 18 beats, you have a pulse of 72; but if just a couple of those beats are lost due to your movement or the patient’s, suddenly it becomes 64, which is a substantial difference. This is no good; we want better reliability than that.

Rhythm is the answer. A pulse is typically a regular rhythm. So are respirations. So are the Korotkoff sounds of a blood pressure. In order to establish this rhythm, you only need to hear two consecutive beats, and appreciate exactly how far apart they are. If you can do this, then you can continue to mentally tap out that pace — hopefully, while continuing to feel, see, or hear the true beats, which will help you to maintain the right speed, but even if you miss some, you’ll still have your mental beat to count. Even if you miss most of them!

So you feel for the pulse, and you palpate the first couple beats. Then you hit a tortuous section of road that throws you around the cabin, and you’re unable to feel anything for several seconds. But you already had the rhythm in your head, so when you pick up the pulse again, you haven’t lost the count — and you’ll end up with an accurate number.

Now, in sick people these rhythms aren’t always regular. And if you observe that a pulse or respiratory cycle isn’t regular, then this system won’t be as effective — for instance, there’s not much point in trying to find the “beat” to an A-Fib pulse. But small irregularities or breaks in the rhythm are okay, as long as there’s still a regular cycle underlying it; for instance, occasional dropped (or extra) beats won’t change the basic rate.

Give it a try. If you got rhythm, vital signs will never give you trouble again.

What it Looks Like: Agonal Respirations

See also what Jugular Venous Distention, Seizures, and Cardiac Arrest and CPR look like

Education and experience are both important to making a well-rounded provider, and each of the two have distinct advantages. Perhaps the greatest advantage of experience is that it gives you the best ability to recognize situations you’d otherwise only know by description or by photograph.

Nowadays, though, with the Wonders of Modern Technology, we have some tools that can help bridge this gap. Experience is still essential — but there’s no reason that the first time you see a seizure or cyanosis should be in a situation with real stakes.

So let’s go through some of the common medical events and conditions we talk about, learn about, but may not truly know the presentation of until we encounter it.

Today, it’s:

 

Agonal Respirations

Agonal respirations are an inadequate pattern of breathing associated with extreme physiological distress, particularly periarrest states (that is, it is usually seen just prior to cardiac arrest, as well as during and for some time after). Although not always seen during arrest, it is not uncommon, and there is some evidence that it may be associated with better outcomes than arrests without agonal breathing. Whatever the case, it can easily be confused for ordinary respiration, leading to the mistaken impression that the “breathing” patient must also have a pulse; this confusion is part of why the American Heart Association no longer recommends checking for breathing as part of layperson’s CPR.

As for healthcare providers, whether we’re able to put the label of “agonal” on it or not, we should be able to recognize from the rate and depth that this is not adequate respiration to sustain oxygenation, and ventilatory assistance (as well as a check of hemodynamic status) is in order. But recognizing the specific nature of this breathing can be a very useful red flag to set your “code” wheels in motion.

Here are a few simulated examples, performed by medical actors. They range in presentation and context.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M99bRjmsC7E

Finally, here’s a treat — this is a video of a real-life cardiac arrest at a beach in Australia. Starting after the first shock, from 2:39 onward, you can see a great example of agonal breathing. The rest of the video is also a nice example of an honest code being worked in the field — not perfect, but real. (For bonus points, how could their CPR and other treatment have been improved?)

(Thanks to Dave Hiltz for inspiring today’s topic.)

Patient Advocacy

What does it mean to be a patient advocate?

I first learned this term from my original EMT textbook, and since then, it seems like it’s been the favorite buzzword of the medical profession. It’s a little bit like “leveraging synergies”; it sounds surely good while having no clear meaning at all.

I think this is a shame, because to me, patient advocacy is actually a very meaningful concept, and in EMS, a very important one. Perhaps this isn’t true for doctors and nurses, radiologists and cath technicians — although I’d like to think it is — but on the ambulance, it’s more than just a pretty ideal.

