PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of ijemedspringer.comThis journalToc AlertsSubmit OnlineOpen Choice
 
Int J Emerg Med. Dec 2008; 1(4): 297–300.
Published online Nov 1, 2008. doi:  10.1007/s12245-008-0069-4
PMCID: PMC2657259
A national Internet survey on rapid sequence intubation patterns from Turkey
Ozlem Guneysel,corresponding author Ozge Ecmel Onur, Haldun Akoglu, Serkan Eroglu, and Arzu Denızbası
Department of Emergency Medicine, Marmara University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
Ozlem Guneysel, Phone: +90-216-3271010, Fax: +90-216-3269578, guneysel/at/gmail.com.
corresponding authorCorresponding author.
Received May 28, 2008; Accepted September 16, 2008.
Aim
To determine which specialty was performing rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in the emergency departments and to determine drug preferences of emergency physicians during RSI in Turkey.
Method
All emergency departments were contacted via e-mail, and the chiefs of the departments were requested to answer a survey consisting of six questions. Hospitals within the specified regions were selected with the only inclusion criteria being that the hospital had an emergency medicine department. We determined that there were 32 university and 9 state hospital emergency medicine residency programs.
Results
Thirty-five emergency departments responded. In 31 (73%) departments emergency medicine physicians, in 4 (10%) departments anesthetists, and in 7 (17%) departments physicians of either specialty were routinely performing RSI. The most commonly preferred drugs were fentanyl for premedication, vecuronium for defasciculation, etomidate for induction, and succinylcholine for neuromuscular blocking.
Conclusion
In the majority of the emergency departments in Turkey, emergency medicine physicians perform the RSI; the anesthetists perform it in only a few departments.
Keywords: Rapid sequence intubation, Emergency department
Rapid sequence induction of anesthesia is a specific technique originally used by anesthetists, described formally in 1970 by Stept and Safar [1], who showed it to reduce the risk of aspiration of gastric contents. With the advent of critical care, this procedure was increasingly used for the rapid control and protection of the airway, and for ventilation [2]. Safe, effective airway management in critically ill or injured patients is the cornerstone of resuscitation. Rapid sequence intubation (RSI) represents an important element in this process. It is defined as the virtual simultaneous administration of a potent sedative agent and neuromuscular blocking drug to facilitate tracheal intubation. By providing unparalleled access to the airway, and superior protection against adverse effects such as aspiration, RSI is the fastest and safest way to secure a definitive airway [3].
RSI is a protocol predicated on the successful administration of several medications in a specific sequence. The medications fall into one of several categories of agents: pretreatment, induction, and paralytic. The purpose of this survey was to find out which specialty is performing RSIs in the emergency departments and to determine drug preferences of emergency physicians during RSI in Turkey.
University and state hospitals with ongoing emergency medicine residency programs were included in the study. Hospitals within the specified regions were selected with the only inclusion criteria being that the hospital had an emergency medicine department. We determined 32 university and 9 state hospital emergency medicine residency programs. The chief of the program or department was contacted via e-mail and requested to answer a survey consisting of six questions. The first question was to determine the specialties that perform the RSI in the emergency department. The following questions were about the drug preferences during premedication, defasciculation, induction, and neuromuscular blocking. The last question was about the preferred agent for maintaining sedation.
From the total of 41 emergency medicine residency programs, 35 emergency departments (28 university hospitals and 7 state hospitals) were successfully contacted during the period from January-February 2008. Table 1 and Fig. 1 show the answers to the questions.
Table 1
Table 1
Frequently preferred drugs during rapid sequence intubation
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Rapid sequence intubation performing specialty
RSI is a technique that both emergency physicians and anesthetists should master. Recent literature has indicated that rapid sequence intubation (RSI) with neuromuscular blocking agents has become the most common method emergency physicians use to achieve tracheal intubation [4]. This survey demonstrates that RSI is mostly being performed by emergency physicians in Turkey. This survey is to be the first to determine the specialties that perform RSI in the emergency department and drug preferences during RSI in Turkey.
According to the responses, frequently preferred premedications were fentanyl, the defasciculating agent vecuronium, the induction agent etomidate, and the neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) was succinylcholine. Still, there is no consensus on the ideal induction agent for emergency RSI. A number of pharmacologically distinct medications are presently used for sedation, dissociation, hypnosis, or induction. Likewise, the muscle paralysis achieved by the NMBA is undoubtedly responsible for most of the improvement in ease of intubation using RSI techniques [5]. The ideal (induction and NMBA) agent would smoothly and quickly render the patient unconscious, unresponsive, and amnestic in one arm/heart/brain circulation time. Such an agent would also provide analgesia, maintain stable cerebral perfusion pressure and cardiovascular hemodynamics, be immediately reversible, and have few, if any, adverse side effects [6], in other words, have rapid onset, brief duration, and no side effects. Unfortunately, such an agent does not exist.
