Welcome to ScubaBoard, an online scuba diving forum community where you can join over 205,000 divers from around the world discussing all things related to Scuba Diving. To gain full access to ScubaBoard (and make this large box go away) you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
Participate in over 500 dive topic forums and browse from over 5,500,000 posts.
Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
Post your own photos or view from well over 100,000 user submitted images.
Gain access to our free classifieds marketplace to buy, sell and trade gear, travel and services.
Use the calendar to organize your events and enroll in other members' events.
All this and much more is available to you absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the ScubaBoard Support Team.
Kev, The study authors don't advocate delaying treatment of a diver with minor DCS. The point was to look at delays in treatment vs. treatment outcomes. For minor DCS (defined as pain or tingling), the data the authors analyzed indicated that a delay in treatment up to 20 hours did not influence the treatment outcome. This supports their contention that medical personnel should analyze the risks and benefits of different evacuation methods when determining how an injured diver will be transported.DDM
Has Zombie left eye ala Marilyn Manson, but for real (Corneal Hydrops).
Join Date
Jul 2005
Location
South Santa Monica Bay/Los Angeles California, USA, Planet Earth, a blue world 71% water & third planet from a G2 yellow dwarf star, in the Milky Way Galaxy two thirds of the way out from the center on the inner edge of the Orion–Cygnus arm.
CONCLUSION: More data are needed assess the benefits of faster evacuations. However, in real-world scenarios with EvCTs in the 20-hour range, time did not influence outcome. Risk-benefit analysis of emergency transport is advised, especially for mild cases of DCI with a low probability of symptom progression.”
Regards,
DocVikingo
The caveat being -to a Certified First Responder (Dive Master, Dive buddy, Deck hand, Boat Captain etc) or as a potential victim of DCS- you don't know whether or not you have "a mild case of DCI with low probability of progression". IMO, an interesting academic study for physicians/professional EMS personnel after the fact --but with a trivial conclusion above that has no utility or application for an "actual real world scenario" post-dive. The dilemma of immediate evacuation vs transport risk still remains evident. . .
Last edited by Kevrumbo; June 15th, 2011 at 08:36 PM.
Reason: clr
"Luck is the residue of design."
Branch Rickey. "A Life is not important . . .except in the impact it has on other Lives."
Jackie Robinson. "Chance favors the prepared mind" --Louis Pasteur
The dilemma of immediate evacuation vs transport risk still remains evident. . .
Hi Kev,
Agreed. However, as the research develops it appears to strengthen the argument against risky haste in seeking recompression, e.g.:
Diving Hyperb Med. 2011 Sep;41(3):129-34.
Risk factors and clinical outcome in military divers with neurological decompression sickness: influence of time to recompression.
Blatteau JE, Gempp E, Constantin P, Louge P.
Source
Chef de l'Equipe Residante de Recherche Subaquatique Operationnelle (ERRSO), Institut de Recherche Biomedicale des Armees (IRBA), Toulon, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
This study was designed to examine the influence of short delay to recompression and other risk factors associated with the development of severe neurological decompression sickness (DCS) in military divers.
METHODS:
Fifty-nine divers with DCS treated in less than 6 hours from onset of symptoms to hyperbaric recompression were included retrospectively. Diving parameters, symptom latency and recompression delay were analysed. Clinical symptoms were evaluated for both the acute event and one month later.
RESULTS:
Median delay to hyperbaric treatment was 35 min (2-350 min). Resolution was incomplete after one month in 25.4 % of divers with DCS. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that severe symptoms, classified as sensory and motor deficits or the presence of bladder dysfunction, were predictors of poor recovery with adjusted odds ratios (OR) of 4.1 (1.12 to 14.92) and 9.99 (1.5 to 66.34) respectively. There was a relationship between a longer delay to treatment and incomplete recovery, but the increased risk appeared negligible with an adjusted OR of 1.01 (1-1.02).
CONCLUSION:
Our results suggest that neurological severity upon occurrence is the main independent risk factor associated with a poor outcome in military divers with DCS. Clinical recovery was not dramatically improved in this series when recompression treatment was performed promptly.”
I've received a number of questions relating to the significance these studies.
I think the important take-away from the research to date is that supervising dive professionals and medical personnel should weigh the risks and benefits of various evacuation and treatment methods when determining how an injured diver will be transported and medically handled. As the research develops, it appears to strengthen the argument against risky haste in seeking recompression, be that risky transport methods or risky treatment approaches (e.g., in water recompression (IWR)).
I agree with DocVikingo. Somebody mentioned my persentation at DEMA 2011 about IWR. My intention was to deliver this same message and I hope I succeded.
5Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Originally Posted by Duke Dive Medicine
Reply With Quote
