| Literature DB >> 27752622 |
Ki Hyuk Joo1, In Sool Yoo1, Jinwoong Lee1, Seung Whan Kim1, Seung Ryu1, Yeon Ho You1, Yong Chul Cho1, Woon Jun Jeong1, Byung Jun Ahn1, Sung Uk Cho1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Critically ill patients sometimes require transport to another location. Longer intra-hospital transport time increases the risk of hemodynamic instability and associated complications. Therefore, reducing intra-hospital transport time is critical. Our objective was to evaluate whether or not a new device the easy tube arrange device (ETAD) has the potential to reduce intra-hospital transport time of critically ill patients.Entities:
Keywords: Critical illness; Equipment and supplies; Transportation of patients
Year: 2016 PMID: 27752622 PMCID: PMC5051612 DOI: 10.15441/ceem.15.091
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Exp Emerg Med ISSN: 2383-4625
Fig. 1.Easy tube arrange device: (A) front view and (B) side view.
Fig. 2.Set-up of fluids and tubings on the easy tube arrange device: (A) overview showing three fluid bags hanging on the easy tube arrange device and (B) multiple tubings in corrugated tubing.
Fig. 3.Resusci Anne with medical fluids and monitoring systems.
Fig. 4.Time measurement of three steps: (A) preparation of the basic setting, (B) preparation for transport, and (C) return to the basic setting.
General characteristics of the volunteers
| Characteristics | Value |
|---|---|
| Sex | |
| Male | 18 (39.1) |
| Female | 28 (60.9) |
| Type of occupation | |
| Nurse | 36 (78.3) |
| Emergency medical technician | 10 (21.7) |
| Work duration (mo) | 21.50 ± 14.64 |
Values are presented as number (%) or mean±standard deviation.
Comparison of transport times using conventional method and the new method with the ETAD
| No. of fluids | Time (sec) | P-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional method | ETAD | |||
| Preparation of basic setting | 4 | 192.00 (187.75–201.50) | 210.00 (200.00–225.25) | < 0.001 |
| 5 | 218.00 (205.00–230.00) | 215.00 (205.00–226.00) | 0.942 | |
| 6 | 220.00 (210.75–225.25) | 219.50 (209.75–233.50) | 0.795 | |
| Preparation for transport | 4 | 38.00 (34.75–47.00) | 28.50 (25.00–32.75) | < 0.001 |
| 5 | 46.00 (41.00–52.00) | 32.50 (27.00–37.50) | < 0.001 | |
| 6 | 55.00 (44.00–65.00) | 35.00 (30.75–42.00) | < 0.001 | |
| Return to basic setting | 4 | 46.50 (41.00–52.00) | 33.00 (37.75–39.00) | < 0.001 |
| 5 | 50.00 (44.50–58.75) | 35.50 (30.75–42.00) | < 0.001 | |
| 6 | 59.50 (49.00–64.75) | 39.00 (34.00–48.00) | < 0.001 | |
| Total transport duration | 4 | 280.00 (268.75–293.00) | 274.50 (261.75–289.25) | 0.024 |
| 5 | 315.50 (304.75–330.75) | 288.00 (271.75–298.25) | < 0.001 | |
| 6 | 338.00 (319.50–360.25) | 301.00 (284.50–310.75) | < 0.001 | |
Values are presented as median (interquartile range).
ETAD, easy tube arrange device.
Comparisons of transport times using the conventional method and the new method using ETAD according to participant characteristics
| Method | No. of fluids | Time (sec) | P-value | Time (sec) | P-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Nurse | EMT | ||||
| Conventional | 4 | 85.50 (78.75–108.25) | 86.50 (72.75–97.50) | 0.069 | 85.50 (77.25–97.75) | 90.00 (57.75–110.75) | 0.865 |
| 5 | 96.50 (85.25–114.75) | 95.50 (86.50–111.25) | 0.710 | 94.50 (85.25–105.75) | 111.00 (90.25–122.25) | 0.091 | |
| 6 | 123.50 (97.50–140.75) | 112.50 (93.00–126.25) | 0.251 | 112.00 (92.25–125.75) | 136.00 (108.00–164.50) | 0.156 | |
| ETAD | 4 | 59.00 (50.75–73.25) | 60.50 (55.25–74.00) | 0.677 | 61.00 (53.50–71.75) | 60.00 (48.00–77.25) | 0.665 |
| 5 | 64.50 (57.75–75.50) | 69.50 (57.75–83.25) | 0.424 | 69.00 (58.50–79.50) | 67.00 (53.25–98.75) | 0.894 | |
| 6 | 71.00 (64.75–85.50) | 77.00 (63.50–94.25) | 0.628 | 71.00 (63.00–87.75) | 83.00 (67.50–110.25) | 0.156 | |
Values are presented as median (interquartile range).
ETAD, easy tube arrange device; EMT, emergency medical technician.