Safety and efficacy of a nitrous oxide procedural sedation programme in a paediatric emergency department: a decade of outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Nitrous oxide (N2O) has multiple benefits in paediatric procedural sedation (PPS), but use is restricted by its limited analgesic properties. Analgesic potency could be increased by combining N2O and intranasal fentanyl (INF). We assessed safety and efficacy data from 10 years (2011-2021) of our N2O PPS programme. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from a sedation registry at a paediatric emergency department (PED) were reviewed. Total procedures performed with N2O alone or with INF, success rate, sedation depth and adverse events were determined. Contributing factors for these outcomes were assessed via regression analysis and compared between different N2O concentrations, N2O in combination with INF, and for physician versus nurse administered sedation. A post hoc analysis on factors associated with vomiting was also performed. RESULTS: 831 N2O procedural sedations were performed, 358 (43.1%) involved a combination INF and N2O. Nurses managed sedation in 728 (87.6%) cases. Median sedation depth on the University of Michigan Sedation Scale was 1 (IQR 1-2). Sedation was successful in 809 (97.4%) cases. Combination INF/N2O demonstrated higher median sedation scores (2 vs 1, p<0.001) and increased vomiting (RR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.5), with no difference in sedation success compared with N2O alone. No serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported (desaturation, apnoea, aspiration, bradycardia or hypotension) regardless of N2O concentration or use of INF. 137 (16.5%) minor adverse events occurred. Vomiting occurred in 113 (13.6%) cases and was associated with higher concentrations of N2O and INF use, but not associated with fasting status. There were no differences in adverse events (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04) or success rates (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.7) between physician provided and nurse provided sedation. CONCLUSION: N2O can provide effective PED PPS. No SAEs were recorded. INF may be an effective PPS adjunct but remains limited by increased rates of vomiting.

Prediction of Pediatric Patient Admission/Discharge in the Emergency Department: Irish Pediatric Early Warning Score, Pediatric Observation Priority Score, and Irish Children's Triage System.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of the Irish Paediatric Early Warning Score (PEWS), the Paediatric Observation Priority Score (POPS), and the Irish Children's Triage System (ICTS) to predict patient disposition pathways in an emergency department (ED) setting. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected on patients aged less than 16 years presenting to an Irish mixed adult/pediatric ED over 3 weeks during December 2018. After calculating a once-off PEWS, POPS, and ICTS, we investigated the ability of the scoring systems to predict admission or discharge from the ED. Primary comparison of the index tests was conducted using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: A total of 550 patients were included in this study. There were 114 admissions (20.7%) and 436 discharges (79.3%). The POPS had an area under the ROC curve of 0.7 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65-0.75]. The PEWS had an area under the ROC curve of 0.58 (95% CI, 0.53-0.64). The ICTS had an area under the ROC curve of 0.58 (95% CI, 0.53-0.63). CONCLUSIONS: The POPS has greater accuracy as a predictor of admission from the ED than PEWS and ICTS. Possible future implementation of POPS into pediatric EDs as a cognitive prompt before admission decision seems to be merited. Further multicenter validation in Ireland would be helpful.

A Bibliometric Analysis of Global Pediatric Emergency Medicine Research Networks.

OBJECTIVES: During the last 3 decades newly formed pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) research networks have been publishing research. A desire of these networks is to produce and disseminate research to improve patient health and outcomes. The aims of the study were to quantitatively analyze and compare the literature by PEM research networks globally through numeric and visual bibliometrics. METHODS: A bibliometric analysis of articles published from 1994 to 2019 (26 years) by authors from PEM research networks globally were retrieved using PubMed, Web of Science (Thompson Reuters), and accessing individual research network databases. Bibliometric analysis was performed utilizing Web of Science, VOSviewer, and Dimensions. Research was quantified to ascertain the number of articles, related articles, citations, and Altmetric attention score. RESULTS: A total of 493 articles were published across 9 research networks in 3 decades. Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network produced the most articles, citations, and h-index of all networks. We identified 3 main groupings of productive authors across the networks who collaborate globally. The sex of the first author was female in 46% of publications, and the corresponding author(s) was female in 45%. A nonsignificant moderate positive correlation between the number of years publishing and the number of publications was identified. There was nonsignificant moderate negative association between the number of countries in a network and total publications per annum. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first bibliometric analysis of publications from PEM research networks that collaborate globally. Exploring the relationships of numerical bibliometric indicators and visualizations of productivity will benefit the understanding of the generation, reach, and dissemination of PEM research within the global research community.

