Worldwide Regulation of the Medical Emergency Kit and First Aid Kit.

INTRODUCTION: On-board medical emergencies are increasing. Different geographies have different legislation and requirements for medical emergency kits and first aid kits. A comprehensive review to compare the contents of both kits was conducted, including the International Air Transport Association, European Union Aviation Safety Agency, and Federal Aviation Administration, as well as some from other geographical areas of the globe to cover continents and regions with the highest air traffic, such as Brazil, Kenya, Australia, and Taiwan.METHODS: On June 10, 2023, a search was conducted using standardized medical terms (medical subject headings) within the PubMed® database. The relevant terms identified were "Aircraft" and "Medical Emergencies"; articles published within the last 10 yr were filtered. Subsequently, even articles published before 2013 were consulted if cited by the initial ones. The main regulatory entities' documentation was found using the Google search engine and consulted.CONCLUSIONS: It is impossible to be prepared for every emergency on board. Still, as doctors, we have a moral and ethical obligation to try to improve the outcomes of those emergencies. Getting a standardized report of every on-board emergency is crucial. That would make optimizing the items to include in the emergency and first aid kits easier. There are many similarities among the compared entities, but essential differences have been found. There is room for improvement, especially for pediatric travelers.Oliveira ATB. Worldwide regulation of the medical emergency kit and first aid kit. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2024; 95(6):321-326.

Bleeding Control Protections Within US Good Samaritan Laws.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States, all 50 states and the District of Columbia have Good Samaritan Laws (GSLs). Designed to encourage bystanders to aid at the scene of an emergency, GSLs generally limit the risk of civil tort liability if the care is rendered in good faith. Nation-wide, a leading cause of preventable death is uncontrolled external hemorrhage. Public bleeding control initiatives aim to train the public to recognize life-threatening external bleeding, perform life-sustaining interventions (including direct pressure, tourniquet application, and wound packing), and to promote access to bleeding control equipment to ensure a rapid response from bystanders. METHODS: This study sought to identify the GSLs in each state and the District of Columbia to identify what type of responder is covered by the law (eg, all laypersons, only trained individuals, or only licensed health care providers) and if bleeding control is explicitly included or excluded in their Good Samaritan coverage. RESULTS: Good Samaritan Laws providing civil liability qualified immunity were identified in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. One state, Oklahoma, specifically includes bleeding control in its GSLs. Six states - Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, and Missouri - have laws that define those covered under Good Samaritan immunity, generally limiting protection to individuals trained in a standard first aid or resuscitation course or health care clinicians. No state explicitly excludes bleeding control from their GSLs, and one state expressly includes it. CONCLUSION: Nation-wide across the United States, most states have broad bystander coverage within GSLs for emergency medical conditions of all types, including bleeding emergencies, and no state explicitly excludes bleeding control interventions. Some states restrict coverage to those health care personnel or bystanders who have completed a specific training program. Opportunity exists for additional research into those states whose GSLs may not be inclusive of bleeding control interventions.

Survival After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Before and After Legislation for Bystander CPR.

Importance: The lack of evidence-based implementation strategies is a major contributor to increasing mortality due to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in developing countries with limited resources. Objective: To evaluate whether the implementation of legislation is associated with increased bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator (AED) use and improved clinical outcomes for patients experiencing OHCA and to provide policy implications for low-income and middle-income settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational cohort study analyzed a prospective city registry of patients with bystander-witnessed OHCA between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2022. The Emergency Medical Aid Act was implemented in Shenzhen, China, on October 1, 2018. An interrupted time-series analysis was used to assess changes in outcomes before and after the law. Data analysis was performed from May to October 2023. Exposure: The Emergency Medical Aid Act stipulated the use of AEDs and CPR training for the public and provided clear legal guidance for OHCA rescuing. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were rates of bystander-initiated CPR and use of AEDs. Secondary outcomes were rates of prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to arrival at the hospital, and survival at discharge. Results: A total of 13 751 patients with OHCA (median [IQR] age, 59 [43-76] years; 10 011 men [72.83%]) were included, with 7858 OHCAs occurring during the prelegislation period (January 1, 2010, to September 30, 2018) and 5893 OHCAs occurring during the postlegislation period (October 1, 2018, to December 31, 2022). The rates of bystander-initiated CPR (320 patients [4.10%] vs 1103 patients [18.73%]) and AED use (214 patients [4.12%] vs 182 patients [5.29%]) increased significantly after legislation implementation vs rates before the legislation. Rates of prehospital ROSC (72 patients [0.92%] vs 425 patients [7.21%]), survival to arrival at the hospital (68 patients [0.87%] vs 321 patients [5.45%]), and survival at discharge (44 patients [0.56%] vs 165 patients [2.80%]) were significantly increased during the postlegislation period. Interrupted time-series models demonstrated a significant slope change in the rates of all outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that implementation of the Emergency Medical Aid Act in China was associated with increased rates of CPR and public AED use and improved survival of patients with OHCA. The use of a systemwide approach to enact resuscitation initiatives and provide legal support may reduce the burden of OHCA in low-income and middle-income settings.

The Challenge of Emergency Abortion Care Following the Dobbs Ruling.

This Viewpoint discusses how limited or blocked access to legal abortion will affect the provision of emergency and critical care, including negative effects on patient health, legal intrusion into the patient-physician decision-making process, and concerns about legal jeopardy.

Regimento interno SAMUFor / Normas de Conduta Técnica e Gestora para Profissionais do SAMU 192 - Regional Fortaleza / SAMUFor Internal Regulations / Technical and Management Conduct Rules for SAMU 192 - Fortaleza Regional Professionals

Trata-se do Volume 1 da coleção "Normas de Conduta Técnica e Gestora para Profissionais do SAMU 192 - Regional Fortaleza" (SAMUFor), que publiciza o Regimento Interno do SAMUFor. Divide-se em três capítulos: 1. Normatização Vigente; 2. Normatização Municipal Vigente; e 3. Regimento Interno SAMUFor. Esse terceiro capítulo divide-se em: Regimento Interno do SAMU 192 ­ Regional Fortaleza; Regimento Interno da Gerência SAMUFor; Regimento Interno dos Órgãos de Assessoria da Gerência do SAMUFor; Regimento Interno do Núcleo Médico; Regimento Interno do Núcleo de Enfermagem; Regimento Interno do Núcleo de Farmácia; Regimento Interno do Núcleo Administrativo; Regimento Interno do Núcleo de Educação Permanente; e Regimento Interno da Central de Regulação das Urgências

Emergency use authorisation of Covid-19 vaccines: An ethical conundrum.

Large-scale vaccination with a safe and effective vaccine against Covid-19 is the only way to conquer the ongoing lethal pandemic that has led to extraordinary social and economic upheaval globally. Fortunately, the world is on the verge of developing Covid-19 vaccines in an unprecedentedly short time. More than forty vaccines are in different stages of clinical trials, and a few are in the crucial phase III studies stage. A new demand for emergency use authorisation and rapid deployment of these vaccines before scrutinising phase III trial data is raging in different quarters. Can advancement of the deployment of these vaccines by even a few weeks give us rich public health dividends? Would it be ethical to deploy these novel vaccines based only on the safety and immunogenicity data generated by the phase-I and II clinical trials? Would it be ethical to deny vaccination of vulnerable populations against an untreatable infectious disease despite the availability of reasonably safe and efficacious vaccines for the want of phase III trial data? The answer is not straightforward, as there are many complexities involved. This commentary attempts to discuss some ethical issues involved in a decision to deploy Covid-19 vaccination before phase III trial results are declared.

Emergency Department and Urgent Care Medical Malpractice Claims 2001-15.

INTRODUCTION: This study reviews malpractice, also called medical professional liability (MPL), claims involving adult patients cared for in emergency departments (ED) and urgent care settings. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of closed MPL claims of adults over 18 years, from the Medical Professional Liability Association's Data Sharing Project database from 2001-2015, identifying 6,779 closed claims. Data included the total amount, origin, top medical specialties named, chief medical factors, top medical conditions, severity of injury, resolution, average indemnity, and defense costs of closed claims. RESULTS: Of 6,779 closed claims, 65.9% were dropped, withdrawn, or dismissed. Another 22.8% of claims settled for an average indemnity of $297,709. Of the 515 (7.6%) cases that went to trial, juries returned verdicts for the defendant in 92.6% of cases (477/515). The remaining 7.4% of cases (38/515) were jury verdicts for the plaintiff, with an average indemnity of $816,909. The most common resulting medical condition cited in paid claims was cardiac or cardiorespiratory arrest (10.4%). Error in diagnosis was the most common chief medical error cited in closed claims. Death was the most common level of severity listed in closed (38.5%) and paid (42.8%) claims. Claims reporting major permanent injury had the highest paid-to-closed ratio, and those reporting grave injury had the highest average indemnity of $686,239. CONCLUSION: This retrospective review updates the body of knowledge surrounding medical professional liability and represents the most recent analysis of claims in emergency medicine. As the majority of emergency providers will be named in a MPL claim during their career, it is essential to have a better understanding of the most common factors resulting in MPL claims.

