Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin最新文献

Epileptic seizures, which are often accompanied by a reduction in vigilance, are a common emergency. Every first-time epileptic seizure should be investigated further. Particular attention should be paid to whether it is an acute symptomatic seizure, which is an acute event characterized by a metabolic disorder or acute cerebral damage within a certain period of time, or possibly epilepsy. In terms of differential diagnosis, psychogenic nonepileptic seizures also pose a challenge, as they are often not easy to distinguish from epileptic seizures, but require a different therapeutic approach. Persistent epileptic seizures in the sense of status epilepticus (duration: > 5 min) are also common in the (pre)clinical emergency situation and require immediate initiation of adequate therapy, which consists of rapid and sufficient administration of benzodiazepines. Nasal administration is a quick and simple option here, particularly in the prehospital setting. Furthermore, persistent reductions in vigilance are a not infrequently occurring phenomenon in the (pre)clinical setting, which is, however, based on numerous differential diagnoses. Here, nonconvulsive status epilepticus should be considered as a possible cause and rapid diagnosis using EEG should be sought in order to begin early treatment, which improves patient outcomes.

In Germany, a substantial reform of emergency care is strictly recommended. Regulation of patient flows into the ambulatory and stationary sectors remains a major issue.In the OPTINOFA project funded by Innovationsfunds, a new triage system was developed for a structured primary evaluation of both urgency and care level of emergency cases. OPTINOFA was evaluated in a cluster-randomized, controlled multicenter trial using a stepped-wedge design in eight emergency departments (ED) from 1 July 2019 to 31 May 2021. Additionally, data from one ED were used for comparison of temporal changes without intervention. The primary study endpoint represented the increase of patient transfers to the ambulatory sector; secondary endpoints included the outcome, process and quality indicators as well as mean emergency care costs.In the study, 46,558 emergency cases were included in the control period and 37,485 emergency cases in the intervention period. Concerning the primary endpoint, a significant increase of transfers to the ambulatory sector were detected in the per-protocol EDs (p < 0.001, odds ratio = 10.59). Waiting times were significantly reduced by an average 20 min in the intervention phase. Furthermore, a stable admission rate was found within 3 days after initial ED presentation. Cost analysis revealed no increase of treatment expenses within 28 days after ED admission.In this project a valid assistant service for structured primary evaluation of urgency and care level was successfully developed for emergency cases and served as a digital triage instrument with interoperable format. Clinical trial results revealed great potential for the OPTINOFA triage system to control patient flows in emergency and acute medicine.

This review examines the issue of overtreatment and overdiagnosis in the context of intensive care and emergency medicine and its relationship to sustainability. It shows that the intensive use of resources, both human and technology, is often associated with risks of overuse, especially in critical medical situations. More diagnostic and therapeutic measures are often taken than necessary, leading to both stress for the patient and a high consumption of resources. One of the main problems is the often difficult distinction between necessary and excessive treatment. Uncertainty in acute care, coupled with legal concerns, often leads to defensive medicine. This means that, for safety reasons, physicians initiate more diagnostic tests and treatments than are clinically necessary. There are also economic disincentives in the healthcare system that encourage overtreatment. The paper also discusses the role of guidelines, particularly with respect to patient preferences. These can help to avoid unnecessary admissions to the intensive care unit and thus contribute to sustainability. The discussion shows that sustainability should not be at odds with high-quality patient care. Rather, treatment options should also be considered in terms of their contribution to sustainability, without neglecting the individual needs of patients.

Background: Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a medical emergency with high morbidity and mortality. General and specific therapeutic approaches aim to improve the patient's outcome.

Objectives: The objective of this article is to present the current scientific state regarding the in-hospital care of patients with ICH.

Materials and methods: This narrative review presents and analyzes the current evidence regarding treatment options for ICH.

Results: The primary focus of acute therapy is to prevent the prognostically unfavorable enlargement of the hematoma. This is associated with specific computed tomographic markers, as well as the initial hematoma volume, the use of anticoagulants, and a shorter time from symptom onset. An elevated blood pressure should be promptly and precisely lowered to a systolic value below 140 mm Hg, and the inhibition of coagulation must be immediately antagonized. This should be constituted into a treatment bundle with optimal adjustment of vital parameters and implementation of basic intensive care measures. Intraventricular hemorrhage can be effectively treated by external ventricular drainage and intraventricular fibrinolysis, with or without additional lumbar drainage. Minimally invasive procedures for hematoma removal have the potential to improve outcomes in lobar ICH. A realistic prognostic assessment forms the basis for informed treatment decisions regarding ICH.

Conclusions: In recent years, the evidence supporting aggressive therapeutic approaches in ICH has become increasingly robust, with reliable results now available regarding the efficacy of individual or combined measures.

Critically ill patients are at high risk of adverse drug-drug interactions. Pharmacodynamic drug-drug interaction may cause organ damage. Pharmacokinetic interactions are usually caused by inhibition or induction of enzymes of drug metabolism such as cytochrome P-450 isoenzymes or transporter proteins such as P‑glycoprotein. Inhibitors of such molecules can cause toxic levels of the corresponding substrates, while inducers might produce subtherapeutic concentrations. Amiodarone, macrolides, antifungal azoles, direct-acting anticoagulants, vitamin K antagonists, immunosuppressants, rifampicin, and some central nervous system (CNS)-active substances are frequently involved in drug-drug interactions. Sound risk and benefit assessment of the applied medication, therapeutic drug monitoring, the use of electronic alert systems and databases along with clinical evaluation will contribute to avoiding adverse drug-drug interactions.

Background: Man-made climate change is one of the greatest challenges of the future. The course is being set in the current generation. As the healthcare sector contributes a considerable proportion of greenhouse gas emissions, measures to counteract this must be introduced as a matter of urgency. A guideline is therefore necessary as an initial recommendation for action in the intensive care and emergency medicine sector.

Methods: As part of the guideline program of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF e. V.), an S1 guideline was developed with the participation of 12 professional societies and initiatives, and published in October 2024. The guideline group defined relevant key topics and carried out a systematic search of the literature; due to the S1 classification, no separate evidence review was carried out. The classification of the recommendations took place in a formal consensus-building process.

Results: The guideline contains 73 recommendations for the implementation of sustainable approaches in intensive care and emergency medicine. These are recommendations that concern both the interprofessional team in the departments and the organizational structure of the hospital.

Conclusion: The guideline shows that there are already relevant and concrete possibilities for more sustainable work in intensive care and emergency medicine. However, there is a need for further research (e.g., detailed analyses, such as life cycle assessment) on how exactly to reduce the environmental impact of medical facilities, while maintaining high-quality patient care.