Captive-bred Atlantic salmon released into the wild have fewer offspring than wild-bred fish and decrease population productivity.

The release of captive-bred animals into the wild is commonly practised to restore or supplement wild populations but comes with a suite of ecological and genetic consequences. Vast numbers of hatchery-reared fish are released annually, ostensibly to restore/enhance wild populations or provide greater angling returns. While previous studies have shown that captive-bred fish perform poorly in the wild relative to wild-bred conspecifics, few have measured individual lifetime reproductive success (LRS) and how this affects population productivity. Here, we analyse data on Atlantic salmon from an intensely studied catchment into which varying numbers of captive-bred fish have escaped/been released and potentially bred over several decades. Using a molecular pedigree, we demonstrate that, on average, the LRS of captive-bred individuals was only 36% that of wild-bred individuals. A significant LRS difference remained after excluding individuals that left no surviving offspring, some of which might have simply failed to spawn, consistent with transgenerational effects on offspring survival. The annual productivity of the mixed population (wild-bred plus captive-bred) was lower in years where captive-bred fish comprised a greater fraction of potential spawners. These results bolster previous empirical and theoretical findings that intentional stocking, or non-intentional escapees, threaten, rather than enhance, recipient natural populations.

Developing outcome, process and balancing measures for an emergency department longitudinal patient monitoring system using a modified Delphi.

BACKGROUND: Early warning score systems have been widely recommended for use to detect clinical deterioration in patients. The Irish National Emergency Medicine Programme has developed and piloted an emergency department specific early warning score system. The objective of this study was to develop a consensus among frontline healthcare staff, quality and safety staff and health systems researchers regarding evaluation measures for an early warning score system in the Emergency Department. METHODS: Participatory action research including a modified Delphi consensus building technique with frontline hospital staff, quality and safety staff, health systems researchers, local and national emergency medicine stakeholders was the method employed in this study. In Stage One, a workshop was held with the participatory action research team including frontline hospital staff, quality and safety staff and health systems researchers to gather suggestions regarding the evaluation measures. In Stage Two, an electronic modified-Delphi study was undertaken with a panel consisting of the workshop participants, key local and national emergency medicine stakeholders. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the characteristics of the panellists who completed the questionnaires in each round. The mean Likert rating, standard deviation and 95% bias-corrected bootstrapped confidence interval for each variable was calculated. Bonferroni corrections were applied to take account of multiple testing. Data were analysed using Stata 14.0 SE. RESULTS: Using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement framework, 12 process, outcome and balancing metrics for measuring the effectiveness of an ED-specific early warning score system were developed. CONCLUSION: There are currently no published measures for evaluating the effectiveness of an ED early warning score system. It was possible in this study to develop a suite of evaluation measures using a modified Delphi consensus approach. Using the collective expertise of frontline hospital staff, quality and safety staff and health systems researchers to develop and categorise the initial set of potential measures was an innovative and unique element of this study.

Simple aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage for primary spontaneous pneumothorax in adults.

BACKGROUND: For management of pneumothorax that occurs without underlying lung disease, also referred to as primary spontaneous pneumothorax, simple aspiration is technically easier to perform than intercostal tube drainage. In this systematic review, we seek to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of simple aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage for management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax. This review was first published in 2007 and was updated in 2017. OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of simple aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage for management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 1) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (1966 to January 2017); and Embase (1980 to January 2017). We searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry for ongoing trials (January 2017). We checked the reference lists of included trials and contacted trial authors. We imposed no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adults 18 years of age and older with primary spontaneous pneumothorax that compared simple aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. We combined studies using the random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS: Of 2332 publications obtained through the search strategy, seven studies met the inclusion criteria; one study was ongoing and six studies of 435 participants were eligible for inclusion in the updated review. Data show a significant difference in immediate success rates of procedures favouring tube drainage over simple aspiration for management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax (risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.89; 435 participants, 6 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Duration of hospitalization however was significantly less for patients treated by simple aspiration (mean difference (MD) -1.66, 95% CI -2.28 to -1.04; 387 participants, 5 studies; moderate-quality evidence). A narrative synthesis of evidence revealed that simple aspiration led to fewer adverse events (245 participants, 3 studies; low-quality evidence), but data suggest no differences between groups in terms of one-year success rate (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.18; 318 participants, 4 studies; moderate-quality evidence), hospitalization rate (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.47; 245 participants, 3 studies; very low-quality evidence), and patient satisfaction (median between-group difference of 0.5 on a scale from 1 to 10; 48 participants, 1 study; low-quality evidence). No studies provided data on cost-effectiveness. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Available trials showed low to moderate-quality evidence that intercostal tube drainage produced higher rates of immediate success, while simple aspiration resulted in a shorter duration of hospitalization. Although adverse events were reported more commonly for patients treated with tube drainage, the low quality of the evidence warrants caution in interpreting these findings. Similarly, although this review observed no differences between groups when early failure rate, one-year success rate, or hospital admission rate was evaluated, this too needs to be put into the perspective of the quality of evidence, specifically, for evidence of very low and low quality for hospitalization rate and patient satisfaction, respectively. Future adequately powered research is needed to strengthen the evidence presented in this review.

