Assessment of frailty by paramedics using the clinical frailty scale - an inter-rater reliability and accuracy study.

BACKGROUND: Frailty assessment by paramedics in the prehospital setting is understudied. The goals of this study were to assess the inter-rater reliability and accuracy of frailty assessment by paramedics using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study with paramedics exposed to 30 clinical vignettes created from real-life situations. There was no teaching intervention prior to the study and paramedics were only provided with the French version of the CFS (definitions and pictograms). The primary outcome was the inter-rater reliability of the assessment. The secondary outcome was the accuracy, compared with the expert-based assessment. Reliability was determined by calculating an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Accuracy was assessed through a mixed effects logistic regression model. A sensitivity analysis was carried out by considering that an assessment was still accurate if the score differed from no more than 1 level. RESULTS: A total of 56 paramedics completed the assessment. The overall assessment was found to have good inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.87 [95%CI 0.81-0.93]). The overall accuracy was moderate at 60.6% (95%CI 54.9-66.1) when considering the full scale. It was however much higher (94.8% [95%CI 92.0-96.7] when close assessments were considered as accurate. The only factor associated with accurate assessment was field experience. CONCLUSION: The assessment of frailty by paramedics was reliable in this vignette-based study. However, the accuracy deserved to be improved. Future research should focus on the clinical impact of these results and on the association of prehospital frailty assessment with patient outcomes. REGISTRATION: This study was registered on the Open Science Framework registries ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VDUZY ).

[LGBTQIA+ people: care issues in the emergency department]. / Personnes LGBTQIA+ : enjeux de prise en charge aux urgences.

Visits to the emergency department are often a difficult time for LGBTQIA+ people, mainly because of the frequent discrimination in healthcare environments and the lack of knowledge of medical and nursing staff. This article begins by presenting some epidemiological features, before discussing specific issues such as contraception and fertility, hormone therapy, sexually transmitted infections, surgical complications, psychiatric pathologies, and traumatology, from the perspective of the emergency physician. Finally, suggestions for further reflection and improvement are proposed.

Les visites aux urgences représentent souvent des moments difficiles pour les personnes LGBTQIA+, principalement en raison des discriminations particulièrement fréquentes dans les milieux de soins et du manque de connaissances du personnel médico-soignant. Cet article présente dans un premier temps quelques chiffres épidémiologiques, avant de discuter des enjeux spécifiques, comme la contraception et la fertilité, l'hormonothérapie, les infections sexuellement transmissibles, les complications opératoires, les pathologies psychiatriques ou la traumatologie, le tout sous le prisme de l'urgentiste. Enfin, des pistes de réflexion et d'amélioration sont proposées.

A Two-Step Approach Using the National Health Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Assessed by Paramedics to Enhance Prehospital Stroke Detection: A Case Report and Concept Proposal.

Background: Prehospital detection and triage of stroke patients mostly rely on the use of large vessel occlusion prediction scales to decrease onsite time. These quick but simplified scores, though useful, prevent prehospital providers from detecting posterior strokes and isolated symptoms such as limb ataxia or hemianopia. Case report: In the present case, an ambulance was dispatched to a 46-year-old man known for ophthalmic migraines and high blood pressure, who presented isolated visual symptoms different from those associated with his usual migraine attacks. Although the assessment advocated by the prehospital guideline was negative for stroke, the paramedic who assessed the patient was one of the few trained in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale assessment. Based on this assessment, the paramedic activated the fast-track stroke alarm and an ischemic stroke in the right temporal lobe was finally confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging. Discussion and conclusions: Current prehospital practice enables paramedics to detect anterior strokes but often limits the detection of posterior events or more subtle symptoms. Failure to identify such strokes delay or even forestall the initiation of thrombolytic therapy, thereby worsening patient outcomes. We therefore advocate a two-step prehospital approach: first, to avoid unnecessary delays, the prehospital stroke assessment should be carried out using a fast large vessel occlusion prediction scale; then, if this assessment is negative but potential stroke symptoms are present, a full National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale assessment could be performed to detect neurological deficits overlooked by the fast stroke scale.