European Journal of Emergency Medicine最新文献

Background: Treatment of acute pain in older patients is a common challenge faced in emergency departments (EDs). Despite many studies that have investigated chronic analgesic use in the elderly, data on patterns of acute use, especially in EDs, of analgesics according to patient characteristics is scarce.

Objective: To investigate sex- and age-related patterns of analgesic use in the Spanish EDs and determine differences in age-related patterns according to patient sex.

Design: A secondary analysis of the Emergency Department and Elderly Needs (EDEN) multipurpose cohort.

Setting: Fifty-two Spanish EDs (17% of Spanish EDs covering 25% of Spanish population).

Participants: All patients' ≥65 years attending ED during 1 week (April 1-7, 2019). Patient characteristics recorded included age, sex, chronic treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opiates, comorbidity, dependence, dementia, depression, ability to walk and previous falls. Analgesics used in the ED were categorized in three groups: non-NSAID non-opioids (mainly paracetamol and metamizole, PM), NSAIDs, and opiates.

Outcome measures: Frequency of analgesic use was quantified, and the relationship between sex and age and analgesic use (in general and for each analgesic group) was assessed by unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression and restricted cubic spline models. Interaction between sex and age was explored.

Main results: We included 24 573 patients, and 6678 (27.2%) received analgesics in the ED: 5551 (22.6%) PM, 1661 (6.8%) NSAIDs and 937 (3.8%) opiates (1312 received combinations). Analgesics were more frequently used in women (adjusted OR = 1.076, 95%CI = 1.014-1.142), as well as with NSAID (1.205, 1.083-1.341). Analgesic use increased with age, increasing PM and decreasing NSAIDs use. Opiate use remained quite constant across age and sex. Interaction of sex with age was present for the use of analgesics in general ( P  = 0.006), for PM ( P  < 0.001) and for opiates ( P  = 0.033), with higher use of all these analgesics in women.

Conclusion: Use of analgesics in older individuals in EDs is mildly augmented in women and increases with age, with PM use increasing and NSAIDs decreasing with age. Conversely, opiate use is quite constant according to sex and age. Age-related patterns differ according to sex, with age-related curves of women showing higher probabilities than those of men to receive any analgesic, PM or opiates.

Intravenous fluid therapy is commonly administered in the emergency department (ED). Despite the deleterious potential of over- and under-resuscitation, professional society guidelines continue to recommend administering a fixed volume of fluid in initial resuscitation. Predicting whether a specific patient will respond to fluid therapy remains one of the most important, but challenging questions that ED clinicians face in clinical practice. Surrogate parameters (i.e. blood pressure and heart rate), are widely used in usual care to estimate changes in stroke volume (SV). Due to their inadequacy in estimating SV, noninvasive techniques (e.g. bioreactance, echocardiography, noninvasive finger cuff technology), have been proposed as a more accurate and readily deployable method for assessing flow and preload responsiveness. Dynamic monitoring systems based on cardiac preload challenge and assessment of SV, by using noninvasive and continuous methods, provide more accurate, feasible, efficient, and reasonably accurate strategy for prediction of fluid responsiveness than static measurements. In this article, we aimed to analyze the different methods currently available for dynamic monitoring of preload responsiveness.

Background and importance: Sudden cardiac arrest has a high incidence and often leads to death. A treatment option that might improve the outcomes in refractory cardiac arrest is Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (ECPR).

Objectives: This study investigates the number of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients eligible to ECPR and identifies clinical characteristics that may help to identify which patients benefit the most from ECPR.

Design, settings and participants: A retrospective two-centre study was conducted in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. All IHCA and OHCA patients between 1 January 2017 and 1 January 2020 were screened for eligibility to ECPR. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients eligible to ECPR and patients treated with ECPR. The secondary outcome was the comparison of the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients eligible to ECPR treated with conventional Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CCPR) vs. those of patients treated with ECPR.

Main results: Out of 1246 included patients, 412 were IHCA patients and 834 were OHCA patients. Of the IHCA patients, 41 (10.0%) were eligible to ECPR, of whom 20 (48.8%) patients were actually treated with ECPR. Of the OHCA patients, 83 (9.6%) were eligible to ECPR, of whom 23 (27.7%) were actually treated with ECPR. In the group IHCA patients eligible to ECPR, no statistically significant difference in survival was found between patients treated with CCPR and patients treated with ECPR (hospital survival 19.0% vs. 15.0% respectively, 4.0% survival difference 95% confidence interval -21.3 to 28.7%). In the group OHCA patients eligible to ECPR, no statistically significant difference in-hospital survival was found between patients treated with CCPR and patients treated with ECPR (13.3% vs. 21.7% respectively, 8.4% survival difference 95% confidence interval -30.3 to 10.2%).

Conclusion: This retrospective study shows that around 10% of cardiac arrest patients are eligible to ECPR. Less than half of these patients eligible to ECPR were actually treated with ECPR in both IHCA and OHCA.