摘要 :
Refractory hypotension is one of the most common and difficult clinical problems faced by acute care clinicians, and it poses a particularly large problem to the emergency physician when a patient in undifferentiated shock arrives...
展开
Refractory hypotension is one of the most common and difficult clinical problems faced by acute care clinicians, and it poses a particularly large problem to the emergency physician when a patient in undifferentiated shock arrives in the department. Angiotensin II (Ang-2) has been previously used as a vasopressor to combat shock; the feasibility of its clinical use has been reinvigorated after approval of a human synthetic formulation of the medication by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2017 and the European Medicines Agency in 2019. A thorough literature search was completed, and in this review, we discuss the discovery and development of Ang-2, its complex mechanisms of vasoconstriction, its potential adverse effects and its potential role in clinical practice for emergency physicians.
收起
摘要 :
Based on the 2018 update of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign, the Committee for Quality Improvement of the NHSs of England recommended the instigation of the elements of the ‘Sepsis-6 bundle’ within 1 hour to adult patients screene...
展开
Based on the 2018 update of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign, the Committee for Quality Improvement of the NHSs of England recommended the instigation of the elements of the ‘Sepsis-6 bundle’ within 1 hour to adult patients screened positive for sepsis. This bundle includes a bolus infusion of 30 mL/kg crystalloids in the ED. Besides the UK, both in the USA and Australia, compliance with similar 1-hour targets became an important quality indicator. However, the supporting evidence may neither be contemporaneous nor necessarily valid for emergency medicine settings.A systematic review was designed and registered at PROSPERO to assess available emergency medicine/prehospital evidence published between 2012 and 2020, investigating the clinical benefits associated with a bolus infusion of a minimum 30 mL/kg crystalloids within 1 hour to adult patients screened positive for sepsis. Due to the small number of papers that addressed this volume of fluids in 1 hour, we expanded the search to include studies looking at 1–6 hours.Seven full-text articles were identified, which investigated various aspects of the fluid resuscitation in adult sepsis. However, none answered completely to the original research question aimed to determine either the effect of time-to-crystalloids or the optimal fluid volume of resuscitation. Our findings demonstrated that in the USA/UK/Australia/Canada, adult ED septic patients receive 23–43 mL/kg of crystalloids during the first 6 hours of resuscitation without significant differences either in mortality or in adverse effects.This systematic review did not find high-quality evidence supporting the administration of 30 mL/kg crystalloid bolus to adult septic patients within 1 hour of presentation in the ED. Future research must investigate both the benefits and the potential harms of the recommended intervention.
收起
摘要 :
Variation in the approach to the patient with a possible subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) has been previously documented. The purpose of this study was to identify factors that influence emergency physicians’ decisions about diagno...
展开
Variation in the approach to the patient with a possible subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) has been previously documented. The purpose of this study was to identify factors that influence emergency physicians’ decisions about diagnostic testing after a normal CT brain scan for ED patients with a headache suspicious of a SAH.We conducted an interview-based qualitative study informed by social constructionist theory. Fifteen emergency physicians from six EDs across Queensland, Australia, underwent individual face-to-face or telephone interviews. Content analysis was performed whereby transcripts were examined and coded independently by two co-investigators, who then jointly agreed on the influencing factors.Six categories of influencing factors were identified. Patient interaction was at the forefront of the identified factors. This shared decision-making process incorporated ‘what the patient wants’ but may be biased by how the clinician communicates the benefits and harms of the diagnostic options to the patient. Patient risk profile, practice evidence and guidelines were also important. Other influencing factors included experiential factors of the clinician, consultation with colleagues and external influences where practice location and work processes impose constraints on test ordering external to the preferences of the clinician or patient. The six categories were organised within a conceptual framework comprising four components: the context, the evidence, the experience and the decision.When clinicians are faced with a diagnostic challenge, such as the workup of a patient with suspected SAH, there are a number of influencing factors that can result in a variation in approach. These need to be considered in approaches to improve the appropriateness and consistency of medical care.
收起
摘要 :
Variation in the approach to the patient with a possible subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) has been previously documented. The purpose of this study was to identify factors that influence emergency physicians’ decisions about diagno...
展开
Variation in the approach to the patient with a possible subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) has been previously documented. The purpose of this study was to identify factors that influence emergency physicians’ decisions about diagnostic testing after a normal CT brain scan for ED patients with a headache suspicious of a SAH.We conducted an interview-based qualitative study informed by social constructionist theory. Fifteen emergency physicians from six EDs across Queensland, Australia, underwent individual face-to-face or telephone interviews. Content analysis was performed whereby transcripts were examined and coded independently by two co-investigators, who then jointly agreed on the influencing factors.Six categories of influencing factors were identified. Patient interaction was at the forefront of the identified factors. This shared decision-making process incorporated ‘what the patient wants’ but may be biased by how the clinician communicates the benefits and harms of the diagnostic options to the patient. Patient risk profile, practice evidence and guidelines were also important. Other influencing factors included experiential factors of the clinician, consultation with colleagues and external influences where practice location and work processes impose constraints on test ordering external to the preferences of the clinician or patient. The six categories were organised within a conceptual framework comprising four components: the context, the evidence, the experience and the decision.When clinicians are faced with a diagnostic challenge, such as the workup of a patient with suspected SAH, there are a number of influencing factors that can result in a variation in approach. These need to be considered in approaches to improve the appropriateness and consistency of medical care.
