Analgesia use in trauma patients at a university teaching hospital in Kigali, Rwanda.

Introduction: While trends in analgesia have been identified in high-income countries, little research exists regarding analgesia administration in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). This study evaluates analgesia administration and clinical characteristics among patients seeking emergency injury care at University Teaching Hospital-Kigali in Kigali, Rwanda. Methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional study utilized a random sample of emergency center (EC) cases accrued between July 2015 and June 2016. Data was extracted from the medical record for patients who had an injury and were ≥ 15 years of age. Injury-related EC visits were identified by presenting complaint or final discharge diagnosis. Sociodemographic information, injury mechanism and type, and analgesic medications ordered and administered were analyzed. Results: Of the 3,609 random cases, 1,329 met eligibility and were analyzed. The study population was predominantly male (72%) with a median age of 32 years and range between 15 and 81 years. In the studied sample, 728 (54.8%) were treated with analgesia in the EC. In unadjusted logistic regression, only age was not a significant predictor of receiving pain medication and was excluded from the adjusted analysis. In the adjusted model, all predictors remained significant, with being male, having at least one severe injury, and road traffic accident (RTA) as injury mechanism being significant predictors of analgesia administration. Conclusion: In the study setting of injured patients in Rwanda, being male, involved in RTA or having more than one serious injury was associated with higher odds of receiving pain medication. Approximately half of the patients with traumatic injuries received pain medications, predominantly opioids with no factors predicting whether a patient would receive opioids versus other medications. Further research on implementation of pain guidelines and drug shortages is warranted to improve pain management for injured patients in the LMIC setting.

Accuracy of weight estimation methods in adults, adolescents and children: a prospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Weight estimation of both adult and paediatric patients is often necessary in emergency or low-resource settings when it is not possible to weigh the patient. There are many methods for paediatric weight estimation, but no standard methods for adults. PAWPER and Mercy tapes are used in children, but have not been assessed in adults. The primary aim of this study was to assess weight estimation methods in patients of all ages. METHODS: Patients were prospectively recruited from emergency and outpatient departments in Kigali, Rwanda. Participants (or guardians) were asked to estimate weight. Investigators collected weight, height, mid-arm circumference (MAC) and humeral-length data. In all participants, estimates of weight were calculated from height and MAC (PAWPER methods), MAC and humeral length (Mercy method). In children, Broselow measurements and age-based formulae were also used. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of estimates within 20% of actual weight (p20). RESULTS: We recruited 947 participants: 307 children, 309 adolescents and 331 adults. For p20, the best methods were: in children, guardian estimate (90.2%) and PAWPER XL-MAC (89.3%); in adolescents, PAWPER XL-MAC (91.3%) and guardian estimate (90.9%); in adults, participant estimate (98.5%) and PAWPER XL-MAC (83.7%). In all age groups, there was a trend of decreasing weight estimation with increasing actual weight. CONCLUSION: This prospective study of weight estimation methods across all age groups is the first adult study of PAWPER and Mercy methods. In children, age-based rules performed poorly. In patients of all ages, the PAWPER XL-MAC and guardian/participant estimates of weight were the most reliable and we would recommend their use in this setting.

Estimating children's weight in a Rwandan emergency centre.

INTRODUCTION: Most drugs, fluids and ventilator settings depend on the weight of a paediatric patient. However, knowledge of the weight is often unavailable as the urgency of the situation may impede measurement. The most common methods for paediatric weight estimation are based on height or age. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of various weight estimation methods and to derive a dedicated age-based tool within a Rwandan setting. METHODS: This was a retrospective study using age, weight and height data from randomly selected charts of Rwandan children, aged between one and ten years, who attended the paediatric emergency centre, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Kigali, Rwanda. Weights were estimated using four versions of the Broselow Tape and several age-based formulae. Linear regression was used to derive a new age-based weight estimation formula, the Rwanda Rule. Weight estimations were then compared with actual weight using Bland-Altman analysis, and the proportions of estimates within 10 and 20% of actual weight. RESULTS: There were 327 children included in the study. The derived Rwanda Rule was: weight (kg) = [1.7 × age (years)] + 8. This formula and the original Advanced Paediatric Life Support formula (weight = [2 × age] + 8) performed similarly. Both were better than other age-based formulae (69% of estimates within 20% of actual weight). All editions of the Broselow Tape performed better than age-based rules. The 1998 version performed best with 84.8% of estimates within 20% of actual weight. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to compare paediatric weight estimation methods in Rwanda. Locally, and until we have evidence from further research that other methods are superior, we would advise use of the 1998 Broselow Tape in children aged one to ten years old. Where the Broselow Tape is not available, the original Advanced Paediatric Life Support formula should be used.

The accuracy of Broselow pediatric emergency tape in estimating body weight of pediatric patients.

[No Abstract Available].