Skip to content


Should EMS Improvise? And the Recipe for the “Kaiser Cocktail”

29 comments

Here’s the recipe for what I call the “Kaiser Cocktail”:

  1. Look in the patient’s kitchen cupboards until you find a box (or a bag) of some type of granulated sugar, powdered sugar, or brown sugar. (in a pinch, you can use honey or syrup)
  2. Find one of the patient’s own cups or glasses, wash it if you have to.
  3. Dump a bunch of the sugar in the glass.
  4. Look in the patient’s refrigerator until you find some soda pop or some type of sweet juice like orange, apple, or grape juice.
  5. Pour that in the glass with the sugar.
  6. Mix it up really well with some type of stirring device. Don’t use your pen or your finger. (Your partner’s pen or finger is ok though.) (Not really.)
  7. Serve warm, chilled, or tepid. Garnish with a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

Have you guessed what the “Kaiser Cocktail is used for? If you’re in EMS I’m pretty sure you may have figured it out. It’s for sweetening up your local mild hypoglycemic… and no, it’s definitely not for serving to my son right before I drop him off with the in-laws for revenge purposes. The Kaiser Cocktail is for those patients who have blood glucose levels in the mid double digits but that still have the mental faculties necessary for drinking fluids and for protecting their airway while they do it. It’s a home remedy of sorts and it isn’t exactly the kind of thing that they teach you in EMT school. It works like a charm every time and I’ve never seen it not be well tolerated by the patients I’ve used it on or by the families that watch me do it. In fact, the families always seem more than willing to help whip one right up when I ask them to do so.

Picture this scenario: Your ambulance is dispatched to the “Known Diabetic with Altered Mental Status” at an address a short 8 minutes away. You respond to a well kept address in a nice neighborhood and are directed into the residence by a twenty-something female who tells you that her grandfather “Just isn’t acting right and won’t get out of bed”. Seeing no obvious hazards, you enter the residence with the granddaughter and follow her to the back bedroom of the residence to find a 60-something male patient sitting on the bed. He acknowledges you when you introduce yourself and you can see that he’s trying to talk but that he cannot seem to form the words. You say to him “Howdy! How are you feeling??” He answers: “Um… hello…” with a normal voice quality. His airway is patent, his skin is pink, warm, and sweaty, and he doesn’t appear to have any hemispheric neurological deficit. His pulse is bounding and regular at the radial and his respirations are normal. The granddaughter tells you that the patient is diabetic and that he takes insulin.

Got the case diagnosed yet? I’d bet you do. The next thing I would do with this patient is to take a quick finger stick glucose check. For the above fictional scenario, the reading would be 40mg/dl (which is um… “something’ MMOL for you British folk). It’s mild hypoglycemia. I ruled out a possible stroke (CVA/TIA) with the Cincinnati Pre-Hospital Stroke Scale and he patient’s cardiac function seems very normal with his bounding, regular pulse rate. The diaphoresis (sweating) and skin color are differential signs of hypoglycemia, and the patient’s past medical history helps clinch the field diagnosis. This patient’s blood glucose level dropped too low for his brain to function normally and he needs more sugar coursing through his veins in order to feed his brain.

You may be wondering why I brought forth such a common, run-of-the-mill patient presentation on the blog today. As pre-hospital providers, we have a few options available for us that could be considered proper care for this patient. Most EMTs have oral glucose paste at their disposal and a growing number of EMT-Basics carry Glucagon for IM injection. EMT-Intermediates and Paramedics usually have both of the previous medications available and almost all of them carry D-50, or 50% Dextrose solution in water, for IV administration. All of these treatments could be considered for this patient; however I would pull out my namesake concoction in this case. Call it experience, but starting an IV and giving D-50 seems like it would be risky overkill for this patient and an IM injection of glucagon saps the patient’s natural reserves of glycogen for quite a while after administration. Patients seem to hate the taste of oral glucose paste (Lemon?? Really??) and one tube never sees to do the trick. We only care two of them anyway.

That’s why I use a Kaiser Cocktail with these patients. As long as the patient can maintain their own airway and there’s not an aspiration risk, I can’t think of any contraindications once you rule out a possible stroke. It’s cheap, easy, and it has worked like a charm for me every time I’ve tried it. I like using it too, as it feels like a “Mr. Wizard” type home remedy that always fascinates the patient’s family members who watch me make it up.

