The research for the utilization of mechanical chest compression device for emergency medical center in Korea: a survey-based study

Objective@#During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the use of mechanical chest compression (meCC) devices for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in emergency departments might have increased. However, there are few reports yet of such an increase in use. This study aimed to assess the current status of meCC device utilization in emergency medical institutions nationwide through a survey. @*Methods@#This cross-sectional study conducted a survey from August 20, 2022 to September 29, 2022, using emails and text messages to target 287 out of a total of 409 emergency medical institutions nationwide for which contact information was obtained. @*Results@#Of the 287 emergency medical institutions, 127 responded (44.2% response rate). Of these, 74 (58.3%) reported using meCC devices. The utilization rates were highest in the regional emergency medical center, followed by local emergency medical centers and local emergency medical agencies (93.3% vs. 67.3% vs. 27.1%, respectively; P<0.001). The most common reason for device purchases was to reduce rescuer fatigue and ensure high-quality CPR. The second reason was personnel shortages, while the regional emergency medical center gave a higher priority to the protection of medical staff from COVID-19. The meCC device group reported significantly higher cases of CPR (100 or more cases per year) compared to the non-meCC device group (64.9% vs. 24.6%; P<0.001) although no difference was shown in the total number of medical staff participated in CPR between the groups. Also, 90.5% of the meCC group expressed satisfaction with using the device. @*Conclusion@#More than 50% of emergency medical institutions used meCC devices in CPR, citing reasons such as reducing rescuer fatigue and ensuring high-quality CPR.

A quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment–negative result at triage is associated with low compliance with sepsis bundles: a retrospective analysis of a multicenter prospective registry

Objective@#We investigated the effects of a quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA)–negative result (qSOFA score <2 points) at triage on the compliance with sepsis bundles among patients with sepsis who presented to the emergency department (ED). @*Methods@#Prospective sepsis registry data from 11 urban tertiary hospital EDs between October 2015 and April 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who met the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock criteria were included. Primary exposure was defined as a qSOFA score ≥2 points at ED triage. The primary outcome was defined as 3-hour bundle compliance, including lactate measurement, blood culture, broad-spectrum antibiotics administration, and 30 mL/kg crystalloid administration. Multivariate logistic regression analysis to predict 3-hour bundle compliance was performed. @*Results@#Among the 2,250 patients enrolled in the registry, 2,087 fulfilled the sepsis criteria. Only 31.4% (656/2,087) of the sepsis patients had qSOFA scores ≥2 points at triage. Patients with qSOFA scores <2 points had lower lactate levels, lower SOFA scores, and a lower 28-day mortality rate. Rates of compliance with lactate measurement (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29–0.75), antibiotics administration (aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52–0.78), and 30 mL/kg crystalloid administration (aOR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49–0.77) within 3 hours from triage were significantly lower in patients with qSOFA scores <2 points. However, the rate of compliance with blood culture within 3 hours from triage (aOR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.33–2.08) was higher in patients with qSOFA scores <2 points. @*Conclusion@#A qSOFA-negative result at ED triage is associated with low compliance with lactate measurement, broad-spectrum antibiotics administration, and 30 mL/kg crystalloid administration within 3 hours in sepsis patients.

The role of platelet to lymphocyte ratio and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in ulcerative colitis

Background/Aims@#Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) can serve as biomarkers for diagnosing and assessing disease activity in ulcerative colitis (UC). We investigated their clinical significance in UC. @*Methods@#We analyzed 48 patients with UC who underwent measurement of fecal calprotectin (FC) and endoscopy and 96 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. NLR and PLR were compared between the patients and healthy controls. The endoscopic activity was divided into 2 groups: group 1 (mild to moderate inflammation) and group 2 (severe inflammation) according to the Mayo endoscopic subscore in UC. @*Results@#To diagnose UC, the optimal cutoff of NLR and PLR was 2.26 (sensitivity 54.2%; specificity 90.6%; positive likelihood ratio 5.778, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.944–11.339; area under the curve [AUC] 0.774, 95% CI, 0.690–0.859) and 179.8 (sensitivity 35.4%; specificity 90.6%; positive likelihood ratio 3.778, 95% CI 1.821–7.838; AUC 0.654, 95% CI 0.556–0.753), respectively. The optimal cutoff to differentiate group 1 and group 2 was 3.44, 175.9, and 453 µg/g for NLR, PLR, and FC, respectively (sensitivity, 63.6% vs. 90.9% vs. 81.8%; specificity, 81.1% vs. 78.4% vs. 73.0%; positive likelihood ratio, 3.364 vs. 4.205 vs. 3.027; AUC, 0.714 vs. 0.897 vs. 0.813). PLR had the highest AUC and positive likelihood ratio. @*Conclusions@#NLR and PLR help differentiate patients with UC from healthy controls. NLR, PLR, and FC indicate endoscopic activity and may reflect intestinal mucosal conditions.