Evaluation of HACOR scale as a predictor of non-invasive ventilation failure in acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema patients: A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema (ACPO) is a common indication for non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in the emergency department (ED). HACOR score of >5 is used to predict NIV failure. The predictive ability of HACOR may be affected by altered physiological parameters in ACPO patients due to medications or comorbidities. OBJECTIVES: To validate the HACOR scale in predicting NIV failure among acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema (ACPO) patients. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: This is a prospective, observational study of consecutive ACPO patients requiring NIV admitted to the ED. OUTCOME MEASURE AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcome was the ability of the HACOR score to predict NIV failure. Clinical, physiological, and HACOR score at baseline and at 1 h, 12 h and 24 h were analysed. Other potential predictors were assessed as secondary outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 221 patients were included in the analysis. Fifty-four (24.4%) had NIV failure. Optimal HACOR score was >5 at 1 h after NIV initiation in predicting NIV failure (AUC 0.73, sensitivity 53.7%, specificity 83.2%). As part of the HACOR score, respiratory rate and heart rate were not found to be significant predictors. Other significant predictors of NIV failure in ACPO patients were acute coronary syndrome, acute kidney injury, presence of congestive heart failure as a comorbid, and the ROX index. CONCLUSIONS: The HACOR scale measured at 1 h after NIV initiation predicts NIV failure among ACPO patients with acceptable accuracy. The cut-off level > 5 could be a useful clinical decision support tool in ACPO patient. However, clinicians should consider other factors such as the acute coronary and acute kidney diagnosis at presentation, presence of underlying congestive heart failure and the ROX index when clinically deciding on timely invasive mechanical ventilation.

Isotonic balanced fluid versus 0.9% saline in patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: A double-blinded randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a global health concern with significant economic impact. Optimal fluid therapy aims to restore intravascular volume, maintain cerebral perfusion pressure and blood flow, thus preventing secondary brain injury. While 0.9% saline (NS) is commonly used, concerns about acid-base and electrolyte imbalance and development of acute kidney injury (AKI) lead to consideration of balanced fluids as an alternative. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of patients with moderate to severe TBI treated with Sterofundin (SF) versus NS. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: A double-blinded randomised controlled trial of patients aged 18 to 65 years with TBI was conducted at the University Malaya Medical Centre from February 2017 to November 2019. INTERVENTION OR EXPOSURE: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either NS or SF. The study fluids were administered for 72 h as continuous infusions or boluses. Participants, investigators, and staff were blinded to the fluid type. OUTCOMES MEASURE AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 70 patients were included in the analysis, with 38 in the NS group and 32 in the SF group. The in-hospital mortality rate were 3 (7.9%) in the NS group vs. 4 (12.5%) in the SF group, RR = 1.29 (95% CI, 0.64 to 2.59; p = 0.695). No patients developed AKI and required renal replacement therapy. ICP on day 3 was significantly higher in the SF group (18.60 ± 9.26) compared to 12.77 ± 3.63 in the NS group, (95% CI, -11.46 to 0.20; p = 0.037). There were no significant differences in 3-day biochemical parameters and cerebral perfusion pressure, ventilator-free days, length of ICU stay, or Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E) score at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with moderate to severe TBI, the use of SF was not associated with reduced in-hospital mortality, development of AKI, or improved 6-month GOS-E when compared to NS.

Improving the reliability of smartphone-based urine colorimetry using a colour card calibration method.

Objective: Urine colorimetry using a digital image-based colorimetry is potentially an accessible hydration assessment method. This study evaluated the agreement between urine colorimetry values measured with different smartphone brands under various lighting conditions in patients with dengue fever. Methods: The urine samples were photographed in a customized photo box, under five simulated lighting conditions, using five smartphones. These images were analyzed using Adobe Photoshop to obtain urine Red, Green and Blue (RGB) values with and without colour correction. A commercially available colour calibration card was used for colour correction. Using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), inter-phone and intra-phone agreements of urine RGB values were analyzed. Results: Without colour correction, the various smartphones produced the highest agreement for Blue and Green values under the 'daylight' lighting condition. With colour correction, ICC values showed 'exceptional' inter-phone and intra-phone agreement for the Blue and Green values (ICC > 0.9). Red values showed 'poor' (ICC < 0.5) agreement with and without colour correction in all lighting conditions. Out of the five phones compared in this study, Phone 4 produced the lowest intra-phone agreement. Conclusions: Colour calibration using photo colour cards improved the reliability of smartphone-based urine colorimetry, making this a promising point-of-care hydration assessment tool using the ubiquitous smartphone.