Here’s the rub though, nowhere in my protocols does it give me authority to give a patient any nourishment or fluids by mouth. In fact, I can’t give a patient anything to eat or drink that isn’t specifically allowed by my standing orders. In EMS, even something as innocuous as sugared-up orange juice can be a legal difficulty. Common sense isn’t allowed by lawyers, unless of course they’re saying you should have used some. The reality is that every time I whip up a Kaiser Cocktail, I’m putting my license at risk.

I used a Kaiser Cocktail as recently as of the day I’m writing this post and I’m asking for a debate here. I’d like it if you would please answer some questions for me below the post in the comments section:

  1. Do you think that the Kaiser Cocktail is an appropriate treatment for mild-to-moderate hypoglycemia in a known-diabetic patient with a patent airway?
  2. Do you see any contraindications or risks that I have missed?
  3. Would a tube of oral glucose paste (or tablets, if you use them) be more appropriate than the Kaiser Cocktail?
  4. Should EMS providers be allowed to improvise treatments such as the Kaiser Cocktail for these and other like situations? Why or Why not?

I can’t wait to see your answers.

Something I found in the Iowa State EMS Protocols

10 comments

I hold licensure in three states as well as my NREMT-P certification. This is partially because I work in both Illinois and Wisconsin but also because I used to work in Iowa and maintain my license as an Iowa EMT-Paramedic Specialist. I keep that license too. Since Iowa’s a National Registry state, it’s a simple matter of forwarding them my National recert paperwork to keep it up. Also, because I’m um… “Rather Opinionated” and one never knows when I’ll get ran out of a state with pitchforks and torches from the townsfolk, I need a backup plan.

Oh, and I like being called a “Specialist” in something. Cool, huh? I’m Special, it says so right here on this card I carry. “EMT-PS”

Today, my friend Google landed me on the web link for the new revision of the Iowa State EMS protocols (Revision Aug 2009) and I had the chance to study up on them. There’s some interesting things in there. You can find the link below.

While they aren’t as advanced as the EMS protocols that I function within in Wisconsin, there is something I found in there that I really like and want to bring to the attention of the EMS 2.0 crowd.

- From the Iowa State EMS Protocols – August 2009 Revision

APPENDIX D GUIDELINES FOR NEW PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT A RATIONAL DECISION MAKING PROCESS*

(Also can be used to evaluate existing protocols) Making a decision to develop a new protocol or evaluate an existing one should be based on a rational process. Questions that should be asked and answered when considering a new drug therapy or procedure are as follows:
Key Questions for any New Protocol
1) Is the drug therapy or procedure medically indicated and safe?
2) Is it within the scope of practice for the provider?
3) How specifically will this protocol benefit patient care?
4) What specifically is needed to implement this protocol (education/training, medical director protocol development/authorization, equipment needs, etc.)?
5) How will this protocol impact operations?
6) What is the opinion of providers concerning this protocol?
7) Does the medical community support this protocol change?
8) What are all the costs versus benefits associated with implementation and maintenance?
9) What are the medical-legal implications?
10) What ongoing provider involvement such as skills maintenance and continuous quality improvement is necessary?
11) How will success be measured?

Rational Protocol Development Process to Make the Right Protocol Decision
1) Study the issue thoroughly
2) Identify key questions
3) Compare with goals
4) Assess fit with system
5) Cost benefit analysis
6) Identify measuring tools

Stakeholders in this process are recognized to include, but not be limited to:
2) Medical direction (on-line and off-line)
3) Educators/training programs
4) Regulators of policy and rules
5) Service directors
6) Service providers
7) Consumers
8) Third party payers

*Developed based upon discussion at the October 1998 meeting of the Quality Assurance, Standards, and Protocols subcommittee of the Iowa EMS Advisory Council; and on concepts from the article „When to Implement Clinical Protocol Change?’ From EMS Best Practices September 1998.

My understanding of the Iowa State EMS system is that they have mandatory state EMS protocols that all providers must adhere to. Each service may have a medical director, who may choose to use the state protocols at their base level, or may choose to add additional protocols for more advanced treatment. 

