Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Eur J Emerg Med ; 26(3): 168-173, 2019 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29240569

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Paediatric patients receive less procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the emergency department compared with adults, especially in countries where emergency medicine is at an early stage of development. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the adverse events and efficacy of paediatric PSA in a country with a recent establishment of emergency medicine and to describe which factors aided implementation. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicentre, observational study of paediatric patients undergoing PSA by the first trained emergency physicians (EPs) in The Netherlands. A standardized data collection form was used at all participating hospitals to collect data on adverse events, amnesia, pain scores, and procedure completion. A survey was used to interpret which factors had aided PSA implementation. RESULTS: We recorded 351 paediatric PSA. The mean age was 9.5 years (95% confidence interval: 9.1-10.0). Esketamine was most frequently used (42.4%), followed by propofol (34.7%). The adverse event rate was low (3.0%). Amnesia was present in 86.8%. The median pain score was 2 (out of 10) for patients without amnesia. Procedures were successfully completed in 93.9% of the cases. CONCLUSION: Paediatric PSA provided by the first EPs in The Netherlands showed appropriate levels of sedation and analgesia with a high rate of procedure completion and a low rate of adverse events. Our paper suggests that EPs provided with a proper infrastructure of mentorship, training and guidelines can implement effective paediatric PSA.


Subject(s)
Analgesia/methods , Conscious Sedation/methods , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Pain Management/methods , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Confidence Intervals , Emergency Medicine/organization & administration , Female , Humans , Male , Netherlands , Pediatrics/methods , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Propofol/therapeutic use , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Treatment Outcome
2.
Am J Emerg Med ; 35(8): 1154-1158, 2017 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28302375

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Unplanned Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission has been used as a surrogate marker of adverse events, and is used by the Australian Council of Healthcare Accreditation as a reportable quality indicator. If we can identify independent variables predicting deterioration which require ICU transfer within 24h after emergency department (ED) admission, direct ICU admission should be considered. This may improve patient safety and reduce adverse events by appropriate disposition of patients presenting to the ED. OBJECTIVE(S): The aim of this study was to identify independent variables predicting deterioration which require ICU transfer within 24h after ED admission. METHODS: A case control study was performed to examine characteristics of patients who underwent an unplanned transfer to the ICU within 24h after ED admission. RESULTS: There were significantly more hypercapnia patients in the ICU admission group (n=17) compared to the non-ICU group (n=5) (p=0.028). There were significantly greater rates of tachypnea in septic patients (p=0.022) and low oxygen saturation for patients with pneumonia (p=0.045). The level of documentation of respiratory rate was poor. CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting to the ED, hypercapnia was a predictor for deterioration which requires ICU transfer within 24h after ED admission. Additional predicting factors in patients with sepsis or pneumonia were respectively tachypnea and low oxygen saturation. For these patient groups direct ICU admission should be considered to prevent unplanned ICU admission. This data emphasizes the importance of measuring the vital signs, particularly the respiratory rate.


Subject(s)
Critical Illness/therapy , Intensive Care Units , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Patient Transfer/statistics & numerical data , Case-Control Studies , Comorbidity , Critical Illness/mortality , Disease Progression , Emergency Service, Hospital , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Patient Transfer/organization & administration , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Risk Factors , Time-to-Treatment , Vital Signs
3.
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd ; 156(5): A4195, 2012.
Article in Dutch | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22296902

ABSTRACT

Recently the out-of-date Dutch guideline 'Mild traumatic head/brain injury' dating from 2001 was revised under the supervision of the Dutch Institute for Healthcare Improvement (CBO). The revised guideline gives underpinned decision rules for the referral of patients to hospital, carrying out diagnostic imaging investigations, and formulating indications for admission. Mild head-brain injury is no longer an indication for a conventional skull radiograph. Adults and children aged 6 years and older no longer have to be woken regularly if they are allowed home. The guideline can be used in both primary care and on the Emergency Departments of hospitals and is applicable to both adults and children. The guideline does not address the rehabilitation or long-term care of patients with mild traumatic head/brain injury, but it does give advice on reducing the risk of long-term symptoms. Regional implementation of the guideline in primary and secondary care is recommended.


Subject(s)
Brain Injuries/therapy , Craniocerebral Trauma/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Societies, Medical/standards , Glasgow Coma Scale , Humans , Netherlands , Prognosis , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...