RESUMO
Objectives Anaphylaxis is an acute, life-threatening immediate allergic reaction caused by the sudden systemic release of mediators from mast cells. This study aims to assess the current practice of emergency management of children and adults diagnosed with anaphylaxis at the Royal Hospital, Muscat, Oman, in line with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines. Methods This is an observational retrospective study of all anaphylaxis cases seen at the emergency department (ED) from January 2013 to January 2018 and compared with the management of anaphylaxis in the ED as per the NICE guidelines. Inclusion criteria were all patients, children (age 16 and below), and adults diagnosed with anaphylaxis based on the World Allergy Organization (WAO) criteria. Exclusion criteria are all cases labeled as anaphylaxis that did not match the WAO criteria for anaphylaxis. Results Of 100 patients with a preliminary diagnosis of anaphylaxis, 49 patients (49%) were true-anaphylaxis cases based on the WAO definition 16 were children (age 16 years and below), and 33 were adults ( age 16 years and above). The other 51 patients (51%) with misdiagnosed anaphylaxis were later diagnosed with spontaneous urticaria, septic shock, vocal cord dysfunction, severe asthma, and anxiety attack. All 49 patients with true-anaphylaxis appropriately received adrenaline intramuscularly at the ED. All 16 children were admitted, seen by an allergist, and received an adrenaline auto-injector when indicated. Only 5 of the 33 adults were admitted and seen by an allergist, and 4 of those required an adrenaline auto-injector upon discharge. The remaining 28 adults were discharged from the ED, and only 3 of these were referred to the allergist. None received an adrenaline auto-injector upon discharge from the ED, and no mention in the ED notes on patient education regarding allergen avoidance. Conclusion Third of the patients who presented to ED were children (<16 years), and two third were adults. Insect venom was the main reason for anaphylaxis in both age groups. There was an underutilization of adrenaline auto-injector prescriptions for adult patients. This could be very well improved by disseminating policies and guidelines to adult physicians.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Balance testing is an important part of the initial concussion assessment. There is no research on the differences in Modified Balance Error Scoring System (M-BESS) scores when tested in real world as compared to control conditions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the difference in M-BESS scores in athletes wearing their protective equipment and cleats on different surfaces as compared to control conditions. METHODS: This cross-sectional study examined university North American football and soccer athletes. Three observers independently rated athletes performing the M-BESS test in three different conditions: (1) wearing shorts and T-shirt in bare feet on firm surface (control); (2) wearing athletic equipment with cleats on FieldTurf; and (3) wearing athletic equipment with cleats on firm surface. Mean M-BESS scores were compared between conditions. RESULTS: 60 participants were recruited: 39 from football (all males) and 21 from soccer (11 males and 10 females). Average age was 21.1â years (SD=1.8). Mean M-BESS scores were significantly lower (p<0.001) for cleats on FieldTurf (mean=26.3; SD=2.0) and for cleats on firm surface (mean=26.6; SD=2.1) as compared to the control condition (mean=28.4; SD=1.5). Females had lower scores than males for cleats on FieldTurf condition (24.9 (SD=1.9) vs 27.3 (SD=1.6), p=0.005). Players who had taping or bracing on their ankles/feet had lower scores when tested with cleats on firm surface condition (24.6 (SD=1.7) vs 26.9 (SD=2.0), p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Total M-BESS scores for athletes wearing protective equipment and cleats standing on FieldTurf or a firm surface are around two points lower than M-BESS scores performed on the same athletes under control conditions.