Study protocol for evaluating the implementation and effectiveness of an emergency department longitudinal patient monitoring system using a mixed-methods approach.

BACKGROUND: Early detection of patient deterioration is a key element of patient safety as it allows timely clinical intervention and potential rescue, thus reducing the risks of serious patient safety incidents. Longitudinal patient monitoring systems have been widely recommended for use to detect clinical deterioration. However, there is conflicting evidence on whether they improve patient outcomes. This may in part be related to variation in the rigour with which they are implemented and evaluated. This study aims to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of a longitudinal patient monitoring system designed for adult patients in the unique environment of the Emergency Department (ED). METHODS: A novel participatory action research (PAR) approach is taken where socio-technical systems (STS) theory and analysis informs the implementation through the improvement methodology of 'Plan Do Study Act' (PDSA) cycles. We hypothesise that conducting an STS analysis of the ED before beginning the PDSA cycles will provide for a much richer understanding of the current situation and possible challenges to implementing the ED-specific longitudinal patient monitoring system. This methodology will enable both a process and an outcome evaluation of implementing the ED-specific longitudinal patient monitoring system. Process evaluations can help distinguish between interventions that have inherent faults and those that are badly executed. DISCUSSION: Over 1.2 million patients attend EDs annually in Ireland; the successful implementation of an ED-specific longitudinal patient monitoring system has the potential to affect the care of a significant number of such patients. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study combining PAR, STS and multiple PDSA cycles to evaluate the implementation of an ED-specific longitudinal patient monitoring system and to determine (through process and outcome evaluation) whether this system can significantly improve patient outcomes by early detection and appropriate intervention for patients at risk of clinical deterioration.

An introduction to the Emergency Department Adult Clinical Escalation protocol: ED-ACE.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: This study demonstrates how a participatory action research approach was used to address the challenge of the early and effective detection of the deteriorating patient in the ED setting. The approach enabled a systematic approach to patient monitoring and escalation of care to be developed to address the wide-ranging spectrum of undifferentiated presentations and the phases of ED care from triage to patient admission. This paper presents a longitudinal patient monitoring system, which aims to provide monitoring and escalation of care, where necessary, of adult patients from triage to admission to hospital in a manner that is feasible in the unique ED environment. METHODS: An action research approach was taken to designing a longitudinal patient monitoring system appropriate for the ED. While the first draft protocol for post-triage monitoring and escalation was designed by a core research group, six clinical sites were included in iterative cycles of planning, action, reviewing and further planning. Reasons for refining the system at each site were collated and the protocol was adjusted accordingly before commencing the process at the next site. RESULTS: The ED Adult Clinical Escalation longitudinal patient monitoring system (ED-ACE) evolved through iterative cycles of design and testing to include: (1) a monitoring chart for adult patients; (2) a standardised approach to the monitoring and reassessment of patients after triage until they are assessed by a clinician; (3) the ISBAR (I=Identify, S=Situation, B=Background, A=Assessment, R=Recommendation) tool for interprofessional communication relating to clinical escalation; (4) a template for prescribing a patient-specific monitoring plan to be used by treating clinicians to guide patient monitoring from the time the patient is assessed until when they leave the ED and (5) a protocol for clinical escalation prompted by single physiological triggers and clinical concern. CONCLUSIONS: This tool offers a link in the 'Chain of Prevention' between the Manchester Triage System and ward-based early warning scores taking account of the importance of standardisation, while being sufficiently adaptable for the unique working environment and patient population in the ED.