收起
摘要 :
Guidelines for adults presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected sepsis recommend protocols and bundles that promote rapid and potentially intensive treatment, but give little consideration of how patient character...
展开
Guidelines for adults presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected sepsis recommend protocols and bundles that promote rapid and potentially intensive treatment, but give little consideration of how patient characteristics, such as age, functional status and comorbidities, might influence management. This study aimed to describe the characteristics, management and outcomes of adults attending the ED with suspected sepsis, and specifically describe the prevalence of comorbidities, functional impairment and escalations of care.We undertook a single-centre retrospective observational study involving medical record review of a random sample of adults admitted to an ED between February 2018 and January 2019 with suspected sepsis. Descriptive statistics were used with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for key proportions.We included 509 patients (median age 74 years), of whom 49.3% met the Sepsis-3 criteria. Less than half of the patients were living at home independently (42.5%) or could walk independently (41.5%), 19.3% were care home residents and 89.2% of patients had one or more comorbidity. 22% had a pre-existing do not attempt resuscitation order. 6.5% were referred to intensive care, and 34.3% of the 13.2% who died in-hospital had an escalation plan explicitly documented.Adults with suspected sepsis have substantial functional limitations, comorbidities and treatment directives that should be considered in guidelines, especially recommendations for escalation of care.
收起
摘要 :
Many patients presenting with abdominal pain to emergency departments (EDs) are discharged without a definitive diagnosis. For these patients, often designated as having non-specific abdominal pain, re-evaluation is often advocate...
展开
Many patients presenting with abdominal pain to emergency departments (EDs) are discharged without a definitive diagnosis. For these patients, often designated as having non-specific abdominal pain, re-evaluation is often advocated. We aimed to investigate how often re-evaluation changes the diagnosis and clinical management and discern factors that could help identify patients likely to benefit from re-evaluation.This was a retrospective study conducted in the Netherlands between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2015 of patients asked to return to the ED after an initial presentation with acute non-traumatic abdominal pain. The primary outcome was a clinically relevant change in treatment (surgery, endoscopy during admission and/or hospitalisation) and diagnosis at ED re-evaluation within 30?hours.During the 2-year study period, 358 ED patients with non-specific abdominal pain were scheduled for re-evaluation. Of these, 14% (11%–18%)) did not present for re-evaluation. Re-evaluation resulted in a clinically relevant change in diagnosis and treatment in, respectively, 21.3% (17%–29%)) and 22.3% (18%–27%)) of the subjects. Of the clinical, biochemical and radiological factors available at the index visit, C reactive protein (CRP) at the index visit predicted a change in treatment (CRP >27?mg/L likelihood ratio (LR)+ 1.69 (1.21–2.36)), while an increase in CRP of >25?mg/L between index and re-evaluation visit (LR+ 2.85 (1.88–4.32)) and the conduct of radiological studies at the re-evaluation visit were associated with changes in treatment (LR+ 3.05 (2.41–3.86)).Re-evaluation within 30?hours for ED patients discharged with non-specific abdominal pain resulted in a clinically relevant change in diagnosis and therapy in almost one-quarter of patients. Elevated CRP at the index visit might assist in correctly identifying patients with a greater likelihood of needing treatment in follow-up, and a low threshold for radiological studies should be considered during re-evaluation.
收起
摘要 :
To construct a model to optimise and personalise recommendations for antiplatelet prescription for patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Acknowledging that emergency physicians work with diagnostic uncertainty, we...
