Open Access Emergency Medicine最新文献

Background: The first wave of COVID-19 in 2020 created massive challenges in providing safe surgery for pediatric patients with COVID-19. Inevitably, emergency surgery and the unknown nature of the disease place a burden on the heavily challenged surgical services for pediatrics in a developing country. Lessons from the pandemic are important for future disaster planning.

Aim: To describe the characteristics of pediatric surgical patients with COVID-19 undergoing emergency surgery during the first wave and its perioperative narrative in a developing country.

Methods: The study was a multicenter retrospective descriptive study in eight Indonesian government-owned referral and teaching hospitals. The authors reviewed confirmed COVID-19 pediatric patients (≤18 years old) who underwent surgery. Institutional review board clearances were acquired, and data were evaluated in proportion and percentages. The writing of this paper follows the STROBE guidelines.

Results: About 7791 pediatric surgical cases were collected, 73 matched the study criteria and 24 confirmed cases were found. Cases were more common in females (58.3%), who were above 12 years old (37.5%) and who were asymptomatic (62.5%). Laparotomy (33.3%), general anesthesia (90.4%) and intubation (80.8%) were common, while use of video laryngoscopy (40%) and rapid sequence intubation (28.8%) were rare. The mean length of stay was 12 ±13.3 days, and in-hospital mortality was 8.3%.

Discussions: Lockdown and school closure were successful in protecting children, hence the low incidence of pediatric surgical cases with COVID-19 during the first wave. Many hospitals were unprepared to perform surgery for a droplet or airborne infectious disease, and COVID-19 testing was not available nationally in the early pandemic, hence the use of protective protection equipment  during these early pandemic times are often not efficient.

Conclusion: The incidence of COVID-19 in pediatric surgical patients is low. The rapidity and availability of preoperative testing for a new emerging disease are essential in a pandemic.

Background: Surgical services at level referral hospitals were an essential part of overall health care. The surgical uhservice was approximated to account for 11% of the worldwide load of disease, with a large percentage of that burden being uncovered in resource-constraint settings. Even though the surgery service is significant and growing across all economic sectors, the majority of resource-limited countries have been unable to provide essential surgical services.

Objective: To investigate the capacity of essential and emergency surgical services in primary hospital facilities in the Gedeo zone and Sidama region.

Methodology: In the Gedeo zone and Sidama region, a cross-sectional study was undertaken in eight district hospitals. By looking at four areas of data: infrastructure, human resources, interventions available, and equipment, a World Health Organization tool for conditional analysis was used to assess a health set-up competence to perform essential surgical and anesthetic procedures. The tool looked for eight different categories of healthcare giving 35 surgical procedures, and 67 different pieces of instruments.

Results: This research found that 48.57% of the 35 essential interventions counted in the test, including cesarean section, were available at all hospitals. Prior to admission, each hospital reported a total of 53 beds, with an average travel distance of 28 kilometers. There were 189 healthcare providers in the eight facilities. According to the research, basic instruments were not always present at all of the sites.

Conclusion: Infrastructure, health profession, service supply, and key instruments and supplies deficiencies reveal major inadequacies in hospitals' capacity to perform EESC and efficiently treat the growing surgical load of disease and damage in primary care.

Convulsive status epilepticus (CSE) is the most common neurological emergency in children and the second most common neurological emergency in adults. Mortality is low, but morbidity, including neuro-disability, learning difficulties, and a de-novo epilepsy, may be as high as 22%. The longer the duration of CSE, the more difficult it is to terminate, and the greater the risk of morbidity. Convulsive status epilepticus is usually managed using specific national or local algorithms. The first-line treatment is administered when a tonic-clonic or focal motor clonic seizure has lasted five minutes (impending or premonitory CSE). Second-line treatment is administered when the CSE has persisted after two doses of a first-line treatment (established CSE). Randomised clinical trial (RCT) evidence supports the use of benzodiazepines as a first-line treatment of which the most common are buccal or intra-nasal midazolam, rectal diazepam and intravenous lorazepam. Alternative drugs, for which there are considerably less RCT data, are intra-muscular midazolam and intravenous clonazepam. Up until 2019, phenobarbital and phenytoin (or fosphenytoin) were the preferred second-line treatments but with no good supporting RCT evidence. Robust RCT data are now available which has provided important information on second-line treatments, specifically phenytoin (or fosphenytoin), levetiracetam and sodium valproate. Lacosamide is an alternative second-line treatment but with no supporting RCT evidence. Current evidence indicates that first, buccal or intranasal midazolam or intravenous lorazepam are the most effective and the most patient and carer-friendly first-line anti-seizure medications to treat impending or premonitory CSE and second, that there is no difference in efficacy between levetiracetam, phenytoin (or fosphenytoin) or sodium valproate for the treatment of established CSE. Pragmatically, levetiracetam or sodium valproate are preferred to phenytoin (or fosphenytoin) because of their ease of administration and lack of serious adverse side-effects, including potentially fatal cardiac arrhythmias. Sodium valproate must be used with caution in children aged three and under because of the rare risk of hepatotoxicity and particularly if there is an underlying mitochondrial disorder.