Huh… A state that says “This is the minimum standard we’ll hold you to. Now go make them better and report back to us” Then actually gives each individual paramedic and EMT the logical framework to evaluate ideas and make revisions and improvement? 

Also, and this is just HUGE. A state that posts the name and phone number of the State Director of EMS on the protocols… Know what? He actually answers his phone. I know, I’ve called him.

Bravo State of Iowa EMS. Bravo a lot.

EMS 2.0 & EMS Ethics – How far would you go?

12 comments

Throughout my EMS career I’ve heard a lot of the same complaints from paramedics that seem to be endemic within the system. One of these is the quality of physician medical direction and whether or not theirs is considered “Progressive” or “Permissive” by the EMTs and Paramedics that work within the protocol system. Some systems seem almost regressive. They don’t seem to show any trust in the providers that work within the protocols and end up being putting forth “Mother-May-I” protocols that disallow aggressive field treatment and require hand holding over the radio or cell phone to a base station. Others, are fairly progressive and allow quite a bit of treatment to be provided in the field.

However, even in the more progressive of the systems out there the medics always tend to have their own personal “wish list” of things that they’d like to be permitted to do. I currently work in the most progressive protocol system I’ve ever worked in and yet there are a few things that I would like to be allowed to do further than I can do now. Toradol for pain control, and the inclusion of a paralytic to our Medication Assisted Intubation protocols would be examples.

However, there begs a question here that I haven’t seen explored before: What if this was reversed?

Say tomorrow you head on into work and get there to hear the news that your medical director up and left for Tahiti with a new love interest with whom he or she will be very happy. Incidentally, you’ve now got a new medical director that just graduated medical school after spending 10 years as a field paramedic. There’s a “Get to Know Me” meeting scheduled in a half hour,

In the meeting the new medical director, who emphatically insists that you call him “Dr. Pat”, and then changes it to “Just Pat” outlines the new protocols that you will be functioning under starting as soon as you all can get through the trainings and meetings that are scheduled. These protocols are amazing. For example, your protocols for treatment of severe asthma used to include just oxygen, nebulized albuterol, and subcutaneous epinephrine. Now you’ll be giving Albuterol mixed with atrovent for your nebulizers, Epi 1:1000 sub-q or brethine (terbutaline) sub-q, epi 1:10000 IV for severe cases, Solu-Medrol (an injectable steroid), and Magnesium Sulfate infusions for refractory cases. For pain control, you used to have to call for orders to give Morphine. Now you give Morphine in 2mg increments titrated to effect up to 20mg if the blood pressure is over 100mmhg systolic, Fentanyl 50mcg – 200mcg, Toradol 60mg IM, and/or Nitronox (Inhaled Nitrous Oxide). The protocols are really advanced and have at least twenty new medications, some of which you’ve never even heard of.

Soon after you start reading the new protocols you start noticing things that frankly, scare you a bit. Never mind the fact that you don’t know how you’re going to calculate amiodarone drips and use propofol for conscious sedation, you’re frankly scared that the protocol system directs you to perform emergent C-Sections to save a viable fetus in cases of limb presentations in pregnancy. Really?

Mannitol and induced hypothermia for head injuries? Wow. You also now have needle crics, surgical crics, Needle decompression of the chest, pericardiocentesis, retrograde intubation, and what are those words? Thoracostomy (Chest Tubes)?? Thoracotomy? Holy crap! There’s almost nothing you can’t do! 

After the meeting you head out on the streets with your partner. You’re honestly feeling a little nostalgic for the days when your Tahiti-bound regressive medical director wouldn’t let you be responsible for hardly anything. It’s completely opposite now. You’ve gone from one extreme to the other. There’s nothing that you’ve ever thought of doing in the field that you can’t do anymore.

On one hand this would be very exciting for me (and yes, I went a little overboard with plausible treatment modalities to make a point here) but on the other hand, I’d have to ask the question:

Where would be the line where progressive treatment protocols cross the line? When would be the point where paramedics are given too much responsibility for complex invasive treatments?

