Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd ; 1662022 10 05.
Article in Dutch | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36300434

ABSTRACT

Dutch research demonstrated that almost 5% of the pediatric population at an emergency department (ED) of an university hospital are so-called frequent flyers (FFs). These FFs account for more than 20% of all pediatric visits. Three-quarter of these FFs have (multiple) comorbidities. We hypothesize that among these FFs three groups can be recognized: (1) patients with acute manifestations from their comorbidity, (2) patients with medical complexity and (3) patients from families with psychosocial fragility. FFs from these groups should be recognized and offered a tailor-made care plan to reduce (unnecessary) ED visits.


Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital , Ethnicity , Child , Humans , Hospitals, University , Comorbidity , Retrospective Studies
2.
Injury ; 53(10): 3070-3077, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36038387

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Lightning strikes have high morbidity and mortality rates. Thousands of fatalities are estimated to be caused by lightning worldwide, with the number of injuries being 10 times greater. However, evidence of lightning injuries is restricted to case reports and series and nonsystematic reviews. In this clinical review, we systematically select, score, and present evidence regarding lightning injuries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a systematic search for reviews and guidelines in the PubMed, Embase (OvidSP), MEDLINE (OvidSP), and Web of Science databases. All publications were scored according to the Levels of Evidence 2 Table of the Oxford center for Evidence-Based Medicine. The reviews were also scored using the scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles (SANRA) and guidelines from the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II). RESULTS: The search yielded 536 articles. Eventually, 56 articles were included, which consisted of 50 reviews, five guidelines and one overview. The available reviews and guidelines were graded as low to moderate evidence. Most damage from lightning injuries is cardiovascular and neurological, although an individual can experience complications with any of their vital functions. At the scene, initial treatment and resuscitation should focus on those who appear to be dead, which is called the reverse triage system. We proposed an evidence-based treatment protocol for lightning strike patients. CONCLUSION: It is vital that every lightning strike patient is treated according to standard trauma guidelines, with a specific focus on the possible sequelae of lighting injuries. All emergency healthcare professionals should acknowledge the risks and particularities of treating lighting strike injuries to optimize the care and outcomes of these patients. Our evidence-based treatment protocol should help prehospital and in-hospital emergency healthcare practitioners to prevent therapeutic mismanagement among these patients.


Subject(s)
Lightning Injuries , Lightning , Shock , Clinical Protocols , Humans , Lightning Injuries/complications , Lightning Injuries/prevention & control , Resuscitation/methods , Triage
3.
Eur J Emerg Med ; 28(3): 202-209, 2021 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33105329

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Healthcare personnel working in the emergency department (ED) is at risk of acquiring severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-Cov-2). So far, it is unknown if the reported variety in infection rates among healthcare personnel is related to the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) or other factors. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the association between PPE use and SARS-CoV-2 infections among ED personnel in the Netherlands. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A nationwide survey, consisting of 42 questions about PPE-usage, ED layout - and workflow and SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of permanent ED staff, was sent to members of the Dutch Society of Emergency Physicians. Members were asked to fill out one survey on behalf of the ED of their hospital. The association between PPE use and the infection rate was investigated using univariable and multivariable regression analyses, adjusting for potential confounders. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the incidence of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections among permanent ED staff between 1 March and 15 May 2020. RESULTS: Surveys were sent to 64 EDs of which 45 responded (70.3%). In total, 164 ED staff workers [5.1 (3.2-7.0)%] tested positive for COVID-19 during the study period compared to 0.087% of the general population. There was significant clustering of infected ED staff in some hospitals (range: 0-23 infection). In 13 hospitals, an FFP2 (filtering facepiece particles >94% aerosol filtration) mask or equivalent and eye protection was worn for all contacts with patients with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 during the whole study period. The unadjusted staff infection rate was higher in these hospitals [7.3 (3.4-11.1) vs. 4.0 (1.9-6.1)%, absolute difference + 3.3%]. Hospital staff testing policy was identified as a potential confounder of the relation between PPE use and confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections (collinearity statistic 0.95). After adjusting for hospital testing policy, type of PPE was not associated with incidence of COVID 19 infections among ED staff (P = 0.40). CONCLUSION: In this cross-sectional study, the use of high-level PPE (FFP2 or equivalent and eye protection) by ED personnel during all contacts with patients with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 does not seem to be associated with a lower infection rate of ED staff compared to lower level PPE use. Attention should be paid to ED layout and social distancing to prevent cross-contamination of ED personnel.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Gloves, Protective/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Infection Control/methods , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Male , Netherlands , Protective Clothing/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Protective Devices/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
4.
Int J Emerg Med ; 11(1): 12, 2018 Mar 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29500558

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The treatment of acute pain in the emergency department is not always optimal. Peripheral nerve blocks using "blind" or nerve stimulator techniques have substantial disadvantages. Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia may provide quick, safe, and effective pain relief in patients with proximal femoral fractures with severe pain. However, no evidence exists on emergency physician-performed ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia in these patients in Dutch emergency departments. We hypothesized that emergency physicians can be effectively trained to safely perform and implement ultrasound-guided femoral nerve blocks, resulting in effective pain relief in patients with proximal femoral fractures. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, emergency physicians were trained by expert anesthesiologists to perform ultrasound-guided femoral nerve blocks during a single-day course. Femoral nerve blocks were performed on patients with proximal femoral fractures. A system of direct supervision by skilled anesthesiologists and residents was put in place. RESULTS: A total of 64 femoral nerve blocks were performed. After 30 min, blocks were effective in 69% of patients, and after 60 min, in 83.3%. The mean reduction in pain scores after 30 and 60 min was 3.84 and 4.77, respectively (both p <  0.001). Patients reported a mean satisfaction of 8.42 (1 to 10 scale). No adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block is an effective, safe, and easy to learn (single-day course) procedure for emergency physicians to implement and perform in the emergency department. Patient satisfaction was high.