A Randomized Trial of Single-Dose Oral Dexamethasone Versus Multidose Prednisolone for Acute Exacerbations of Asthma in Children Who Attend the Emergency Department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: In acute exacerbations of asthma in children, corticosteroids reduce relapses, subsequent hospital admission, and the need for ß2-agonist bronchodilators. Prednisolone is the most commonly used corticosteroid, but prolonged treatment course, vomiting, and a bitter taste may reduce patient compliance. Dexamethasone has a longer half-life and has been used safely in other acute pediatric conditions. We examine whether a single dose of oral dexamethasone is noninferior to prednisolone in the emergency department (ED) treatment of asthma exacerbations in children, as measured by the Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM) at day 4. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial comparing oral dexamethasone (single dose of 0.3 mg/kg) with prednisolone (1 mg/kg per day for 3 days) in patients aged 2 to 16 years and with a known diagnosis of asthma or at least 1 previous episode of ß2-agonist-responsive wheeze who presented to a tertiary pediatric ED. The primary outcome measure was the mean PRAM score (range of 0 to 12 points) performed on day 4. Secondary outcome measures included requirement for further steroids, vomiting of study medication, hospital admission, and unscheduled return visits to a health care practitioner within 14 days. RESULTS: There were 245 enrollments involving 226 patients. There was no difference in mean PRAM scores at day 4 between the dexamethasone and prednisolone groups (0.91 versus 0.91; absolute difference 0.005; 95% CI -0.35 to 0.34). Fourteen patients vomited at least 1 dose of prednisolone compared with no patients in the dexamethasone group. Sixteen children (13.1%) in the dexamethasone group received further systemic steroids within 14 days after trial enrollment compared with 5 (4.2%) in the prednisolone group (absolute difference 8.9%; 95% CI 1.9% to 16.0%). There was no significant difference between the groups in hospital admission rates or the number of unscheduled return visits to a health care practitioner. CONCLUSION: In children with acute exacerbations of asthma, a single dose of oral dexamethasone (0.3 mg/kg) is noninferior to a 3-day course of oral prednisolone (1 mg/kg per day) as measured by the mean PRAM score on day 4.

A Prevalence and Management Study of Acute Pain in Children Attending Emergency Departments by Ambulance.

Pain is the most common symptom in the emergency setting and remains one of the most challenging problems for emergency care providers, particularly in the pediatric population. The primary objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of acute pain in children attending emergency departments (EDs) in Ireland by ambulance. In addition, this study sought to describe the prehospital and initial ED management of pain in this population, with specific reference to etiology of pain, frequency of pain assessment, pain severity, and pharmacological analgesic interventions. A prospective cross-sectional study was undertaken over a 12-month period of all pediatric patients transported by emergency ambulance to four tertiary referral hospitals in Ireland. All children (<16 years) who had pain as a symptom (regardless of cause) at any stage during the prehospital phase of care were included in this study. Over the study period, 6,371 children attended the four EDs by emergency ambulance, of which 2,635 (41.4%, 95% confidence interval 40.2-42.3%) had pain as a documented symptom on the ambulance patient care report (PCR) form. Overall 32% (n = 856) of children who complained of pain were subject to a formal pain assessment during the prehospital phase of care. Younger age, short transfer time to the ED, and emergency calls between midnight and 6 am were independently associated with decreased likelihood of having a documented assessment of pain intensity during the prehospital phase of care. Of the 2,635 children who had documented pain on the ambulance PCR, 26% (n = 689) received some form of analgesic agent prior to ED arrival. Upon ED arrival 54% (n = 1,422) of children had a documented pain assessment and some form of analgesic agent was administered to 50% (n = 1,324). Approximately 41% of children who attend EDs in Ireland by ambulance have pain documented as their primary symptom. This study suggests that the management of acute pain in children transferred by ambulance to the ED in Ireland is currently poor, with documentary evidence of only 26% receiving prehospital analgesic agents.

Parental knowledge, attitudes and beliefs regarding fever in children: an interview study.