COVID-19 aerosol box as protection from droplet and aerosol contaminations in healthcare workers performing airway intubation: a randomised cross-over simulation study.

BACKGROUND: Concerns over high transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 have led to innovation and usage of an aerosol box to protect healthcare workers during airway intubation in patients with COVID-19. Its efficacy as a barrier protection in addition to the use of a standard personal protective equipment (PPE) is not fully known. We performed a simulated study to investigate the relationship between aerosol box usage during intubation and contaminations on healthcare workers pre-doffing and post-doffing of PPE. METHODS: This was a randomised cross-over study conducted between 9 April to 5 May 2020 in the ED of University Malaya Medical Centre. Postgraduate Emergency Medicine trainees performed video laryngoscope-assisted intubation on an airway manikin with and without an aerosol box in a random order. Contamination was simulated by nebulised Glo Germ. Primary outcome was number of contaminated front and back body regions pre-doffing and post-doffing of PPE of the intubator and assistant. Secondary outcomes were intubation time, Cormack-Lehane score, number of intubation attempts and participants' feedback. RESULTS: Thirty-six trainees completed the study interventions. The number of contaminated front and back body regions pre-doffing of PPE was significantly higher without the aerosol box (all p values<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in the number of contaminations post-doffing of PPE between using and not using the aerosol box, with a median contamination of zero. Intubation time was longer with the aerosol box (42.5 s vs 35.5 s, p<0.001). Cormack-Lehane scores were similar with and without the aerosol box. First-pass intubation success rate was 94.4% and 100% with and without the aerosol box, respectively. More participants reported reduced mobility and visibility when intubating with the aerosol box. CONCLUSIONS: An aerosol box may significantly reduce exposure to contaminations but with increased intubation time and reduced operator's mobility and visibility. Furthermore, the difference in degree of contamination between using and not using an aerosol box could be offset by proper doffing of PPE.

Performance of emergency physicians in point-of-care echocardiography following limited training.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate if emergency medicine trainees with a short duration of training in echocardiography could perform and interpret bedside-focused echocardiography reliably on emergency department patients. METHODS: Following a web-based learning module and 3 h of proctored practical training, emergency medicine trainees were evaluated in technical and interpretative skills in estimating left ventricular function, detection of pericardial effusion and inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter measurements using bedside-focused echocardiography on emergency department patients. An inter-rater agreement analysis was performed between the trainees and a board-certified cardiologist. RESULTS: 100 focused echocardiography examinations were performed by nine emergency medicine trainees. Agreement between the trainees and the cardiologist was 93% (K=0.79, 95% CI 0.773 to 0.842) for visual estimation of left ventricular function, 92.9% (K=0.80, 95% CI 0.636 to 0.882) for quantitative left ventricular ejection fraction by M-mode measurements, 98% (K=0.74, 95% CI 0.396 to 1.000) for the detection of pericardial effusion, and 64.2% (K=0.45, 95% CI 0.383 to 0.467) for IVC diameter assessment. The Bland-Altman limits of agreement for left ventricular function was -9.5% to 13.7%, and a Pearson's correlation yielded a value of 0.82 (p<0.0001, 95% CI 0.734 to 0.881). The trainees detected pericardial effusion with a sensitivity of 60%, specificity of 100%, positive predictive value of 100% and negative predictive value of 97.9%. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency medicine trainees were found to be able to perform and interpret focused echocardiography reliably after a short duration of training.