Out-of-Hospital Endotracheal Intubation Experience and Patient Outcomes
Study objective
Previous studies suggest improved patient outcomes for providers who perform high volumes of complex medical procedures. Out-of-hospital tracheal intubation is a difficult procedure. We seek to determine the association between rescuer procedural experience and patient survival after out-of-hospital tracheal intubation.
Methods
We analyzed probabilistically linked Pennsylvania statewide emergency medicine services, hospital discharge, and death data of patients receiving out-of-hospital tracheal intubation. We defined tracheal intubation experience as cumulative tracheal intubation during 2000 to 2005; low=1 to 10 tracheal intubations, medium=11 to 25 tracheal intubations, high=26 to 50 tracheal intubations, and very high=greater than 50 tracheal intubations. We identified survival on hospital discharge of patients intubated during 2003 to 2005. Using generalized estimating equations, we evaluated the association between patient survival and out-of-hospital rescuer cumulative tracheal intubation experience, adjusted for clinical covariates.
Results
During 2003 to 2005, 4,846 rescuers performed tracheal intubation. These individuals performed tracheal intubation on 33,117 patients during 2003 to 2005 and 62,586 patients during 2000 to 2005. Among 21,753 cardiac arrests, adjusted odds of survival was higher for patients intubated by rescuers with very high tracheal intubation experience; adjusted odds ratio (OR) versus low tracheal intubation experience: very high 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15 to 1.89), high 1.13 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.31), and medium 1.02 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.15). Among 8,162 medical nonarrests, adjusted odds of survival were higher for patients intubated by rescuers with high and very high tracheal intubation experience; adjusted OR versus low tracheal intubation experience: very high 1.55 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.22), high 1.29 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.59), and medium 1.16 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.38). Among 3,202 trauma nonarrests, survival was not associated with rescuer tracheal intubation experience; adjusted OR versus low tracheal intubation experience: very high 1.84 (95% CI 0.89 to 3.81), high 1.25 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.85), and medium 0.92 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.26).
Conclusion
Rescuer procedural experience is associated with improved patient survival after out-of-hospital tracheal intubation of cardiac arrest and medical nonarrest patients. Rescuer procedural experience is not associated with patient survival after out-of-hospital tracheal intubation of trauma nonarrest patients.
Supervising editors: Kathy J. Rinnert, MD, MPH; Michael L. Callaham, MD
Dr. Rinnert and Dr. Callaham were the supervising editors on this article. Dr. Yealy did not participate in the editorial review or decision to publish this article.
Author contributions: HEW conceived the study. HEW, JRL, and DMY designed the study. HEW obtained the data. LJC performed data set linkage. HEW, GKB, and LJC performed the analysis. HEW drafted the article, and all authors contributed substantially to its revision. HEW had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. HEW takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article that might create any potential conflict of interest. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement. This study was supported by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute grant R21-HL084528. Dr. Wang received support from Clinical Scientist Development Award K08-HS013628 from the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. The funders had no direct role in the design or execution of the study or the composition of the resulting article.
Publication date: Available online February 5, 2010.
Reprints not available from the authors.
Please see page 528 for the Editor's Capsule Summary of this article.
Provide feedback on this article at the journal's Web site, www.annemergmed.com.
PII: S0196-0644(09)01841-1
doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2009.12.020
© 2009 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