I’ve never seen the case I’m describing. I love working under a progressive and liberal protocol system. However, in a meeting the other day when the possibility of administering thrombolytics for refractory ventricular fibrillation in cardiac arrest came up I had a thought that I’d never had before:

“I don’t get paid enough to have that much responsibility. I take on a lot of liability and have to put in a lot of uncompensated education time for the meager wage that I get paid now… how much is that going to have to increase for no more money?”

I don’t want to think that way, and I’d have to question the dedication of any paramedic in any of the protocol systems that I’ve examined that would say no to being able to provide potentially lifesaving treatments to their patients. I can’t imagine refusing to do something because I didn’t think that I was compensated enough to take on the responsibility of doing it. I’d be happy to sit through the required education, but I doubt that they would increase the compensation of the medics in the above example.

Could it happen? Has it happened? Will it happen as treatments progress and professional responsibility increases? I’ll firmly say that I’m nowhere near adequately compensated for the responsibility I have today. Where would I be if the above scenario happened to me tomorrow?

EMS 2.0 needs to seek out and find answers to the questions that we haven’t asked yet just as much as we need to find answers to the questions we’ve been struggling with for years.

What do you think?

Advances in Resuscitation – CCR If you’re not doing it now, you will be

9 comments

Visitors to my old blog probably know that at my ambulance service we tend to bring back a lot of codes. I talk about it a lot. Back in 2004 our medical director, Dr. Michael Kellum, got us involved in a “Demonstration Project” to bring Continuous Compression CPR or Cardiocerebral resuscitation to a rural area. Since that time, the results have been more than dramatic. Depending on what statistics you look at, we may be “Saving” almost 50% of witnessed arrests found to be in ventricular fibrillation.

It’s all explained at Http://www.callandpump.org But if you want to go right to the whitepaper that explains what we do, why we do it, and how it’s done then you want to go here: http://callandpump.org/assets/Proposal_Current.pdf – This link is explains the demonstration project initiated by Dr. Kellum et al. in the two county area that I work in. This paper was published in 2004 at the beginning of the project.

This is a link to the results published in the Annals of Emergenc Medicine in 2008 – http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18374452?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum 

You may be interested in this part:

“RESULTS: In the 3 years preceding the change in protocol, there were 92 witnessed arrests with an initially shockable rhythm. Eighteen patients survived (20%) and 14 (15%) were neurologically intact. During the 3 years after implementation of the new protocol, there were 89 such patients. Forty-two (47%) survived and 35 (39%) were neurologically intact. CONCLUSION: In adult patients with a witnessed cardiac arrest and an initially shockable rhythm, implementation of an out-of-hospital treatment protocol based on the principles of cardiocerebral resuscitation was associated with a dramatic improvement in neurologically intact survival.”

This is good stuff. Remember, the above is only reflective of those included in the study, who are “Witnessed arrest(s) with an initially shockable rhythm”. Anecdotally, I’ve personally attended those that were not in a shockable rhythm and witnessed greater effectiveness as well.

Here’s the short version of our protocols for Witnessed V-Fib Arrest: (and for those of you who want more, email me at: proems1@yahoo.com and I will be happy to send you a copy of the protocols)

We follow an acronym called MCMAID in our resuscitation protocols, it stands for:

Metronome – We carry a metronome in our monitor/defibrillator bags that clicks out at 100 beats per minute. We are to compress at 100bpm. No more, no less. This metronome keeps us on rhythm and reminds us to be on the chest.

Compressions – 100 compressions per minute. Do not stop. Initially, we are to administer 200 compressions (2 minutes) before our first shock. We are to limit any interruptions in compressions absolutely as much as possible, charging our defibrillators while compressions are ongoing, and recognizing V-fib through the compressions if possible. Compress hard and deep, completely releasing tension on the chest upon recoil to maximize the compression and decompression of the chest.

Monitor – Place the monitor on the patient using fast patches. Do not stop the 200 compression cycles to determine the rhythm. Shock at max joules biphasic. If you can anticipate V-Fib, charge the defib during the compressions and only stop long enough to clear for the shock. Don’t check the pulse, get right back to compressions.

Airway – Initially, a BLS airway will be placed in the patient and a non-rebreather oxygen mask will be placed on the patient. If the airway must be controlled by more advanced means to protect and ensure a patent airway, now is the time to do so.