Background: Emergency Department (ED) clinicians commonly experience difficulties in referring patients to inpatient teams for hospital admission. There is limited literature reporting on patient outcomes following these complicated referrals, where ED requests for inpatient admission are rejected - which study investigators termed a "knockback".

Purpose: To identify disposition outcomes and referral accuracy in ED patients whose admission referral was initially rejected. Secondary objectives were to identify additional patient, clinician and systemic factors associated with knockbacks.

Selection and methodology: Emergency clinicians prospectively nominated a convenience sample of patients identified as having knockbacks over two time periods (Jan-Feb 2020 and Aug 2020 to Jan 2021) at a tertiary Australian ED. Data were analyzed with a mixed-methods approach and subsequent descriptive and thematic analyses were performed.

Results: A total of 109 patients were identified as knockbacks. The referrals were warranted, with 89.0% of cases (n = 97) ultimately requiring a hospital admission. In 60.6% (n = 66) of the admissions, patients were admitted under the inpatient team initially referred to by the ED, suggesting referrals were generally accurate. The number of in-hospital units involved in the admission process and ED length of stay were positively correlated (0.409, p < 0.001). Patient factors associated with knockbacks include pre-existing chronic medical conditions and presenting acutely unwell. Analysis of clinicians' perspectives yielded recurring themes of disagreements over admission destination and diagnostic uncertainty.

Conclusion: In this patient sample, emergency referrals for admission were mostly warranted and accurate. Knockbacks increase ED length of stay and may adversely affect patient care. Further focused discussion and clearer referral guidelines between ED clinicians and their inpatient colleagues are required.

Objective: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) declined. The main goal of this study was to compare and describe the non-COVID-19 patient's disease severity presentation during the pandemic with its pre-pandemic severity.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study. We selected two samples of visits: one during the first COVID-19 wave of 2020 (pandemic period, PP) and the other during the same months of 2019 (control period, CP). The primary endpoints were the comparison of severity and distribution of the Emergency Severity Index (ESI). Secondary endpoints were comparisons of specific patient characteristics (age, sex, length of the symptoms before the visits, spontaneous visits or not, return home or not).

Results: The mean ESI of the visits during the PP (3.19) was statistically significantly lower (P = 0.001) than it was in the CP (3.43). These changes were more pronounced during the months of March (3.03 versus 3.33, P = 0.037) and April (2.96 versus 3.48, P < 0.001). The change in ESI was mainly due to an increase in the proportion of visits by patients with an ESI score of 3 (42% versus 28%, P < 0.001). There were no differences in the characteristics of patients except a decline in patients whose symptoms had a duration of more than 30 days (2% during PP versus 4% during CP, P = 0.03).

Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a change in the pattern of non-COVID-19 visits, with proportionally more severe presentations based on the ESI. To our knowledge, this is the first description of changes in behaviour in ED visits by specifically non-COVID-19 patients.

Background: Effective and well-organized ambulance services system forms the link between household and health facility for providing basic or comprehensive emergency obstetric care. Therefore, the establishment of a strong ambulance services network across the country based on evidences from local study is necessary for the improvement of ambulance service utilization among mothers who gave birth. This study aimed to assess magnitude and factors associated with ambulance service utilization among women who gave birth at public health institutions in central Ethiopia.

Methods: A community-based cross-sectional study supplemented by a qualitative method was employed. Data were collected via face-to-face interview. A simple random sampling and purposive sampling techniques were used to select study participants. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were done to identify factors associated with ambulance services utilization, and variables with a p-value <0.25 were entered in the multivariable logistic regression analysis. Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with 95% CI and a P-value <0.05 were used to declare statistically significant associations.

Results: Among study participants, only 214 (46%) utilized ambulance service. Mother who had no formal education (AOR=0.03, 95% CI [0.01, 0.07]), husband who completed primary school and above (AOR=7.03, 95% CI [1.83, 27.16]), rural residence (AOR=2.27, 95% CI [1.11, 4.65]), decision maker to get ambulance service (AOR=0.03, 95% CI [0.01, 0.07]), multigravida (AOR=4.8, 95% CI [2.48, 9.34]), having ambulance phone number (AOR=0.36, 95% CI [0.19, 0.68]), antenatal care attendance (AOR=0.07, 95% CI [0.04, 0.16]), and having discussion with health extension worker (AOR=0.14, 95% CI [0.084, 0.24]) were significantly associated with ambulance service utilization.

Conclusion: The magnitude of ambulance service utilization was low. Hence, health sector should improve the awareness of pregnant mothers on benefit of ambulance utilization through provision of information. Health care providers should provide antenatal services for pregnant mothers as early as possible.

Purpose: The paper intends to do a scoping review of people with intellectual disabilities in emergency care where this group seems to face access barriers and discrimination. It analyses the conceptual and methodological framework for studies examining the former.

