Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Minerva Anestesiol ; 75(3): 151-61, 2009 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19221544

ABSTRACT

Hyperbaric therapy is the basis of treatment for pervasive development disorders. For this reason, the choice of the right therapeutic table for each case is critical. Above all, the delay in recompression time with respect to the first symptoms and to the severity of the case must be considered. In our experience, the use of low-pressure oxygen tables resolves almost all cases if recompression takes place within a short time. When recompression is possible almost immediately, the mechanical effect of reduction on bubble volume due to pressure is of remarkable importance. In these cases, high-pressure tables can be considered. These tables can also be used in severe spinal-cord decompression sickness. The preferred breathing mixture is still disputed. Heliox seems to be favored because it causes fewer problems during the recompression of divers, and above all, because nitrox can cause narcosis and contributes nitrogen. Saturation treatment should be avoided or at least used only in special cases. In cases of arterial gas embolism cerebral injury, it is recommended to start with an initial 6 ATA recompression only if the time between symptom onset and the beginning of recompression is less than a few hours.


Subject(s)
Decompression Sickness/therapy , Hyperbaric Oxygenation/standards , Oxygen/administration & dosage , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Adult , Algorithms , Cell Adhesion/drug effects , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Embolism, Air/therapy , Endothelium, Vascular/drug effects , Endothelium, Vascular/physiopathology , Female , Helium/administration & dosage , Helium/pharmacology , Helium/therapeutic use , Humans , Hyperbaric Oxygenation/adverse effects , Hyperbaric Oxygenation/methods , Hypoxia/etiology , Hypoxia/prevention & control , Inert Gas Narcosis/etiology , Inert Gas Narcosis/prevention & control , Leukocytes/drug effects , Leukocytes/physiology , Male , Middle Aged , Nitrogen/administration & dosage , Nitrogen/adverse effects , Nitrogen/pharmacology , Nitrogen/therapeutic use , Oxygen/adverse effects , Oxygen/pharmacology , Oxygen/therapeutic use , Reperfusion Injury/etiology , Reperfusion Injury/prevention & control , Spinal Cord/blood supply , Spinal Cord Compression/complications , Spinal Cord Compression/therapy , Treatment Outcome
2.
J Prev Med Hyg ; 48(1): 17-23, 2007 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17506233

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: A multi-centre study has been conducted, during 2005, by means of a questionnaire posted on the Italian Society of Emergency Medicine (SIMEU) web page. Our intention was to carry out an organisational and functional analysis of Italian Emergency Departments (ED) in order to pick out some macro-indicators of the activities performed. Participation was good, in that 69 ED (3,285,440 admissions to emergency services) responded to the questionnaire. METHODS: The study was based on 18 questions: 3 regarding the personnel of the ED, 2 regarding organisational and functional aspects, 5 on the activity of the ED, 7 on triage and 1 on the assessment of the quality perceived by the users of the ED. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The replies revealed that 91.30% of the ED were equipped with data-processing software, which, in 96.83% of cases, tracked the entire itinerary of the patient. About 48,000 patients/year used the ED: 76.72% were discharged and 18.31% were hospitalised. Observation Units were active in 81.16% of the ED examined. Triage programmes were in place in 92.75% of ED: in 75.81% of these, triage was performed throughout the entire itinerary of the patient; in 16.13% it was performed only symptom-based, and in 8.06% only on-call. Of the patients arriving at the ED, 24.19% were assigned a non-urgent triage code, 60.01% a urgent code, 14.30% a emergent code and 1.49% a life-threatening code. Waiting times were: 52.39 min for non-urgent patients, 40.26 min for urgent, 12.08 for emergent, and 1.19 for life-threatening patients.


Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital/standards , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Quality of Health Care , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Italy , Triage
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...