Legal Authority for Emergency Medical Services to Increase Access to Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder.

Treatment with buprenorphine significantly reduces both all-cause and overdose mortality among individuals with opioid use disorder. Offering buprenorphine treatment to individuals who experience a nonfatal opioid overdose represents an opportunity to reduce opioid overdose fatalities. Although some emergency departments (EDs) initiate buprenorphine treatment, many individuals who experience an overdose either refuse transport to the ED or are transported to an ED that does not offer buprenorphine. Emergency medical services (EMS) professionals can help address this treatment gap. In this Concepts article, we describe the federal legal landscape that governs the ability of EMS professionals to administer buprenorphine treatment, and discuss state and local regulatory considerations relevant to this promising and emerging practice.

Emergency Care EMTALA Alterations During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States.

The coronavirus 2019 pandemic has affected almost every aspect of health care delivery in the United States, and the emergency medicine system has been hit particularly hard while dealing with this public health crisis. In an unprecedented time in our history, medical systems and clinicians have been asked to be creative, flexible, and innovative, all while continuing to uphold the important standards in the US health care system. To continue providing quality services to patients during this extraordinary time, care providers, organizations, administrators, and insurers have needed to alter longstanding models and procedures to respond to the dynamics of a pandemic. The Emergency Medicine Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986, or EMTALA, is 1 example of where these alterations have allowed health care facilities and clinicians to continue their work of caring for patients while protecting both the patients and the clinicians themselves from infectious exposures at the same time.

A Primer on the Good Samaritan Act.

This article explores the various legal and ethical facets for healthcare professionals to consider in order to avoid legal liability when rendering aid in an emergency. A general overview of Good Samaritan legislation enacted throughout the United States is discussed along with varying levels of assistance required or protected by law in selected states. Moral considerations for Christian nurses are addressed.

Examining the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act: impact on telemedicine for neurotrauma.

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) protects patient access to emergency medical treatment regardless of insurance or socioeconomic status. A significant result of the COVID-19 pandemic has been the rapid acceleration in the adoption of telemedicine services across many facets of healthcare. However, very little literature exists regarding the use of telemedicine in the context of EMTALA. This work aimed to evaluate the potential to expand the usage of telemedicine services for neurotrauma to reduce transfer rates, minimize movement of patients across borders, and alleviate the burden on tertiary care hospitals involved in the care of patients with COVID-19 during a global pandemic. In this paper, the authors outline EMTALA provisions, provide examples of EMTALA violations involving neurosurgical care, and propose guidelines for the creation of telemedicine protocols between referring and consulting institutions.

Informed consent procedures for emergency interventional research in patients with traumatic brain injury and ischaemic stroke.

Health-care professionals and researchers have a legal and ethical responsibility to inform patients before carrying out diagnostic tests or treatment interventions as part of a clinical study. Interventional research in emergency situations can involve patients with some degree of acute cognitive impairment, as is regularly the case in traumatic brain injury and ischaemic stroke. These patients or their proxies are often unable to provide informed consent within narrow therapeutic time windows. International regulations and national laws are criticised for being inconclusive or restrictive in providing solutions. Currently accepted consent alternatives are deferred consent, exception from consent, or waiver of consent. However, these alternatives appear under-utilised despite being ethically permissible, socially acceptable, and regulatorily compliant. We anticipate that, when the requirements for medical urgency are properly balanced with legal and ethical conduct, the increased use of these alternatives has the potential to improve the efficiency and quality of future emergency interventional studies in patients with an inability to provide informed consent.

[Ethics of clinical trials]. / L'éthique des essais thérapeutiques.

TITLE: L'éthique des essais thérapeutiques. ABSTRACT: La pandémie de COVID-19 a conduit certains acteurs reconnus de la médecine à renoncer aux méthodes codifiées de la recherche médicale au profit d'affirmations établies dans l'urgence et sans réelle évaluation scientifique. Autant l'on peut comprendre que certains praticiens recourent à ce qui leur est ainsi proposé, autant cette confusion entre action dans l'urgence et recherche scientifique serait lourde de conséquences si elle venait à se généraliser, et cela à de multiples points de vue : image et rôle de la science, qualité et éthique de la recherche médicale et en fin de compte sort des malades soumis à des traitements mal évalués. Ce sont ces questions qui motivent la mise au point qui suit sur les questions d'éthique associées de longue date aux « essais thérapeutiques ¼, cette procédure rationnelle d'acquisition dans les meilleurs délais d'informations fiables sur les avantages et les risques des traitements dont on envisage l'éventuelle utilisation.