5.
J Clin Psychopharmacol ; 34(1): 66-71, 2014 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24346754

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal symptoms are frequently reported adverse effects of antidepressants, but antidepressants are also a treatment modality in functional gastrointestinal disorders. We aimed to assess the association between antidepressant use and gastrointestinal symptoms in the general adult population. METHODS: We assessed gastrointestinal symptoms, medication use, and comorbidity through structured questionnaires in randomly selected individuals. We compared presence of gastrointestinal symptoms in respondents who reported antidepressant use with those who did not. We used multivariable regression analysis to verify the association between antidepressant use and gastrointestinal symptoms. RESULTS: In total, 16,758 questionnaires were returned and eligible for analysis. Antidepressant use was reported by 701 respondents (4.2%). Gastrointestinal symptoms were more frequently reported by antidepressant users compared with nonusers (40% vs 25%, P < 0.01). This apparent association between antidepressant use and gastrointestinal symptoms did not remain after adjusting for demographic factors, comorbidity, and use of other medications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-1.18). CONCLUSIONS: In our cross-sectional population-based study, we did not find an association between antidepressant use and gastrointestinal symptoms.


Subject(s)
Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Gastrointestinal Diseases/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Antidepressive Agents/adverse effects , Chi-Square Distribution , Comorbidity , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Gastrointestinal Diseases/chemically induced , Gastrointestinal Diseases/diagnosis , Health Surveys , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Netherlands/epidemiology , Odds Ratio , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires
6.
PLoS One ; 8(7): e69876, 2013.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23922836

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Over the last decades important risk factors for gastrointestinal symptoms have shifted, which may have changed its population prevalence. The aim of this study was to assess the current prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms, appraise associated factors and assess health-related quality of life in the general population. METHODS: A total of 51,869 questionnaires were sent to a representative sample of the Dutch adult general population in December 2008. Demographic characteristics, gastrointestinal symptoms, health-related quality of life, medication use and co-morbidity were reported. We used multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine factors associated with gastrointestinal symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 18,317 questionnaires were returned, and 16,758 were eligible for analysis. Prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms was 26%. Most frequent symptoms were bloating (63%), borborygmi (60%) and flatulence (71%). Female gender (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.59, 95% CI 1.43-1.77), asthma/COPD (aOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.21-1.79), use of paracetamol (aOR 1.33, 95% CI 1.20-1.47), antidepressants (aOR 1.56, 95% CI 1.22-2.00) and acid-suppressive medication were independently associated with presence of gastrointestinal symptoms. Age over 65 years (aOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65-0.87), and use of statins (aOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.93) were associated with a lower prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms. Respondents with gastrointestinal symptoms had a lower mean health-related quality of life of 0.81 (SD = 0.21) compared to 0.92 (SD = 0.14) for persons without gastrointestinal symptoms (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms in the Dutch community is high and associated with decreased health-related quality of life.


Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Diseases/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Gastrointestinal Diseases/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , Quality of Life , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
7.
Drug Saf ; 33(6): 443-53, 2010 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20486727

ABSTRACT

NSAIDs are among the most often used drugs worldwide. Numerous NSAID users are at risk for developing gastrointestinal complications. The purpose of this review was to identify and stratify risk factors for gastrointestinal complications in NSAID users documented in guidelines and consensus agreements, and to collect recommendations regarding over-the-counter (OTC) NSAID use. To facilitate this, a PubMed search from 1 January 1999 until 1 March 2009 was performed, resulting in the inclusion of nine English-language guidelines in our analysis. Risk factors were defined as 'definite' if mentioned in all guidelines; otherwise they were defined as 'controversial' risk factors. 'Definite' risk factors were a history of (complicated) peptic ulcer disease, older age (cut-off range 60-75 years), concomitant anticoagulant or corticosteroid use and multiple NSAID use, including low-dose aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid). 'Controversial' risk factors were high-dose NSAID use, concomitant clopidogrel or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor use, a history of gastrointestinal symptoms, rheumatoid arthritis disability and cardiovascular disease. Infection with Helicobacter pylori was identified as an additive risk factor. Risk factors in OTC NSAID users were difficult to identify in the current literature. Risk factors were not all uniformly present in analysed guidelines and consensus agreements. We identified a history of (complicated) peptic ulcer disease, older age, concomitant anticoagulant or corticosteroid use and multiple NSAID use, including low-dose aspirin, as definite gastrointestinal risk factors in NSAID users.


Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/adverse effects , Gastrointestinal Diseases/chemically induced , Clinical Protocols , Consensus , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Nonprescription Drugs/adverse effects , Risk Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...