Methods: A scoping review is conducted. The studies' quality is assessed via a checklist developed by the authors drawing on a compilation of common assessment tools for study quality.

Results: Fourteen quantitative studies fulfil the inclusion criteria for further analysis. Summary measures are extracted. Results are synthesized with Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Service Use. Studies employ a combination of variables attributable to different aspects of population characteristics and health behavior.

Conclusion: Most studies seek to quantify or predict emergency care overuse by people with intellectual disabilities. Future studies should also take patients' poor health or treatment outcomes and their perspectives into account.

Purpose: Worldwide, the number of patients waiting for organ transplantation exceeds the number of organs available. Program for uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (uDCD) implemented in Europe has resulted in a 10-15% expansion of the donor pool. We aimed to describe the number of patients eligible for an uDCD program in a regional tertiary care center.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a Canadian tertiary academic center located in a rural area including all adults who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation in 2016 and died in the emergency department (ED) or during their hospitalization. The primary outcome was the number of patients eligible for uDCD defined as aged between 18 and 60 years old whose collapse was witnessed and where the time between cardiac arrest to cardiopulmonary resuscitation and ED arrival was, respectively, less than 30 and 120 minutes. As a secondary outcome, we determined the number of patients eligible for controlled donation after circulatory death.

Results: Of the 130 patients included, 84 did not return to spontaneous circulation. We identified 15 potential uDCD candidates, with a mean age of 46.6 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 41.3 to 52) years. Twelve had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with a mean time between collapse and arrival to the ED of 43.2 (29.8 to 56.6) minutes. Among the 46 patients who died after a return of spontaneous circulation, 10 (21.7%) were eligible for organ donation after circulatory death.

Conclusion: Implementing an uDCD program in a tertiary hospital covering a rural area could increase the number of donors.

Objective: The HEART Score is a clinically validated risk stratification tool for patients with chest pain. Using five parameters (History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk factors, and Troponin), this instrument categorizes patients as low, moderate, or high risk for major adverse cardiac events within six weeks after evaluation. Of these parameters, History is the most subjective, as providers independently assign their level of clinical suspicion. Overestimation of history, and ultimately the HEART Score, can result in increased resource utilization, expense, and patient risk. We sought to evaluate bias in provider assessment of history when determining the HEART Score.

Methods: Emergency medicine (EM) and Cardiology providers received surveys with one of two versions of clinical vignettes randomized at the question level and were asked to estimate the history component of the HEART Score. Vignettes differed by age, risk factors, sex, and socioeconomic status (SES), but both versions should have received the same score for history. Statistical analysis was then used to assess differences in history assessment between vignettes.

Results: Of the 884 responses analyzed, most providers overestimated the historical portion of the HEART Score when assessing risk factors, patient distress, age, and lower SES. Many underestimated history with knowledge of a previous negative stress test. When controlling for specialty, the universal theme was overestimation by EM providers and underestimation by cardiologists. Despite the presence of hypertension, gender differences, and the appearance of mild distress, cardiologists were more likely to correctly estimate history compared to EM providers. SES consideration generally led to an underestimation of history by cardiologists. These findings were all statistically significant.

Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that both EM and cardiology providers overestimate history when considering prognosticators that are frequently viewed as concerning. Further education on proper usage of the HEART Score is needed for more appropriate scoring of history and improved resource allocation for hospital systems.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has widely affected the global public health system, especially the emergency medical service (EMS), which has been the first responders since 2020. However, this pandemic persists with still limited studies on its impact on EMS. This study aimed to compare the number of EMS patients and the operation periods of Bangkok EMS in Thailand between 2020 (severe COVID-19 pandemic) and 2019 (prepandemic).

Patients and methods: We retrospectively analyzed data of patients with severe COVID-19 were collected from the emergency medical information system of Bangkok EMS center. Data were compared between the two periods. The COVID-19 pandemic period (study period) spanned from January 01, 2020 to December 31, 2020, whereas the control period referred to the same period in the previous year (January 01, 2019 to December 31, 2019).

Results: A total of 178,594 patients were serviced by EMS, with 93,288 during the study period and 85,306 during the control period. The study period had more EMS patients overall by 9.36% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.16-9.55) and significantly more EMS patients per day, with a mean difference of 21.19 (254.90 ± 25.55 vs 233.71 ± 23.49; 95% CI: 17.63-24.76, p < 0.001), than the control period. Furthermore, all EMS operation periods studied were significantly longer during the study period.

Conclusion: During COVID-19 pandemic period, a significantly increased number of EMS patients compared to one during non-COVID-19 pandemic period for both traumatic and non-traumatic patients, as well as remarkably increased every EMS operation period of both groups during COVID-19 pandemic period were found in the present study. From this knowledge, provision of necessary EMS resources and preparation of emergency staff to be ready for management of future pandemics should be obtained to reduce EMS operation period in the future pandemics.