BACKGROUND: Fever is one of the most common childhood symptoms. It causes significant worry and concern for parents. Every year there are numerous cases of over- and under-dosing with antipyretics. Caregivers seek reassurance from a variety of sources including healthcare practitioners. The aim of this study was to describe parental knowledge, attitudes and beliefs regarding management of childhood fever in children aged 5 years and under. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 parents at six ante-natal clinics in the south west of Ireland during March and April 2015. The Francis method was used to detect data saturation and thereby identify sample size. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Twenty-three parents participated in the study. Five themes emerged from the data: assessing and managing the fever; parental knowledge and beliefs regarding fever; knowledge source; pharmaceutical products; initiatives. Parents illustrated a good knowledge of fever as a symptom. However, management practices varied between participants. Parents revealed a reluctance to use medication in the form of suppositories. There was a desire for more accessible, consistent information to be made available for use by parents when their child had a fever or febrile illness. CONCLUSION: Parents indicated that further initiatives are required to provide trustworthy information on the management of fever and febrile illness in children. Healthcare professionals should play a significant role in educating parents in how to manage fever and febrile illnesses in their children. The accessible nature and location of pharmacies could provide useful support for both parents and General Practitioners.

Knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of parents regarding fever in children: a Danish interview study.

AIM: Fever and febrile illness are some of the most common conditions managed by parents. The aim of this study was to examine the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of parents around fever in children under five years of age. METHODS: Between July and August 2014, a convenience sample of parents was invited to participate in this study in Copenhagen, Denmark. Results were analysed thematically using a constant comparison method. RESULTS: Twenty-one parents participated in the study. Five themes emerged from the data: parental concern, help-seeking behaviour, parental knowledge, parent fever management practices and initiatives. Parents used a range of information sources to obtain their knowledge on management of fever; however, due to issues of trust with these sources, reassurance was often sought from healthcare practitioners. There was a desire amongst most parents for initiatives to be introduced which provide general information on how to manage fever in children. CONCLUSION: Parents were very concerned when their child was febrile and instigated practices obtained from accessible information sources. This study has identified a need for specific and reliable information initiatives to be introduced as a means of reducing parental concern and ensuring evidence-based strategies for managing a child with fever.

Development of key performance indicators for prehospital emergency care.

INTRODUCTION: Key performance indicators (KPIs) are used to monitor and evaluate critical areas of clinical and support functions that influence patient outcome. Traditional prehospital emergency care performance monitoring has focused solely on response time metrics. The landscape of emergency care delivery in Ireland is in the process of significant national reconfiguration. The development of KPIs is therefore considered one of the key priorities in prehospital research. AIMS: The aim of this study was to develop a suite of KPIs for prehospital emergency care in Ireland. METHODS: A systematic literature review of prehospital care performance measurement was undertaken followed by a three-round Delphi consensus process facilitated by a broad-based multidisciplinary group of panellists. The consensus process was conducted between June 2012 and October 2013. Each candidate indicator on the Delphi survey questionnaire was rated using a 5-point Likert-type rating scale. Agreement was defined as at least 70% of responders rating an indicator as 'agree' or 'strongly agree' on the rating scale. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Sensitivity of the ratings was examined for robustness by bootstrapping the original sample. RESULTS: Of the 78 citations identified by the systematic review, 5 relevant publications were used to select candidate indicators for the Delphi round 1 questionnaire. Response rates in Delphi rounds 1 and 2 were 89% and 83%, respectively. Following the consensus development conference, 101 KPIs reached consensus. Based on the Donabedian framework for quality-of-care indicators, 7 of the KPIs which reached agreement were structure KPIs, 74 were process KPIs and 20 were outcome KPIs. The highest ranked indicator was a process KPI ('Direct transport of ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients to a primary percutaneous intervention (PCI)-capable facility for ECG to PCI time <90 min'). CONCLUSION: Improving the quality of prehospital care requires the development and implementation of performance measurement using scientifically valid and reliable KPIs. Employing a Delphi panel of key multidisciplinary Emergency Medical Service stakeholders, it was feasible to develop a suite of 101 KPIs for performance monitoring of prehospital emergency care in Ireland. This suite of KPIs may contribute to a framework for achieving safer, better care in the prehospital environment.

A qualitative study of the barriers to procedural sedation practices in paediatric emergency medicine in the UK and Ireland.

