Observational studyScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2025
Timings of pre-hospital life-saving interventions in mass casualty incidents: an observational simulation study.
Observational study in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of antidote quantity, timing and prehospital strategies in nerve agent mass casualty events: a simulation study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMass casualty incidents (MCIs) pose significant challenges for pre-hospital care. In particular, there is a tension between the need for rapid triage and the need to deliver life-saving interventions (LSIs). Currently, only the simplest interventions are considered appropriate during triage. However, few data exist on how long it takes to perform LSIs, and there may be a difference between perception and reality. This study aims to determine the time intervals (TIs) to perform key LSIs in a simulated pre-hospital setting, and the differences between estimated and actual TIs.
methodsAn observational simulation study was conducted over three sessions at two pre-hospital training centers. Pre-hospital care providers (PHCPs) performed 16 LSIs. A pre-intervention questionnaire was used to assess the participants' backgrounds and LSI experience. Non-parametric tests were used to compare TIs between professional groups and evaluate differences between estimated and actual TIs.
resultsTwenty PHCPs participated: eight physicians and 12 paramedics, with a median pre-hospital experience of nine years. TIs for all LSIs were ≤ 130 s, except for rapid sequence induction and intubation (RSI), median 348 s (IQR: 329-366). Team-based LSIs where paramedics and physicians worked together, had prolonged durations for certain steps, with the RSI preparation stage being the longest (59% of total TI). Considerable delays were also observed in the post-placement securing phase (RSI: 43 s, chest tube: 58 s). All PHCPs tended to overestimate how long TIs take, with significant differences noted in supraglottic airway insertion, cricothyroidotomy, needle decompression and finger thoracostomy.
conclusionWe provide data on the time taken for LSIs in a simulated pre-hospital environment. Nearly all LSIs were completed within two minutes, yet PHCPs overestimated the time it takes to perform them. Approaches to the triage process may need to be reviewed in light of these data. There are further opportunities to streamline the delivery of some interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.