Prospective MAST study in 911 patients. PASG: does it help in the management of traumatic shock?
Nine hundred eleven patients with systolic blood pressures less than or equal to 90 mm Hg were randomized to MAST and No-MAST groups, and all taken to a single Level I Trauma Center. Epidemiologic analysis of etiology, age, race, sex, Trauma Scores, and Injury Severity Scores revealed the two groups to be statistically identical. Seven hundred eighty-four patients were analyzed in detail. The principal injury location was thorax in 41%, abdomen in 32%, extremity in 16%, head in 7%, and neck in 4%. In patients with head and extremity wounds, the mortality rate was clearly not a function of MAST use. In the chest, abdomen, and neck, MAST did not improve survival. Although the total prehospital time was 35.8 + 10.4 minutes for MAST patients and 32.5 +/- 10.7 minutes for No-MAST patients, 70% of patients with MAST had prehospital times greater than 30 minutes compared to 55% of the No-MAST patients. When the prehospital time was greater than 30 minutes, 31% of the MAST patients died, compared to 21% of the No-MAST patients. MAST application adversely affected the outcome most significantly for patients with cardiac and thoracic vascular injury. The overall mortality of 31% in the MAST group, compared to 25% in the No-MAST group was statistically significant (p = 0.05). A prospective, randomized study was designed to determine the efficacy of pneumatic antishock garment (PASG) in the treatment of traumatic shock in a medium-size urban community. A total of 291 traumatic shock patients were assigned to either the PASG or No-PASG treatment groups. Of these, data from 248 patients were analyzed in detail. Analysis of demographic factors--such as age, sex, and mechanism of injury--as well as prehospital evaluative tools--such as trauma and CRAMS scores, and injury severity scores--revealed that the two groups were well-matched. This study did not demonstrate significant differences in hospital stay or mortality between PASG and No-PASG patients. Similarly, in the subset of patients with blunt trauma, PASG was not found to be beneficial.
There is no evidence to suggest that MAST/PASG application reduces mortality, length of hospitalisation or length of ICU stay in trauma patients and it is possible that it may increase these. These data do not support the continued use of MAST/PASG in the situation described. However, it should be recognised that, due to the poor quality of the trials, conclusions should be drawn with caution.