INTRODUCTION: There is extensive literature on paediatric procedural sedation (PPS) and its clinical applications in emergency departments (EDs). While numerous guidance and policy documents exist from international bodies, there remains a lack of uniformity and consistency of PPS practices within EDs. PPS is now gaining traction in the UK and Ireland and this study aimed to describe existing PPS practices and identify any challenges to training and provision of ED-based PPS. METHODS: A qualitative approach was employed to capture data through a focus group interview. Nine consultants in emergency medicine (EM) participated, varying in years of experience, clinical settings (mixed adult and paediatric ED or paediatric only) and geographical location (UK and Ireland). The focus group was audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Attride-Stirling's framework for thematic network analysis. RESULTS: The global theme 'The Future of PPS in EM-A UK and Ireland Perspective' emerged from the following three organising themes: (1) training and education of ED staff; (2) current realities of PPS in EDs and (3) PPS and the wider hospital community. The main findings were (1) there is variability in ED PPS practice throughout the UK and Ireland; (2) lack of formal PPS training for trainees is a barrier to its implementation as a standard treatment and (3) there is a lack of recognition of PPS at a College level as a specialised EM skill. CONCLUSIONS: Establishment of PPS as a standard treatment option in the emergency setting will require implementation of robust training into general and paediatric EM training. This should be supported and enhanced through national and international collaboration in EM-led PPS research and audit.

The inter-rater reliability of the Risk Instrument for Screening in the Community.

Predicting risk of adverse healthcare outcomes is important to enable targeted delivery of interventions. The Risk Instrument for Screening in the Community (RISC), designed for use by public health nurses (PHNs), measures the 1-year risk of hospitalisation, institutionalisation and death in community-dwelling older adults according to a five-point global risk score: from low (score 1,2) to medium (3) to high (4,5). We examined the inter-rater reliability (IRR) of the RISC between student PHNs (n=32) and expert raters using six cases (two low, medium and high-risk), scored before and after RISC training. Correlations increased for each adverse outcome, statistically significantly for institutionalisation (r=0.72 to 0.80, p=0.04) and hospitalisation (r=0.51 to 0.71, p<0.01) but not death. Training improved accuracy for low-risk but not all high-risk cases. Overall, the RISC showed good IRR, which increased after RISC training. That reliability fell for some high-risk cases suggests that the training programme requires adjustment to improve IRR further.

The use of propofol for procedural sedation in emergency departments.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that propofol is efficacious and safe for procedural sedation (PS) in the emergency department (ED) setting. However, propofol has a narrow therapeutic window and lacks of a reversal agent. The aim of this review was to cohere the evidence base regarding the efficacy and safety profile of propofol when used in the ED setting for PS. OBJECTIVES: To identify and evaluate all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing propofol with alternative drugs (benzodiazepines, barbiturates, etomidate and ketamine) used in the ED setting for PS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1950 to September week 2 2013) and EMBASE (1980 to week 2 2013). We searched the Current Controlled Trials metaRegister of Clinical Trials (compiled by Current Science) (September 2013). We checked the reference lists of trials and contacted trial authors. We imposed no language restriction. We re-ran the search in February 2015. We will deal with the one study awaiting classification when we update the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs comparing propofol to alternative drugs (benzodiazepines, barbiturates, etomidate and ketamine) used in the ED setting for PS in participants of all ages. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently performed data extraction. Two authors performed trial quality assessment. We used mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to measure effect sizes. Two authors independently assessed and rated the methodological quality of each trial using The Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: Ten studies (813 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Two studies only included participants 18 years and younger; six studies only included participants 18 years and older; one study included participants between 16 and 65 years of age and one study included only adults but did not specify the age range. Eight of the included studies had a high risk of bias. The included studies were clinically heterogeneous. We undertook no meta-analysis.The primary outcome measures of this review were: adverse effects (as defined by the study authors) and participant satisfaction (as defined by the study authors). In one study comparing propofol/fentanyl with ketamine/midazolam, delayed adverse reactions (nightmares and behavioural change) were noted in 10% of the ketamine/midazolam group and none in the propofol/fentanyl group. Seven individual studies reported no evidence of a difference in adverse effects between intravenous propofol, with and without adjunctive analgesic agents, and alternative interventions. Three individual studies reported no evidence of a difference in pain at the injection site between intravenous propofol and alternative interventions. Four individual studies reported no evidence of a difference in participant satisfaction between intravenous propofol, with and without adjunctive analgesic agents, and alternative interventions (ketamine, etomidate, midazolam). All the studies employed propofol without the use of an adjunctive analgesic and all, except one, were small (fewer than 100 participants) studies. The quality of evidence for the adverse effects and participant satisfaction outcomes was very low.Nine included studies (eight comparisons) reported all the secondary outcome measures of the review except mortality. It was not possible to pool the results of the included studies for any of the secondary outcome measures because the comparator interventions were different and the measures were reported in different ways. Seven individual studies reported no evidence of difference in incidence of hypoxia between intravenous propofol, with and without adjunctive analgesic agents, and alternative interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No firm conclusions can be drawn concerning the comparative effects of administering intravenous propofol, with or without an adjunctive analgesic agent, with alternative interventions in participants undergoing PS in the ED setting on adverse effects (including pain at the injection site) and participant satisfaction. The review was limited because no two included studies employed the same comparator interventions, and because the number of participants in eight of the included studies were small (fewer than 100 participants).

