• Gregory W Hendey, Brandy Snowden, Kenny V Banh, and Krista Kaups.
• Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California San Francisco-Fresno, Fresno, California 93701-2302, USA.
• J Emerg Med. 2012 Nov 1;43(5):e277-82.

BackgroundConcerns over adrenal suppression caused by a single dose of etomidate for intubation led to limiting its use in trauma patients in 2006.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare mortality, hypotension, and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS) for trauma patients requiring intubation during periods of liberal vs. limited etomidate use.MethodsA retrospective review of trauma patients requiring emergent intubation who presented between August 2004 and December 2008, before and after we decided to limit the use of etomidate. Data were collected on patient demographics, induction agents used, episodes of hypotension in the first 24h, ICU and total hospital LOS, and survival.ResultsOf 1325 trauma patients intubated in the Emergency Department during the study period, 443 occurred during the 23 months before July 2006 (liberal etomidate use) and 882 in the 30 months after July 2006 (limited etomidate use). During the liberal use period, 258/443 (58%) were intubated using etomidate, compared to 205/882 (23%, p<0.0001) during the period of limited use. We found no significant differences in mortality (30% vs. 29%, p=0.70), mean ICU days (8.2 vs. 8.8, p=0.356), or mean hospital LOS (13.8 vs. 14.4 days, p=0.55). Episodes of hypotension were more common in the limited etomidate use group (45% vs. 33%, p<0.0001).ConclusionsA significant reduction in the use of etomidate in trauma patients was not associated with differences in mortality, ICU days, or hospital LOS, but was associated with an increase in episodes of hypotension within 24h of presentation.Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

29 keywords...

hide…