Intravenous Access – Most of the time, this is accomplished through the means of the Ez-IO drill that we carry and love. (See: Alternative Circulatory Access Strategies – Hi Ho IO) This can also be obtained through peripheral or EJ IV access.

Drugs – Epinephrine 1:10,000 1mg IVasopression 40 IU, Amiodarone 300mg, then Epinephrine 1:10,000 1mg q 3-5min. If refractory, we may give an additional 150mg Amiodarone IV.

To see the full MCMAID protocol (I put it up in a post) you can see it by clicking here.

Today Dr. Kellum came down again for our monthly training and let us know the latest breakthroughs and orders in the project. He is stressing the importance of End-Tidal CO2 (ETCO2) monitoring and states that no pulse check is necessary without a spontaneous increase in ETCO2. He expects every intubated (or combitubed) patient to have ETCO2 monitoring in place.

He also expects that we will monitor ETCO2 readings as a way to prove effectiveness of compressions. Rescuers who cannot get ETCO2 readings consistent with other personnel when providing compressions shouldn’t be doing compressions.

Rescuers should switch off compressions EVERY ONE MINUTE whenever possible. This is providing some fantastic results in preliminary trials.

He also stated that the effectiveness of the CCR protocols are showing a marked increase in refractory V-fib. He hinted that the protocols might soon show a need for thrombolytic use in treatment of refractory V-Fib.

Stay tuned folks, I am happy as heck to be included in this. I will bring updates, with permission, as many times as I get them.

MCMAID Resuscitation Protocol

4 comments

This post is a stub, and is a supplement to “Advances in Resuscitation – CCR, if you’re not doing it now you will be”

——————

EMERGENCY MEDICAL RESPONDER/EMT

A CODE COMMANDER should assign duties according to MCMAID prior to arrival

  • Establish that the patient is unresponsive, and not breathing normally
  • Rule out DNR status, dependent lividity, rigor mortis

First Priority: M-(metronome) Quality Chest Compressions

  • Turn on Metronome, ensuring a rate of 100/minute
  • Initiate 2 minutes of chest compressions, pediatric-follow AHA 2005 Guidelines

Second Priority: C-(compressions) Quality Chest Compressions

  • Assign two compressors switching every minute, checking each others quality
  • Depth should be at least 2 inches
  • The heal of the compressor’s hand should come off the chest, ensuring full recoil

Third Priority: M-(monitor) Defibrillate

  • AED, push analyze (pediatric patient >1 yr , use peds pads up to 8 yrs if available if not use adult pads)
  • Manual, charge max joules during CPR, analyzing for no more than 5 sec (EMT-I/P) – (pediatric 4 joules/kg)
  • Immediately resume 2 more minutes of compressions

Fourth Priority: A-(airway)

  • Oropharyngeal airway and 10 liters O2 via NRB mask
  • Check patency if chocking is suspected
  • No ventilations until after 3 cycles - (unless pediatric-follow AHA 2005 Guidelines)
  • CombiTube/ET after 3 cycles of compressions, unless 1st  rhythm is nonshockable, then as soon as possible, ventilate at 6/minute only enough volume to just make chest rise

 If ROSC, acquire 12-Lead EKG, ***ACUTE MI SUSPECTED*** see STEMI Guidelines.

Give a status report to the ambulance crew by radio ASAP and ensure ALS has been dispatched.

 AEMT

Fourth Priority: I-(IV) Establish venous access

  • Initiate IO 0.9% Normal Saline unless IV is assured and quick, run wide open (20ml/kg boluses for pediatric patients)
  • Consider second IV and chilling both for unresponsive ROSC. Refer to Therapeutic Hypothermia Procedure

 INTERMEDIATE

 Monitor basic rescuer interventions closely, ensure quality, uninterrupted chest compressions

Fifth Priority: D-(drugs) Proceed to ACLS resuscitation medications

  • Obtain venous access, if not already done
  • Epinephrine 1:10,000 1 mg IV/IO every other cycle of compressions (4 minutes)
  • Vasopressin 40 units IV/IO, repeat dose in 10 minutes if no ROSC
  • If multiple shocks have been given, Amiodarone (Cordarone) 300 mg IV/IO, followed by another 150 mg if still refractory (shocks being delivered)
  • After 3 cycles of compressions, (unless first rhythm in non shockable) place advanced airway without interrupting compressions and begin ventilations at 6/minute, using only the volume to just make the chest rise.
  • If initially non-shockable, Identify and correct reversible causes: The Five H’s and the Five T’s This applies mostly to PEA, but to a lesser extent, Asystole, as well.
  • If rate is <60, Atropine Sulfate 1 mg IV. Repeat every 3 – 5 min to a maximum of 3 mg