Establishing the research priorities of paediatric emergency medicine clinicians in the UK and Ireland.

OBJECTIVE: Paediatric Emergency Research in the UK and Ireland (PERUKI) is a collaborative clinical studies group established in August 2012. It consists of a network of 43 centres from England, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and aims to improve the emergency care of children through the performance of robust collaborative multicentre research within emergency departments. A study was conducted regarding the research priorities of PERUKI, to establish the research agenda for paediatric emergency medicine in the UK and Ireland. METHODS: A two-stage modified Delphi survey was conducted of PERUKI members via an online survey platform. Stage 1 allowed each member to submit up to 12 individual questions that they identified as priorities for future research. In stage 2, the shortlisted questions were each rated on a seven-point Likert scale of relative importance. PARTICIPANTS: Members of PERUKI, including clinical specialists, academics, trainees and research nurses. RESULTS: Stage 1 surveys were submitted by 46/91 PERUKI members (51%). A total of 249 research questions were generated and, following the removal of duplicate questions and shortlisting, 60 questions were carried forward for stage 2 ranking. Stage 2 survey responses were submitted by 58/95 members (61%). For the 60 research questions that were rated, the mean score of 'relative degree of importance' was 4.70 (range 3.36-5.62, SD 0.55). After ranking, the top 10 research priorities included questions on biomarkers for serious bacterial illness, major trauma, intravenous bronchodilators for asthma and decision rules for fever with petechiae, head injury and atraumatic limp. CONCLUSIONS: Research priorities of PERUKI members have been identified. By sharing these results with clinicians, academics and funding bodies, future research efforts can be focused to the areas of greatest need.

Intranasal fentanyl for the management of acute pain in children.

BACKGROUND: Pain is the most common symptom in the emergency setting; however, timely management of acute pain in children continues to be suboptimal. Intranasal drug delivery has emerged as an alternative method of achieving quicker drug delivery without adding to the distress of a child by inserting an intravenous cannula. OBJECTIVES: We identified and evaluated all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized trials to assess the effects of intranasal fentanyl (INF) versus alternative analgesic interventions in children with acute pain, with respect to reduction in pain score, occurrence of adverse events, patient tolerability, use of "rescue analgesia," patient/parental satisfaction and patient mortality. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2014, Issue 1); MEDLINE (Ovid SP, from 1995 to January 2014); EMBASE (Ovid SP, from 1995 to January 2014); the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (EBSCO Host, from 1995 to January 2014); the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information Database (LILACS) (BIREME, from 1995 to January 2014); Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux (CAB) Abstracts (from 1995 to January 2014); the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Science (from 1995 to January 2014); BIOSIS Previews (from 1995 to January 2014); the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) (from 1995 to January 2014); International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) (from 1995 to January 2014); ClinicalTrials.gov (from 1995 to January 2014); and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (to January 2014). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs comparing INF versus any other pharmacological/non-pharmacological intervention for the treatment of children in acute pain (aged < 18 years). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent review authors assessed each title and abstract for relevance. Full copies of all studies that met the inclusion criteria were retrieved for further assessment. Mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to measure effect sizes. Two review authors independently assessed and rated the methodological quality of each trial using the tool of The Cochrane Collaboration to assess risk of bias, as per Chapter 8 of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies (313 participants) met the inclusion criteria. One study compared INF versus intramuscular morphine (IMM); another study compared INF versus intravenous morphine (IVM); and another study compared standard concentration INF (SINF) versus high concentration INF (HINF). All three studies reported a reduction in pain score following INF administration. INF produced a greater reduction in pain score at 10 minutes post administration when compared with IMM (INF group pain score: 1/5 vs IMM group pain score: 2/5; P value 0.014). No other statistically significant differences in pain scores were reported at any other time point. When INF was compared with IVM and HINF, no statistically significant differences in pain scores were noted between treatment arms, before analgesia or at 5, 10, 20 and 30 minutes post analgesia. Specifically, when INF was compared with IVM, both agents were seen to produce a statistically significant reduction in pain score up to 20 minutes post analgesia. No further reduction in pain score was noted after this time. When SINF was compared with HINF, a statistically and clinically significant reduction in pain scores over study time was observed (median decrease for both groups 40 mm, P value 0.000). No adverse events (e.g. opiate toxicity, death) were reported in any study following INF administration. One study described better patient tolerance to INF compared with IMM, which achieved statistical significance. The other studies described reports of a "bad taste" and vomiting with INF. Overall the risk of bias in all studies was considered low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: INF may be an effective analgesic for the treatment of patients with acute moderate to severe pain, and its administration appears to cause minimal distress to children. However, this review of published studies does not allow any definitive conclusions regarding whether INF is superior, non-inferior or equivalent to intramuscular or intravenous morphine. Limitations of this review include the following: few eligible studies for inclusion (three); no study examined the use of INF in children younger than three years of age; no study included children with pain from a "medical" cause (e.g. abdominal pain seen in appendicitis); and all eligible studies were conducted in Australia. Consequently, the findings may not be generalizable to other healthcare settings, to children younger than three years of age and to those with pain from a "medical" cause.