This was what the textbook had to say:

As an EMT-B, you are there for your patient. You are an advocate, the person who speaks up for your patient and pleads his cause. It is your responsibility to address the patient’s needs and to bring any of his concerns to the attention of the hospital staff. You will have developed a rapport with the patient during your brief but very important time together, a rapport that gives you an understanding of his condition and needs. As an advocate, you will do your best to transmit this knowledge in order to help the patient continue through the EMS and hospital system. In your role as an advocate you may perform a task as important as reporting information that will enable the hospital staff to save the patient’s life — or as simple as making sure a relative of the patient is notified. Acts that may seem minor to you may often provide major comfort to your patient. (Limmer 11)

Not half bad, really. But raise your hand if your eyes glossed over that paragraph.

You see, as a prehospital provider, you occupy a unique role in a patient’s course of care. Your time with this patient, from initial contact until transfer of care, is one of the only periods when they’ll have the one-on-one, undivided attention of a healthcare provider. Think about that for a moment. Ms. Smith may previously be, or soon will be, under the auspices of a veritable pantheon of specialists — cardiologists, endocrinologists, orthopedists, neurologists, and more. On this occasion alone, she might pass through the hands of an ED physician who stabilizes her, an internist who admits her, a surgeon who operates on her — never mind a supporting battalion of nurses, techs, CNAs, therapists, and witch doctors. It takes an army to treat a patient.

But that army has other responsibilities, too. That ED doc has two dozen other patients screaming for his attention, most of whom have already been waiting for hours. The internist is running a code in the next bed. Those nurses are overworked, underpaid, and really want to get home.

As a rule, they all have the best intentions, and they all want to look out for the patient. True bad apples or apathetic mercenaries are a rarity in this business. But everyone’s simply spread thin. Even when they have the resources to give their undivided attention to an individual patient, it’s rarely their responsibility to do so. The cardiologist is here to provide a consultation on Ms. Smith’s heart — not to champion her care like the Hospitalist Prince of North 6 and butt into everyone’s else’s work. It’s just not his job.

But what about you, the humble stretcher monkey who brings her in? For that brief period of time, you really have no business except Ms. Smith’s well being. That’s why you’re here; that’s what you were dispatched to look after; and it’s your legal, medical, and moral responsibility to do everything you can for her, until such time as you transfer that responsibility into the aforementioned healthcare cloud (or she refuses further care). Assuredly, you have a defined scope of practice, and company policies to follow, but we’re not talking about cutting out her gallbladder or taking her to a dive bar. We’re talking about — say it with me — patient advocacy. And everyone upstairs agrees that’s part of your job.

Your job is to be her champion. Not because you’re Superman. But because she’s so vulnerable right now, she doesn’t need Superman; she just needs anyone who will step up. Anybody who’ll stand there and say, you are not alone. We all need that, and we all deserve it — but many of these patients, after countless years and battles, have no one else to turn to.

Let’s steal a quote — this is from Danielle E. Sucher at Legal Agility, responding to the question of why she practices criminal defense.

I don’t like hurting people. Is that so hard to understand? When I go to bed at night, I can sleep easily, knowing that I fought for freedom, and for less suffering rather than more. That I stood by someone accused so that he would not have to stand alone.

I can’t know whether anyone is truly guilty or innocent, or what they deserve, and frankly, I don’t care. We all deserve at least one person on the damn planet willing to stand there next to us and fight on our behalf.

[Source]

Patients have problems. You can’t help with all of them. You can’t cure their cancer, or pay their bills, or make the world fair and right. But you can do an awful damned lot, because it’s astonishing how large the gap is between what the patient would do and what they can do in their current, largely powerless position.

You have resources. One’s this big ambulance, and everything in it. But you also have the resource of knowledge: you know how the system works. You know where to go for certain things, you know who to contact to get what you need, and you know what’s available for the asking. These would serve you very well if you should need to visit the emergency room or become hospitalized, or if your mother should, or your child. If Ms. Smith were your mother, you wouldn’t just shuffle through the process of putting Person A into Slot B, ignoring her needs and looking for ways to avoid going the extra mile; you’d fight like hell to keep her as happy, as comfortable, and as looked-after as possible. Because patients can’t fight for themselves, any better than defendants can argue their own cases. And because although other professionals will be involved in this process, they won’t be fighting for the patient either. I have immense respect for the docs and the nurses, but sometimes, you’re standing in a place to do things they can’t. A few of them may go above and beyond, but they all have their jobs to do, and this isn’t it.

But it is yours.