 “The Five H’s” (treatment orders are in parentheses)

  1. Hypovolemia (Infuse Normal Saline wide open)
  2. Hypoxia (Place an advanced airway and administer high-flow oxygen at a ventilation rate of 6/minute with only enough volume to make chest rise. [1])
  3. Hydrogen Ion, i.e. acidosis (Perform ventilation [1])
  4. Hyperkalemia [2]
    1. Give Calcium Chloride (10%) 1000mg IV over 2 – 5 minutes. May repeat X 1
    2. Give Sodium Bicarbonate (8.4%) 50 mEq IV
    3. Give Albuterol Sulfate 2.5 mg HHN may repeat X 1
  5. Hypokalemia (not treated in the field.)
  6. Hypothermia (See Hypothermia & Frostbite Guidelines)

“The Five T’s” (treatment orders are in parentheses)

  1. Tablets (See Toxic Exposure/Overdose Guidelines)
  2. Tamponade (EMT-P: Perform Pericardiocentesis)
  3. Tension pneumothorax (Perform needle decompression)
  4. Thrombosis, cardiac i.e. myocardial infarction (See Chest Pain Guidelines)
  5. Thrombosis, pulmonary i.e. pulmonary embolism (No specific pre-hospital treatment available)

Paramedic

 If there is ROSC, as seen as a sudden large increase in EtCO2 and/or patient movement

  • Give Amiodarone (Cordarone) 150 mg IV/IO over 10 minutes, if multiple shocks given
  • Reassess the need for airway devices
  • Maintain advanced airway, if the patient remains unconscious
  • If the patient wakes up, the airway may be removed. Use the procedures for removing advanced airway devices in the Respiratory Distress Guidelines.
  • Monitor patient’s EtCO2 and ventilate accordingly (12-20 per minute to maintain EtCO2 around 35 mmHg)
  • Maintain SBP >80 mmHg, Consider Dopamine Hydrochloride 10-20mcg/kg/minute IV infusion
  • Consider inducing hypothermia, See Therapeutic Hypothermic Guidelines
  • Consider RSI See Respiratory Distress Guidelines
  • If post-resuscitation 12-lead EKG shows STEMI refer to STEMI Guidelines
  • Contact Medical Control for the following:
    • To discuss termination of resuscitation in the absence of a valid Wisconsin DNR Bracelet
    • Additional medication orders

 FOOTNOTES:

 1. Do not hyperventilate during cardiac arrest, even if hypoxia and acidosis are suspected causes. Strictly follow the ventilation guidelines described above.

2. Suspect Hyperkalemia when patients with a history of chronic renal failure (dialysis patients) develop cardiac arrest. Pre-arrest history may include weakness, missed dialysis appointment(s), vomiting, concurrent illness, and T waves that are peaked and as large as the R wave.

—————————-

This post is a stub, and is a supplement to “Advances in Resuscitation – CCR, if you’re not doing it now you will be”

Introduction to the EMS Protocol Project

No comments

I’m starting a new blog, and there’s another one ready to come. This first one is waaaay still in the works, but it’s up. The address is: http://emsprotocols.blogspot.com

What follows below is it’s tentative introduction.

“EMS” for those of you who might have stumbled on here by mistake stands for that specialty of both Public Safety and Healthcare known as the Emergency Medical Services. This blog is dedicated to its advancement. Here you will find as large as a compilation of EMS Protocols (Also known as “Standing Medical Orders” or “SMOs”, “Standing Medical Guidelines” or “SMGs”) as I can make available to the wider community for review. I will also review individual protocols, protocol sets, medication formularies, and procedure lists as I have the time and I welcome anyone to do the same either on the available comments section or via a post, which I invite people to write. You may contact me if you wish to do so at proems1@yahoo.com.


Random Pages Created By Best Accountant Services