Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Arch Acad Emerg Med ; 10(1): e52, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36033985

RESUMO

Introduction: Various scoring systems have been designed for calculating the mortality risk of patients. This study evaluated the accuracy of Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) and Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS) in predicting the 28-day mortality of non-trauma patients. Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 1003 adult non-trauma patients, who referred to the emergency department of Imam Khomeini Hospital, Urmia, Iran, in the second half of 2018, using the census sampling. We determined the screening performance characteristics of REMS and RAPS in predicting the 28-day mortality of patients. Results: This study examined 1003 non-trauma patients with a mean age of 61.5±18.05 years (60.6% male). The mean REMS (8.7 ± 3.2 vs. 6.0 ± 3.6; p < 0.001) and RAPS (3.7 ± 2.8 vs. 2.7 ± 2.0; p < 0.001) scores were significantly higher in deceased cases. Sensitivity and specificity of REMS in predicting the risk of non-trauma patients' mortality were 85.19% (95%CI: 78.05% - 90.71%) and 78.34% (95%CI: 75.45% - 81.04%), respectively. While, the Sensitivity and specificity of RAPS in this regard were 61.39% (95%CI: 53.33% - 69.02%) and 71.12% (95%CI: 67.94% - 74.16%), respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of REMS and RAPS were 0.72 (95% CI: 0.68 -0.75) and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.56 - 0.65) in predicting the patients' 28-day mortality, respectively (p = 0.001). Conclusion: The total accuracies of REMS and RAPS in predicting the 28-day mortality of non-trauma patients were in good and poor range, respectively. The screening performance characteristics of REMS were a little better in this regard.

2.
Bull Emerg Trauma ; 10(3): 122-127, 2022 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35991372

RESUMO

Objective: To compare the ability of quantitative trauma severity assessment methods based on Glasgow coma scale, age, and arterial pressure (GAP), revised trauma score (RTS), and injury severity score (ISS) criteria in determining the prognosis of accidental patients. Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed on random patients referred to Imam Khomeini Hospital in Urmia from March 20, 2020 to September 21, 2020. The data were obtained by using a checklist includes items such as age, sex, respiration rate, oxygen saturation level, pulse rate, primary blood pressure, initial Glascow coma scale (GCS), patient outcome and injury to different parts of body. After collecting the data, it was entered into SPSS 18 and analyzed with the descriptive and analytical statistics include an independent t-test and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curves. Results: Out of 1930 studied patients, 365 (18.9%) were women and 1565 (81.1%) were men. The mean age of patients was 37.05±17.11 years and women were significantly older than men. The mortality rate was 4.8% and was significantly more in men compared to women. The mean blood pressure, GCS and oxygen saturation level were lower in deceased patients. The mean GAP, ISS and RTS values were 23.13±2.69, 4.07±3.82, 7.72±0.52, respectively. The mean values of GAP and RTS were significantly low in deceased patients whereas the mean ISS value was significantly high in the deceased patients. The Area under the curve (AUS) for ISS was greater than the other two scoring systems. Conclusion: The findings of the current study showed that all three systems were adequately efficient to prognoses the final outcome in multi-trauma patients but the ISS measure was better than the other two criteria.

3.
Emerg (Tehran) ; 3(2): 70-4, 2015.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26495385

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Headache is the most common neurologic symptom among referees to the emergency department (ED), while the best treatment has not yet been found. Therefore, in the present study pain relief effects of metoclopramide and acetaminophen were compared in patients suffered acute primary headache. METHODS: This study was a double-blind randomized clinical trial performed in Imam Khomeini Hospital, Urmia, Iran, through July to October 2014. All adult patients, with acute primary (migraine, tension type and cluster) headache referred to the ED were included in this study. Pain severity was measured with 10 centimeters numeric rating scales. The patients were randomized into two groups of intravenous (IV) metoclopramide (10 milligrams) and acetaminophen (1 gram). Pain score, success rate, and drug complications were compared between the 2 groups at 0, 15, 30, 60, and 120 minutes after injection. RESULTS: 100 patients were equally categorized into two groups (mean age of 32 ± 13.2 years; 51.2% male). Initial pain score in metoclopramide and acetaminophen groups were 9.1 and 9.4, respectively (p = 0.46). IV metoclopramide did not have any analgesic effect at 15 minutes, but had good effect at 30 minutes. While, the analgesic effect of acetaminophen initiated after 15 minutes. After 2 hours, both drugs had good therapeutic effect on primary headaches (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated that efficacy of metoclopramide for pain relief in primary headaches is lower than acetaminophen. In this regard, success rate of acetaminophen was 42.0% versus 0% for metoclopramide within 15 minutes. The efficacy of acetaminophen continued until 60 minutes.

4.
Int J Prev Med ; 5(4): 489-93, 2014 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24829737

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Increasedlife expectancy in populations has brought along specific new scenarios in the fields of medicine for the elderly; prevalence of physical complications such as edentulism and patients with dentures is growing. Management of anesthesia and ventilation in this group of patients has turned into a great challenge. Some researchers suggest dentures to be left in place during bag-mask ventilation; yet, no unanimous agreement exists in this regard. METHODS: In a single blind randomized clinical trial, we studied 300 patients with ASA class I, II (American Society of Anesthesiologists), Mallampati class (I, II) and aged over 55 years in three groups. After induction of anesthesia, in group G dentures were removed and in each buccal space an eight-layer 10 × 10 cm gauze and an oral airway were placed. In group D, the dentures and an oral airway were left in place. In group C (control), after removing dentures just an appropriate oral airway was placed. Then, each three group underwent bag-mask ventilation. Success of bag-mask ventilation (BMV) was considered as increase in end-tidal carbon dioxide to more than 20 mmHg and back to baseline with fresh gas flow of 3 L/min and adjustable pressure limiting valve pressure of 20 cm H2O. Success rates were evaluated between groups. RESULTS: Effective BMV was possible in 91 (91%), 64 (64%) and 41 (41%) patients in groups G, D and C respectively. The differences were statistically significant. Successful BMV rate was significantly higher in female patients in group G compared to group C; 43/44 versus 25/46 individuals, P = 0.0001, odds ratio = 0.03, 95% confidence interval (0.00, 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Leaving dentures in place in edentulous patients after inducing anesthesia improves bag-mask ventilation. However, placing folded compressed gauze in buccal space leads to more significant improvement in BMV compared to leaving dentures in place.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA