Effect of personalised, mobile-accessible discharge instructions for patients leaving the emergency department: A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This pilot study assessed the efficacy of personalised, printed and mobile-accessible discharge instructions for pain relief for patients discharged from the ED. METHODS: Patients presenting with pain caused by acute musculoskeletal or visceral complaints not requiring admission were eligible. Both groups received usual pain relief discharge advice, the intervention group received additional personalised printed and mobile-accessible discharge instructions. Numerical Rating Scale pain scores were measured at ED visit. Pain scores, Patient Global Impression of Change scale improvement scores, satisfaction with instructions, recall of pain relief advice, receipt of side effects advice and unscheduled visits were measured at 5 days. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients, recruited over 14 days, were randomly allocated to the intervention or control group. Two patients were excluded and 81% (n = 65) were followed up at 5 days. There was no significant difference in change of pain scores or improvement scores between groups from visit to 5 day follow up. The intervention group showed significantly higher odds of being 'very satisfied' compared to the control group (odds ratio [OR] 7.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-50.00), significantly higher odds of full recall of pain relief medication advice (OR 20.00, 95% CI 1.56-100.00) and significantly higher odds of receiving information on medication side effects (OR 6.25, 95% CI 1.67-20.00). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received personalised printed and mobile-accessible ED discharge instructions for pain relief reported higher levels of satisfaction with their instructions, had better recall of their pain relief medications advice and received more information on medication side-effects.

Metered-dose inhaler ipratropium bromide in moderate acute asthma in children: A single-blinded randomised controlled trial.

AIM: To determine if the addition of ipratropium bromide (IB) by metered-dose inhaler in moderate acute asthma in children affects hospital admission rates when compared with inhaled salbutamol and oral prednisolone alone. METHODS: A prospective, single-blinded, randomised, controlled, equivalence trial in a tertiary paediatric emergency department. Patients aged 2-15 years with acute, moderate asthma were randomised to two groups, one receiving salbutamol, prednisolone and IB, the other receiving only salbutamol and prednisolone. The managing doctor was blinded to treatment. Admission rates were compared, and less than 15% difference was accepted as statistically equivalent. RESULTS: Recruitment ran from June 2007 until January 2011. Three hundred forty-seven subjects were analysed. The admission rate in the IB group was 70.1% (122/174) compared with 64.2% (111/173) in the non-IB group. The absolute difference of +5.9% (95% confidence interval -4.0% to 15.8%) is not statistically equivalent but does not show a statistically significant decrease in admission rates when IB was given. Adverse effects were more prevalent in the IB group, at 13.2% (23/174), compared with 4.6% (8/173) in the non-IB group, a relative risk of 2.86 (95% confidence interval 1.31-6.21). CONCLUSION: In children with acute asthma of moderate severity who are treated with adequate doses of salbutamol and prednisolone, the addition of IB is not significantly associated with a reduction in admission rates. There is a significantly higher rate of adverse effects if IB is given. IB should be reserved for children with severe asthma exacerbations.