Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters

Database
Language
Journal subject
Publication year range
1.
J Emerg Med ; 54(5): 645-650, 2018 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29366618

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The management of patients with impaled unexploded devices is rare in the civilian setting. However, as the lines of the traditional battlefield are blurred by modern warfare and terrorist activity, emergency providers should be familiar with facility protocols, plans, and contact information of their local resources for unexploded devices. CASE REPORT: A 44-year-old male sustained a close-proximity blast injury to his lower extremities while manipulating a mortar-type firework. He presented to the regional trauma center with an open, comminuted distal femur fracture and radiographic evidence of a potential explosive device in his thigh. His management was coordinated with the local Explosive Ordinance Disposal and the fire department. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Explosive devices pose a grave threat when encountered. Familiarization with protocols to manage these patients can mitigate disaster. Emergency providers should expect and be prepared to coordinate care for these patients.


Subject(s)
Explosive Agents/adverse effects , Foreign Bodies/complications , Wounds and Injuries/etiology , Adult , Foreign Bodies/surgery , General Surgery/methods , Humans , Male , Radiography/methods
2.
West J Emerg Med ; 18(6): 1061-1067, 2017 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29085538

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Our goal was to determine if heated gel for emergency department (ED) bedside ultrasonography improves patient satisfaction compared to room-temperature gel. METHODS: We randomized a convenience sample of ED patients determined by their treating physician to require a bedside ultrasound (US) study to either heated gel (102.0° F) or room-temperature gel (82.3° F). Investigators performed all US examinations. We informed all subjects that the study entailed investigation into various measures to improve patient satisfaction with ED US examinations but did not inform them of our specific focus on gel temperature. Investigators wore heat-resistant gloves while performing the examinations to blind themselves to the gel temperature. After completion of the US, subjects completed a survey including the primary outcome measure of patient satisfaction as measured on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). A secondary outcome was patient perceptions of sonographer professionalism measured by an ordinal scale (1-5). RESULTS: We enrolled 124 subjects; 120 completed all outcome measures. Of these, 59 underwent randomization to US studies with room-temperature gel and 61 underwent randomization to heated US gel. Patient 100-mm VAS satisfaction scores were 83.9 among patients undergoing studies with room-temperature gel versus 87.6 among subjects undergoing studies with heated gel (effect size 3.7, 95% confidence interval -1.3-8.6). There were similarly no differences between the two arms with regard to patient perceptions of sonographer professionalism. CONCLUSION: The use of heated ultrasound gel appears to have no material impact on the satisfaction of ED patients undergoing bedside ultrasound studies.


Subject(s)
Gels/administration & dosage , Patient Satisfaction , Ultrasonography/methods , Administration, Topical , Adult , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Hot Temperature , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Point-of-Care Systems , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL