Brief report
Safety of pre-hospital therapy with morphine sulfate

https://doi.org/10.1016/0735-6757(92)90127-JGet rights and content

Abstract

The safety of prehospital pharmacologic therapy has not been well studied. The authors evaluated field use of morphine sulfate (MS) in San Francisco County over a 6-month period. Paramedics assessed patients for ischemic chest pain (ICP) and/or pulmonary edema (PE), made base hospital contact, and administered 2- to 4-mg doses of intravenous morphine according to treatment protocols. Clinical assessments and patient responses to therapy were recorded by both field paramedics and emergency department (ED) physicians. Safety was evaluated by determining the (1) accuracy of paramedic field assessment, (2) appropriateness of field administration of MS, and (3) therapeutic complications. During the study period, paramedics administered MS to 84 patients. In 69 cases paramedic assessment of either ICP and/or PE corresponded to ED physician diagnosis. In five cases paramedics correctly recognized ICP but missed physical findings of PE. In this group the paramedics' assessment was considered inaccurate but the judgement to give MS was considered appropriate. In the remaining 10 cases paramedics identified ICP or PE but the ED physician diagnosed a different condition. These assessments were considered inaccurate and the management inappropriate. Therefore, overall paramedic accuracy was 77% (true rate 73% to 82%, 95% confidence interval); appropriateness of therapy was 88% (true rate 85% to 92%, 95% confidence interval); and the overall complication rate was 6% (true rate 2% to 12%, 95% confidence interval). Complications of respiratory depression or hypotension occurred in only one of the cases in which MS was inappropriately administered. The authors conclude that paramedics functioning within a system of base hospital medical direction can safely administer MS. The frequency of inappropriate MS administration and the complication rate from both erroneous and appropriate drug administration is acceptably low.

References (7)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (40)

  • Is pre-hospital treatment of chest pain optimal in acute coronary syndrome? the relief of both pain and anxiety is needed

    2011, International Journal of Cardiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    This is a treatment for symptoms which has less effect on disease. Among 84 patients who received 2–4 mg of morphine due to either ischemic chest pain or pulmonary oedema, the complication rate was 6% [27]. In a double-blind study comparing 5 mg of morphine alone with the combination of beta-blockers and morphine, the mean pain score on a scale of 0 to 10 among 128 patients treated with morphine alone was reduced from 6.3 arbitrary units prior to the start of treatment to 3.7 arbitrary units during the subsequent hour (three measurements) [15].

  • Is there an ideal morphine dose for prehospital treatment of severe acute pain? A randomized, double-blind comparison of 2 doses

    2008, American Journal of Emergency Medicine
    Citation Excerpt :

    No patients needed an opioid antagonist, and only 1 had abnormal vital signs requiring clinical reassessment. On the other hand, few studies [16] have shown that morphine, in prehospital clinical practice, is safe when it is used alone. A recent study [13] demonstrated that even a 0.15-mg/kg dose of morphine is not associated with a statistically or clinically significant increase in adverse events.

  • Intravenous morphine titration

    2004, Annales Francaises d'Anesthesie et de Reanimation
  • Prehospital pain management

    2003, Prehospital Emergency Care
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text