Pre-oxygenation is almost never used (2.6%) in premedication. This may be because of misunderstanding of the responders or the fault of the authors of this article that happened during construction of the survey. In some questions the responders were allowed to answer more than one option, but in some questions they were not. This may have resulted in confusion during answering the survey.
The concerns with using the nondepolarizing agents for intubation are their slow onset and long duration of action [7]. From a pharmacodynamic standpoint, succinylcholine’s extremely rapid onset of action and its short duration of action make it the ideal NMBA for RSI. Unfortunately, succinylcholine can cause such adverse effects as fasciculation, increased intracranial pressure, and increased intra-ocular pressure. While many of these side effects are of little clinical significance, succinylcholine also can have some potentially life-threatening effects [4]. Despite these side effects, succinylcholine was the most preferred NMBA. In our survey, de-fasciculation is frequently performed with succinylcholine that provokes fasciculation.
After the patient has been successfully intubated, consideration of long-term sedation and muscle relaxation must be made. Patients frequently can be managed with sedation alone, but neuromuscular blockade also is required at times [7]. Propofol, ketamine, benzodiazepines, and opioids all are appropriate choices for sedation, with any of the nondepolarizing agents useful for paralysis. Midazolam and propofol were the commonly preferred agents for maintenance of sedation.
RSI is not without risks. The drugs used have the potential to turn an urgent airway problem into a life-threatening situation [3]. This survey demonstrated that RSI is currently being performed by emergency physicians. Emergency medicine in Turkey is in its infancy and needs to develop official guidelines in this field.
Limitations of the survey The responders were not requested to define the reason for their drug preferences during RSI. The residency training programs are not supposed to use only one protocol for RSI. Different trainers could perform RSI with different drugs; however, the survey requested only one response from each ED.
Conclusion
In the majority of the emergency departments in Turkey, emergency medicine physicians perform the RSI, with anesthetists performing it only in a few departments. The frequently preferred premedication was fentanyl, the defasciculating agent vecuronium, the induction agent etomidate, and NMBA was succinylcholine.
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of interest None.
 
Appendix: Rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in the emergency department
Multiregional analysis of current activity
To be completed by the chief of the emergency medicine department (or the responsible of the education program)
Name of the instutition ...........................................
  • Which specialty is performing rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in your emergency department?
  • Emergency medicine
  • Anesthesia
  • Other (please specify).
  • ....................................
  • In unexceptional circumstances, which one of the following medications do you prefer for premedication during RSI?
  • Lidocaine
  • Atropine
  • Fentanyl
  • Other (please specify).
  • ....................................
  • In unexceptional circumstances, which one of the following medications do you prefer for defasciculation during RSI?
  • Vecuronium
  • Rocuronium
  • Atracurium
  • Haloperidol
  • Midazolam
  • Other (please specify).
  • ....................................
  • In unexceptional circumstances, which one of the following medications do you prefer for induction during RSI?
  • Thiopental
  • Ketamine
  • Etomidate
  • Propofol
  • Fentanyl
  • Other (please specify).
  • ....................................
  • Which one of the following drugs do you prefer for paralysis during RSI?
  • Succinylcholine
  • Vecuronium
  • Rocuronium
  • Atracurium
  • Other (please specify).
  • ....................................
  • For the maintenance of sedation, which agent(s) do you prefer? (Please specify)
  • ..........................................
  • ..........................................
  • ..........................................
Thanks for your assistance.
Footnotes
The views expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and not those of the editors, editorial board or publisher.
1. Stept WJ, Safar P. Rapid induction-intubation for prevention of gastric content aspiration. Anesth Analg. 1970;49:633–636. doi: 10.1213/00000539-197007000-00027. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
2. Dibble CP, McHague C. Rapid sequence intubations by emergency doctors: we can but are we? Emerg Med J. 2007;24(7):480–481. doi: 10.1136/emj.2007.048082. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
3. Butler JM, Clancy M, Robinson N, Driscoll P. An observational survey of emergency department rapid sequence intubation. Emerg Med J. 2001;18(5):343–348. doi: 10.1136/emj.18.5.343. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
4. Sakles JC, Laurin EG, Rantapaa AA, Panacek EA. Rocuronium for rapid sequence intubation of emergency department patients. J Emerg Med. 1999;17(4):611–616. doi: 10.1016/S0736-4679(99)00046-3. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
5. Sivilotti ML, Filbin MR, Murray HE, et al. Does the sedative agent facilitate emergency rapid sequence intubation? Acad Emerg Med. 2003;10(6):612–620. doi: 10.1197/aemj.10.6.612. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
6. Walls RM, Murphy MF (2004) Manual of Emergency Airway Management. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
7. Frakes MA. Rapid sequence induction medications: an update. J Emerg Nurs. 2003;29(6):533–540. [PubMed]
Articles from International Journal of Emergency Medicine are provided here courtesy of
Springer-Verlag