Emergency Medicine Journal最新文献

Background: Ambulance clinicians use pre-alerts to inform receiving hospitals of the imminent arrival of a time-critical patient considered to require immediate attention, enabling the receiving emergency department (ED) or other clinical area to prepare. Pre-alerts are key to ensuring immediate access to appropriate care, but unnecessary pre-alerts can divert resources from other patients and fuel 'pre-alert fatigue' among ED staff. This research aims to provide a better understanding of pre-alert decision-making practice.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 34 ambulance clinicians from three ambulance services and 40 ED staff from six receiving EDs. Observation (162 hours) of responses to pre-alerts (n=143, call-to-handover) was also conducted in the six EDs. Interview transcripts and observation notes were imported into NVIVO and analysed using thematic analysis.

Findings: Pre-alert decisions involve rapid assessment of clinical risk based on physiological observations, clinical judgement and perceived risk of deterioration, with reference to pre-alert guidance. Clinical experience (pattern recognition and intuition) and confidence helped ambulance clinicians to understand which patients required immediate ED care on arrival or were at highest risk of deterioration. Ambulance clinicians primarily learnt to pre-alert 'on the job' and via informal feedback mechanisms, including the ED response to previous pre-alerts. Availability and access to clinical decision support was variable, and clinicians balanced the use of guidance and protocols with concerns about retention of clinical judgement and autonomy. Differences in pre-alert criteria between ambulance services and EDs created difficulties in deciding whether to pre-alert and was particularly challenging for less experienced clinicians.

Conclusion: We identified potentially avoidable variation in decision-making, which has implications for patient care and emergency care resources, and can create tension between the services. Consistency in practice may be improved by greater standardisation of guidance and protocols, training and access to performance feedback and cross-service collaboration to minimise potential sources of tension.

A short-cut systematic review was conducted using a described protocol. The three-part question addressed was: In adult patients presenting to the ED with diabetes-related visual symptoms, how effective is using a portable handheld fundus camera in diagnosing diabetic retinopathy?MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant evidence. Altogether, 237 papers were found using the search strategy developed. 12 provided the best evidence to answer the three-part question. The data on first author name, publication year, country of origin, study type, study sample size, participant's gender, reported effect sizes, main findings and limitations were extracted from the relevant studies and listed in a table.Following a thorough examination and review of the literature, our analysis identified 12 articles for detailed evaluation. Of these, three provided the most compelling evidence concerning the use of portable handheld fundus cameras for the diagnosis of diabetic retinopathy in emergency settings. Ruan et al (2022) reported superior image quality and a sensitivity of 82.1% (95% CI: 72.1% to 92.2%) with a specificity of 97.4% (95% CI: 95.4% to 99.5%) for a handheld camera combined with artificial intelligence interpretation. Jin et al (2017) demonstrated high-quality images with 63% rated as excellent, showing a comparable efficacy to a traditional tabletop camera. Das et al (2022) found that Remidio and Pictor handheld cameras had high success rates and image quality, with sensitivities of 77.5% (95% CI: 65.9% to 89.0%) and 78.1% (95% CI: 66.6% to 89.5%), respectively, comparable to the Zeiss tabletop camera's sensitivity of 84.9% (95% CI: 78.2% to 91.5%). The clinical bottom line is that the best available evidence supports the effectiveness of portable handheld fundus cameras for diagnosing diabetic retinopathy in emergency settings.

Olanzapine long-acting injection is a commonly used antipsychotic drug formulation in the treatment of schizophrenia. Postinjection delirium/sedation syndrome (PDSS) is a potential side effect of this intramuscular depot, for which patients are often presented at the ED. In this article, we give an overview of the current literature outlining the key aspects of managing this syndrome in a critical care setting, illustrated by a typical fictional clinical case. We discuss several useful and practical aspects of PDSS for emergency physicians and critical care physicians, including pharmacological background, common symptoms, diagnostic criteria and therapeutic options.

Background: Emergency department (ED) crowding causes increased mortality. Professionals working in crowded departments feel unable to provide high-quality care and are predisposed to burnout. Awareness of the impact on patients, however, is limited to metrics and surveys rather than understanding perspectives. This project investigated patients' experiences and identified mitigating interventions.

Methods: A qualitative service evaluation was undertaken in a large UK ED. Adults were recruited during periods of high occupancy or delayed transfers. Semi-structured interviews explored experience during these attendances. Participants shared potential mitigating interventions. Analysis was based on the interpretative phenomenological approach. Verbatim transcripts were read, checked for accuracy, re-read and discussed during interviewer debriefing. Reflections about positionality informed the interpretative process.

Results: Seven patients and three accompanying partners participated. They were aged 24-87 with characteristics representing the catchment population. Participants' experiences were characterised by 'loss of autonomy', 'unmet expectations' and 'vulnerability'. Potential mitigating interventions centred around information provision and better identification of existing ED facilities for personal needs.

Conclusion: Participants attending a crowded ED experienced uncertainty, helplessness and discomfort. Recommendations included process and environmental orientation.