Emergency Medicine Journal最新文献

Background: Acute aortic syndrome (AAS) requires urgent diagnosis with computed tomographic angiography (CTA). Diagnostic strategies need to weigh the benefits of detecting AAS against the costs of using CTA with a low yield of AAS when the prevalence of AAS is low. We aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies using clinical probability scoring and D-dimer to select patients with potential symptoms of AAS for CTA.

Methods: We developed a decision analytical model to simulate the management of patients attending hospital with possible AAS. We modelled diagnostic strategies that used the Aortic Dissection Detection Risk Score (ADD-RS) and D-dimer to select patients for CTA. We used estimates from our meta-analysis, existing literature and clinical experts to model the consequences of diagnostic strategies on survival, health utility, and health and social care costs. We estimated the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-years gained by each strategy compared with the next most effective alternative on the efficiency frontier.

Results: A strategy based on the Canadian guideline (CTA if ADD-RS>1 or ADD-RS=1 with D-dimer >500 ng/mL) is cost-effective but would result in high rates of CTA if applied to an unselected population (AAS prevalence 0.26%). The strategy is also cost-effective and would result in lower rates of CTA if applied to a more selected population, such as those with a non-zero clinical suspicion of AAS (prevalence 0.61%). For patients currently receiving CTA, using ADD-RS>1 or D-dimer >500 ng/mL to select patients for CTA is cost-effective.

Conclusions: A strategy using ADD-RS>1 or ADD-RS=1 with D-dimer >500 ng/mL to select patients for CTA appears cost-effective but primary research is required to evaluate this strategy in practice and determine how suspicion of AAS is identified.

Background: Patients with traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (t-OHCA) require on-scene airway management to maintain tissue oxygenation. However, the benefits of prehospital endotracheal intubation remain unclear, particularly regarding neurological outcomes. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the association between prehospital intubation and favourable neurological outcomes in patients with t-OHCA.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study used a Japanese nationwide trauma registry from 2019 to 2021. It included adult patients diagnosed with traumatic cardiac arrest on emergency medical service arrival. Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) scores, survival at discharge and presence of signs of life on hospital arrival were compared between patients with prehospital intubation and those with supraglottic airway or manual airway management. Inverse probability weighting with propensity scores was used to adjust for patient, injury, treatment and institutional characteristics, and the effects of intubation on outcomes averaged over baseline covariates were shown as marginal ORs.

Results: A total of 1524 patients were included in this study, with 370 undergoing intubation before hospital arrival. Prehospital intubation was associated with favourable neurological outcomes at discharge (GOS≥4 in 5/362 (1.4%) vs 10/1129 (0.9%); marginal OR 1.99; 95% CI 1.12 to 3.53; p=0.021) and higher survival to discharge (25/370 (6.8%) vs 63/1154 (5.5%); marginal OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.90; p=0.012). However, no association with signs of life on hospital arrival was observed (65/341 (19.1%) vs 147/1026 (14.3%); marginal OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.34). Favourable outcomes were observed only in patients who underwent intubation with a severe chest injury (Abbreviated Injury Score ≥3) and with transportation time to hospital >15 min (OR 14.44 and 2.00; 95% CI 1.89 to 110.02 and 1.09 to 3.65, respectively).

Conclusions: Prehospital intubation was associated with favourable neurological outcomes among adult patients with t-OHCA who had severe chest injury or transportation time >15 min.

Introduction: Optimising emergency department (ED) patient experience is vital to ensure care quality. However, there are few validated instruments to measure the experiences of specific patient groups, including older adults. We previously developed a draft 82-item Patient Reported Experience Measure (PREM-ED 65) for adults ≥65 attending the ED. This study aimed to derive a final item list and provide initial validation of the PREM-ED 65 survey.

Methods: A cross-sectional study involving patients in 18 EDs in England. Adults aged 65 years or over, deemed eligible for ED discharge, were recruited between May and August 2021 and asked to complete the 82-item PREM at the end of the ED visit and 7-10 days post discharge. Test-retest reliability was assessed 7-10 days following initial attendance. Analysis included descriptive statistics, including per-item proportions of responses, hierarchical item reduction, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), reliability testing and assessment of criterion validity.