展开
To construct a model to optimise and personalise recommendations for antiplatelet prescription for patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Acknowledging that emergency physicians work with diagnostic uncertainty, we sought to identify the point at which the probability of ACS is sufficiently high that the benefits of antiplatelet treatment outweigh the risks. Second, we evaluated the projected clinical impact of this approach by using a clinical prediction model (Troponin-only Manchester Acute Coronary Syndromes (T-MACS)) to calculate the probability of ACS.We conducted three systematic reviews, quantifying the effects of ticagrelor, clopidogrel or aspirin-alone treatment strategies for ACS (November 2017). We extracted data for (a) clinical outcomes and (b) weighted patient preferences (utilities) for each outcome. We then constructed utilitarian models, simulating the probability of clinical outcomes with different treatment strategies. This identified the threshold probability of ACS at which each treatment strategy became superior.We validated this approach in a prospective diagnostic study including patients with suspected ACS that was conducted at two large UK teaching hospitals (St George’s Hospital London recruited October 2015 to June 2017 and Manchester Royal Infirmary: February 2015 to August 2017). We calculated the probability of ACS using T-MACS. The diagnosis of ACS was adjudicated based on serial high-sensitivity troponin testing and 30-day follow-up.We constructed three models using data from six studies. Prescribing ticagrelor had greatest overall benefit when the probability of ACS exceeded 8.0%. Below that threshold, aspirin alone yielded greater benefit. The validation study included 660 patients, of which 87 (13.2%) had ACS. Prescription of combined antiplatelet strategy to patients with >8%?probability of ACS had greater utility than aspirin alone.Treatment with ticagrelor appears to yield greater net benefit for patients when the probability of ACS >8%. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of this ‘precision medicine’ approach warrants further study.
收起
摘要 :
To construct a model to optimise and personalise recommendations for antiplatelet prescription for patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Acknowledging that emergency physicians work with diagnostic uncertainty, we...
展开
To construct a model to optimise and personalise recommendations for antiplatelet prescription for patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Acknowledging that emergency physicians work with diagnostic uncertainty, we sought to identify the point at which the probability of ACS is sufficiently high that the benefits of antiplatelet treatment outweigh the risks. Second, we evaluated the projected clinical impact of this approach by using a clinical prediction model (Troponin-only Manchester Acute Coronary Syndromes (T-MACS)) to calculate the probability of ACS.We conducted three systematic reviews, quantifying the effects of ticagrelor, clopidogrel or aspirin-alone treatment strategies for ACS (November 2017). We extracted data for (a) clinical outcomes and (b) weighted patient preferences (utilities) for each outcome. We then constructed utilitarian models, simulating the probability of clinical outcomes with different treatment strategies. This identified the threshold probability of ACS at which each treatment strategy became superior.We validated this approach in a prospective diagnostic study including patients with suspected ACS that was conducted at two large UK teaching hospitals (St George’s Hospital London recruited October 2015 to June 2017 and Manchester Royal Infirmary: February 2015 to August 2017). We calculated the probability of ACS using T-MACS. The diagnosis of ACS was adjudicated based on serial high-sensitivity troponin testing and 30-day follow-up.We constructed three models using data from six studies. Prescribing ticagrelor had greatest overall benefit when the probability of ACS exceeded 8.0%. Below that threshold, aspirin alone yielded greater benefit. The validation study included 660 patients, of which 87 (13.2%) had ACS. Prescription of combined antiplatelet strategy to patients with >8%?probability of ACS had greater utility than aspirin alone.Treatment with ticagrelor appears to yield greater net benefit for patients when the probability of ACS >8%. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of this ‘precision medicine’ approach warrants further study.
收起
摘要 :
To determine the effectiveness of prophylactic anticholinergic medications in reducing extrapyramidal symptoms in patients taking acute antiemetics with a dopamine D2 receptor antagonist effect.Systematic searches of all published...
展开
To determine the effectiveness of prophylactic anticholinergic medications in reducing extrapyramidal symptoms in patients taking acute antiemetics with a dopamine D2 receptor antagonist effect.Systematic searches of all published studies through March 2017 were identified from PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus. Only randomised controlled trials of patients receiving dopamine D2 antagonist antiemetic therapy for acute migraine in which an anticholinergic or placebo was compared were included. Pooled ORs were calculated for incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms and sedation.Four placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials consisting of 737 patients met the inclusion criteria for our meta-analysis. The effect of diphenhydramine differed depending on the method of administration of the antiemetic. When the antiemetic was delivered as a 2?min antiemetic bolus, the odds of extrapyramidal symptoms were significantly reduced in the diphenhydramine group compared with placebo (OR 0.42; 95%?CI 0.22 to 0.81; P=0.01). However, when the antiemetic was given as a 15?min infusion, there was no significant difference in extrapyramidal symptoms with or without diphenhydramine (OR 1.06; 95%?CI 0.58 to 1.91; P=0.85). The lowest incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms was observed in patients receiving a 15?min antiemetic infusion without diphenhydramine prophylaxis (9.8%). In two trials including 351 patients that dichotomously reported sedation scales, diphenhydramine had significantly higher rates of sedation (31.6%vs19.2%, OR 2.01, 95%?CI 1.21 to 3.33; P=0.007).Prophylactic diphenhydramine reduces extrapyramidal symptoms in patients receiving bolus antiemetic therapy with a dopamine D2 antagonist effect, but not when it is given as an infusion. Because of significantly greater sedation with diphenhydramine, the most effective strategy is to administer the D2 antagonist antiemetic as a 15?min infusion without prophylaxis.
收起
原文获取