The impact of social media on a major international emergency medicine conference.

OBJECTIVE: To report on the presence and use of social media by speakers and attendees at the International Conference on Emergency Medicine (ICEM) 2012, and describe the increasing use of online technologies such as Twitter and podcasts in publicising conferences and sharing research findings, and for clinical teaching. METHODS: Speakers were identified through the organising committee and a database constructed using the internet to determine the presence and activity of speakers on social media platforms. We also examined the use of Twitter by attendees and non-attendees using an online archiving system. Researchers tracked and reviewed every tweet produced with the hashtag #ICEM2012. Tweets were then reviewed and classified by three separate authors into different categories. RESULTS: Of the 212 speakers at ICEM 2012, 41.5% had a LinkedIn account and 15.6% were on Twitter. Less than 1% were active on Google+ and less than 10% had an active website or blog. There were over 4500 tweets about ICEM 2012. Over 400 people produced tweets about the conference, yet only 34% were physically present at the conference. Of the original tweets produced, 74.4% were directly related to the clinical and research material of the conference. CONCLUSIONS: ICEM 2012 was the most tweeted emergency medicine conference on record. Tweeting by participants was common; a large number of original tweets regarding clinical material at the conference were produced. There was also a large virtual participation in the conference as multiple people not attending the conference discussed the material on Twitter.

A qualitative study of the barriers to prehospital management of acute pain in children.

INTRODUCTION: Effective pain management in the prehospital setting is gaining momentum as a potential key performance indicator by many emergency medical service systems, but historically has been shown to be inadequate, particularly in the paediatric population. This study aimed to identify the barriers, as perceived by a national cohort of advanced paramedics (APs), to achieving optimal prehospital management of acute pain in children. METHODS: A qualitative approach was employed to capture data through two focus group interviews. Sixteen APs were invited to participate in this study. Both focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using Attride-Stirling's framework for thematic network analysis. RESULTS: The global theme 'Understanding Barriers to the Prehospital Management of Acute Pain in Children' emerged from three organising themes as follows: AP education and training; current clinical practice guidelines for paediatric pain management; realities of prehospital practice. Limited exposure to children in the prehospital setting, difficulty assessing pain intensity in small children, and challenges in administering oral or inhaled analgesic agents to distressed and uncooperative children were highlighted by participants. Short transfer times to the emergency department, and a 'medical' cause of pain were also implicated as examples of when children are less likely to receive analgesia from practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: The pathway to improving care must include an emphasis on improvements in practitioner education and training, offering alternatives to assessing pain in preverbal children, exploring the intranasal route of drug delivery in managing acute severe pain, and robustly developed evidence-based guidelines that are practitioner friendly and patient-focused.