Pre- and apnoeic high-flow oxygenation for rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department (the Pre-AeRATE trial): A multicentre randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION@#Evidence regarding the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygenation for preoxygenation and apnoeic oxygenation is conflicting. Our objective is to evaluate whether HFNC oxygenation for preoxygenation and apnoeic oxygenation maintains higher oxygen saturation (SpO2) during rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in ED patients compared to usual care.@*METHODS@#This was a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial in adult ED patients requiring RSI. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to either intervention (HFNC oxygenation at 60L/min) group or control (non-rebreather mask for preoxygenation and nasal prongs of at least 15L/min oxygen flow for apnoeic oxygenation) group. Primary outcome was lowest SpO2 during the first intubation attempt. Secondary outcomes included incidence of SpO2 falling below 90% and safe apnoea time.@*RESULTS@#One hundred and ninety patients were included, with 97 in the intervention and 93 in the control group. Median lowest SpO2 during the first intubation attempt was 100% in both groups. Incidence of SpO2 falling below 90% was lower in the intervention group (15.5%) compared to the control group (22.6%) (adjusted relative risk=0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-1.25). Post hoc quantile regression analysis showed that the first quartile of lowest SpO2 during the first intubation attempt was greater by 5.46% (95% CI 1.48-9.45%, P=0.007) in the intervention group.@*CONCLUSION@#Use of HFNC for preoxygenation and apnoeic oxygenation, when compared to usual care, did not improve lowest SpO2 during the first intubation attempt but may prolong safe apnoea time.

Impact of dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation and myResponder mobile app on bystander resuscitation

INTRODUCTION@#Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (B-CPR) is associated with improved out-of hospital cardiac arrest survival. Community-level interventions including dispatcher-assisted CPR (DA-CPR) and myResponder were implemented to increase B-CPR. We sought to assess whether these interventions increased B-CPR.@*METHODS@#The Singapore out-of-hospital cardiac arrest registry captured cases that occurred between 2010 and 2017. Outcomes occurring in 3 time periods (Baseline, DA-CPR, and DA-CPR plus myResponder) were compared. Segmented regression of time-series data was conducted to investigate our intervention impact on the temporal changes in B-CPR.@*RESULTS@#A total of 13,829 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases were included from April 2010 to December 2017. Higher B-CPR rates (24.8% versus 50.8% vs 64.4%) were observed across the 3 time periods. B-CPR rates showed an increasing but plateauing trend. DA-CPR implementation was significantly associated with an increased B-CPR (level odds ratio [OR] 2.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.79-2.88; trend OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04), while no positive change was detected with myResponder (level OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.82-1.11; trend OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98-1.00).@*CONCLUSION@#B-CPR rates in Singapore have been increasing alongside the implementation of community-level interventions such as DA-CPR and myResponder. DA-CPR was associated with improved odds of receiving B-CPR over time while the impact of myResponder was less clear.

Factors reducing inappropriate attendances to emergency departments before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multicentre study

INTRODUCTION@#Inappropriate attendances (IAs) to emergency departments (ED) create an unnecessary strain on healthcare systems. With decreased ED attendance during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study postulates that there are less IAs compared to before the pandemic and identifies factors associated with IAs.@*METHODS@#We performed a retrospective review of 29,267 patient presentations to a healthcare cluster in Singapore from 7 April 2020 to 1 June 2020, and 36,370 patients within a corresponding period in 2019. This time frame coincided with local COVID-19 lockdown measures. IAs were defined as patient presentations with no investigations required, with patients eventually discharged from the ED. IAs in the 2020 period during the pandemic were compared with 2019. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with IAs.@*RESULTS@#There was a decrease in daily IAs in 2020 compared to 2019 (9.91±3.06 versus 24.96±5.92, P<0.001). IAs were more likely with self-referrals (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50-1.66) and walk-ins (aOR 4.96, 95% CI 4.59-5.36), and those diagnosed with non-specific headache (aOR 2.08, 95% CI 1.85-2.34), or non-specific low back pain (aOR 1.28, 95% CI 1.15-1.42). IAs were less likely in 2020 compared to 2019 (aOR 0.67, 95% CI 0.65-0.71) and older patients (aOR 0.79 each 10 years, 95% CI 0.78-0.80).@*CONCLUSION@#ED IAs decreased during COVID-19. The pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to examine factors associated with IAs.