Results: Five hundred and ten initial surveys and 52 retest surveys were completed. The median respondent age was 76. A similar gender mix (men 47.5% vs women 50.7%) and reason for attendance (40.3% injury vs 49.0% illness) was observed. Most participants self-reported their ethnicity as white (88.6%).Hierarchical item reduction identified 53/82 (64.6%) items for exclusion, due to inadequate engagement (n=33), ceiling effects (n=5), excessive inter-item correlation (n=12) or significant differential validity (n=3). Twenty-nine items were retained.EFA revealed 25 out of the 29 items demonstrating high factor loadings (>0.4) across four scales with an Eigenvalue >1. These scales were interpreted as measuring 'relational care', 'the ED environment', 'staying informed' and 'pain assessment'. Cronbach alpha for the scales ranged from 0.786 to 0.944, indicating good internal consistency. Test-retest reliability was adequate (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.67). Criterion validity was fair (r=0.397) when measured against the Friends and Families Test question.

Conclusions: Psychometric testing demonstrates that the 25-item PREM-ED 65 is suitable for administration to adults ≥65 years old up to 10 days following ED discharge.

Background: The aims of this study were to assess whether delayed admission from the ED influenced mortality risk, length of acute hospital stay, risk of developing delirium and return to domicile for patients presenting with a hip fracture.

Methods: A single centre service evaluation was undertaken including patients aged over 50 years who were admitted to a Scottish hospital through the ED with a hip fracture during a 42-month period (from January 2019 to June 2022). Delay was defined as spending >4 hours in the ED from arrival. Patient demographics and perioperative variables and mortality were collected. Cox regression analysis (adjusting for age, sex, season, socioeconomic status, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, place of residence, fracture type, delirium and time from ward to theatre) was used to determine the independent association between delayed disposition from the ED and mortality (90 days and final follow-up) as recorded on a regional database.

Results: The cohort consisted of 3266 patients with a mean age of 81 years, of which 2359 (72.2%) were female. 1261 (38.6%) patients stayed >4 hours in ED. The median follow-up was 529 days, during which time there were 1314 (40.2%) deaths. Survival at 90 days was significantly lower (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.91) for patients who stayed >4 hours (92.9%) compared with those who stayed ≤4 hours (95.7%). Delayed disposition was independently associated with an increased mortality risk at 90 days (adjusted HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.63, p=0.001) and at final follow-up (adjusted HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.29, p=0.017). Delay was also associated with a longer length of hospital stay (difference in medians of 1 day, p<0.001). There were no differences in the risk of delirium on the ward (p=0.256) or return to place of residence (p≥0.315).

Conclusion: Delayed disposition from our ED was associated with an increased mortality risk and longer length of hospital stay in patients presenting with a hip fracture.

Objectives: Paediatric trauma elbow radiographs are difficult to interpret and there is a potential for harm if misdiagnosed. The primary goal of this study was to assess the ability of healthcare professionals internationally to interpret paediatric trauma elbow radiographs from the radiograph alone by formulating the correct diagnosis.

Methods: This prospective international study was conducted online via the Free Open Access Medical Education platform, Don't Forget the Bubbles (DFTB, ISSN 2754-5407). Participants were recruited via the DFTB social media accounts between 17 August and 14 September 2021. Submissions that were incomplete or from participants who do not interpret paediatric elbow radiographs in their clinical practice were excluded. Participants completed an online survey of demographic data followed by interpreting 10 trauma-indicated elbow radiographs, by selecting multiple-choice options. The primary outcome was correct diagnosis.

Results: Participant responses from 18 countries were analysed, with most responses from the UK, Australia and Ireland. Participants had backgrounds in emergency medicine (EM), paediatric emergency medicine (PEM), general practice (GP) and paediatrics, with over 70% having 6+ years of postgraduate experience. 3180 radiographs were interpreted by 318 healthcare professionals. Only nine (2.8%) participants correctly diagnosed all 10. The mean number of radiographs correctly interpreted was 5.44 (SD 2.3). The mean number for those with 6+ years of experience was 6.02 (SD 2.2). On reviewing the normal radiograph, 158 (49.7%) overcalled injuries. Participants with EM or PEM background were equally likely to have more correct answers than those from paediatric or GP backgrounds.

Conclusion: Globally, healthcare professional's success in correctly diagnosing paediatric elbow injuries from radiographs was suboptimal in this non-clinical exercise, despite capturing quite an experienced cohort of clinicians. This study has provided us with detailed baseline data to accurately assess the impact of interventions aimed at improving clinicians' interpretation of paediatric elbow radiographs in future studies.