RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Over the last 10 years, research has highlighted emerging potential risk factors for poor outcomes following blunt chest wall trauma. The aim was to update a previous systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk factors for mortality in blunt chest wall trauma patients. METHODS: A systematic review of English and non-English articles using MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library from January 2010 to March 2022 was completed. Broad search terms and inclusion criteria were used. All observational studies were included if they investigated estimates of association between a risk factor and mortality for blunt chest wall trauma patients. Where sufficient data were available, ORs with 95% CIs were calculated using a Mantel-Haenszel method. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: 73 studies were identified which were of variable quality (including 29 from original review). Identified risk factors for mortality following blunt chest wall trauma were: age 65 years or more (OR: 2.11; 95% CI 1.85 to 2.41), three or more rib fractures (OR: 1.96; 95% CI 1.69 to 2.26) and presence of pre-existing disease (OR: 2.86; 95% CI 1.34 to 6.09). Other new risk factors identified were: increasing Injury Severity Score, need for mechanical ventilation, extremes of body mass index and smoking status. Meta-analysis was not possible for these variables due to insufficient studies and high levels of heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this updated review suggest that despite a change in demographics of trauma patients and subsequent emerging evidence over the last 10 years, the main risk factors for mortality in patients sustaining blunt chest wall trauma remained largely unchanged. A number of new risk factors however have been reported that need consideration when updating current risk prediction models used in the ED. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021242063. Date registered: 29 March 2021. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/%23recordDetails.
Asunto(s)
Fracturas de las Costillas , Traumatismos Torácicos , Pared Torácica , Heridas no Penetrantes , Humanos , Anciano , Fracturas de las Costillas/complicaciones , Factores de Riesgo , Puntaje de Gravedad del Traumatismo , Heridas no Penetrantes/complicacionesRESUMEN
In the Emergency Department (ED), pain is one of the symptoms that are most frequently reported, making it one of the most significant issues for the emergency physician, but it is frequently under-treated. Intravenous (IV), oral (PO), and intramuscular (IM) delivery are the standard methods for administering acute pain relief. Firstly, we compared the safety and efficacy of IN analgesia to other conventional routes of analgesia to assess if IN analgesia may be an alternative for the management of acute pain in ED. Secondly, we analyzed the incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs) and rescue analgesia required. We performed a narrative review-based keywords in Pubmed/Medline, Scopus, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Controlled Trials Register, finding only twenty randomized Clinical trials eligible in the timeline 1992-2022. A total of 2098 patients were analyzed and compared to intravenous analgesia, showing no statistical difference in adverse effects. In addition, intranasal analgesia also has a rapid onset and quick absorption. Fentanyl and ketamine are two intranasal drugs that appear promising and may be taken simply and safely while providing effective pain relief. Intravenous is simple to administer, non-invasive, rapid onset, and quick absorption; it might be a viable choice in a variety of situations to reduce patient suffering or delays in pain management.
Asunto(s)
Dolor Agudo , Analgesia , Humanos , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Dolor Agudo/diagnóstico , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Analgesia/métodos , Servicio de Urgencia en HospitalRESUMEN
We report the case of a 54 year old man referred to the Emergency Department for rapid onset of an itchy rash and oppressive epigastric pain after assumption of amoxicillin/clavulanate. Electrocardiogram aand laboratory findings were consistent with acute coronaty syndrome. After coronary angiography, diagnosis of type II Kounis syndrome was made.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Masculino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico por imagen , Combinación Amoxicilina-Clavulanato de Potasio/efectos adversos , Angiografía Coronaria , Electrocardiografía , Servicio de Urgencia en HospitalRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Blunt thoracic trauma (BTT) is a leading cause of emergency department (ED) trauma-related attendance. Risk prediction tools are commonly to predict patients' outcomes and assign them to the most appropriate care setting. The STUMBL score is a prognostic model for BTT, derived and validated in the United Kingdom; items comprising the score are age, number of rib fractures, use of pre-injury anticoagulants, chronic lung disease and oxygen saturation levels. This study's aim was to validate the STUMBL score in an Italian ED. METHODS: This single-centre retrospective validation study was conducted in the ED of Santa Croce and Carle hub hospital in Cuneo, north-western Italy. All patients with an ED attendance for isolated BTT from 2018 to 2021 were included. Exclusion criteria were an age of under eighteen and the presence of any immediately life-threatening lesion. The primary outcome was the development of trauma-related complications, defined by the occurrence of one or more of the following: in-hospital mortality, pulmonary complications (infection, pleural effusion, haemothorax, pneumothorax, pleural empyema), need for intensive care unit admission, hospital length of stay equal to or greater than seven days. The performance of the STUMBL score was analysed in terms of discrimination with the evaluation of the receiver operating characteristic curve and calibration with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and with the calibration belt. RESULTS: 745 patients were enroled (median age 64 [25th;75th percentile: 50;78], male/female ratio 1:4, median Charlson comorbidity index 2 [1;4], median STUMBL score 11 [6;17]). 65.2% of patients were discharged home after ED evaluation. 203 patients (27.2%) developed the primary outcome. The STUMBL score was significantly different in patients with complications compared to those without complications (9 [5;13] vs 21 [17;25], p < 0.001). The C index of the score for the primary outcome was 0.90 (95% CI 0.88-0.93), and the result of the Hosmer-Lemeshow test was 9.01 (p = 0.34). STUMBL score = 16 has a sensitivity of 0.80 (95% CI 0.75-0.85), specificity of 0.87 (95% CI 0.84-0.90), a positive predictive value of 0.70 (95% CI 0.64-0.76), and a negative predictive value of 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.94). CONCLUSION: In this validation study, the STUMBL score demonstrated excellent discrimination and calibration in predicting the outcome of patients attending the ED with a BTT.
Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Heridas no Penetrantes , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Heridas no Penetrantes/complicaciones , Heridas no Penetrantes/diagnóstico , Heridas no Penetrantes/terapia , Pronóstico , Hospitalización , Curva ROCRESUMEN
The COVID-19 pandemic has deeply affected the activity and patient flows of Emergency Departments (EDs), and concern for the worsening outcome of cardiovascular emergencies has been raised. However, the impact of COVID-19 on all subtypes of acute aortic syndromes (AASs) has not been evaluated so far. Cases of AASs managed in the ED of three hub hospitals in a large area of Northern Italy were retrospectively analyzed, comparing those registered during the pandemic (March 2020 to May 2021) with corresponding pre-COVID-19 periods. A total of 124 patients with AAS were managed during the COVID-19 period vs. 118 pre-COVID-19 (p = 0.70), despite a -34.6% change in ED visits. Posterior chest pain at presentation was the only clinical variable with a different prevalence (46.0% vs. 32.2%, p = 0.03). Surgery and endovascular treatment rates were unchanged. Time intervals influenced by patient transfer to the hub center were longer during the COVID-19 period and longest during high viral circulation periods. Ninety-day mortality was unchanged, with a higher mortality trend during the pandemic surges. In conclusion, ED presentation and care of AASs were marginally affected by COVID-19, but efforts are needed to preserve efficient patient transfer to specialized centers and prevent mortality, especially during pandemic peaks.
RESUMEN
In the Emergency Department (ED), the decision to hospitalize or discharge COVID-19 patients is challenging. We assessed the utility of lung ultrasound (LUS), alone or in association with a clinical rule/score. This was a multicenter observational prospective study involving six EDs (NCT046291831). From October 2020 to January 2021, COVID-19 outpatients discharged from the ED based on clinical judgment were subjected to LUS and followed-up at 30 days. The primary clinical outcome was a composite of hospitalization or death. Within 393 COVID-19 patients, 35 (8.9%) reached the primary outcome. For outcome prognostication, LUS had a C-index of 0.76 (95%CI 0.68−0.84) and showed good performance and calibration. LUS-based classification provided significant differences in Kaplan−Meier curves, with a positive LUS leading to a hazard ratio of 4.33 (95%CI 1.95−9.61) for the primary outcome. The sensitivity and specificity of LUS for primary outcome occurrence were 74.3% (95%CI 59.8−88.8) and 74% (95%CI 69.5−78.6), respectively. The integration of LUS with a clinical score further increased sensitivity. In patients with a negative LUS, the primary outcome occurred in nine (3.3%) patients (p < 0.001 vs. unselected). The efficiency for rule-out was 69.7%. In unvaccinated ED patients with COVID-19, LUS improves prognostic stratification over clinical judgment alone and may support standardized disposition decisions.
RESUMEN
An excess long-term mortality has been observed in patients who were discharged after a community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), even after adjusting for age and comorbidities. We aimed to derive and validate a clinical score to predict long-term mortality in patients with CAP discharged from a general ward. In this retrospective observational study, we derived a clinical risk score from 315 CAP patients discharged from the Internal Medicine ward of Cuneo Hospital, Italy, in 2015-2016 (derivation cohort), which was validated in a cohort of 276 patients discharged from the pneumology service of the Barakaldo Hospital, Spain, from 2015 to 2017, and from two internal medicine wards at the Turin University and Cuneo Hospital, Italy, in 2017. The main outcome was the 18-month follow-up all-cause death. Cox multivariate analysis was used to identify the predictive variables and develop the clinical risk score in the derivation cohort, which we applied in the validation cohort. In the derivation cohort (median age: 79 years, 54% males, median CURB-65 = 2), 18-month mortality was 32%, and 18% in the validation cohort (median age 76 years, 55% males, median CURB-65 = 2). Cox multivariate analysis identified the red blood cell distribution width (RDW), temperature, altered mental status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index as independent predictors. The derived score showed good discrimination (c-index 0.76, 95% CI 0.70-0.81; and 0.83, 95% CI 0.78-0.87, in the derivation and validation cohort, respectively), and calibration. We derived and validated a simple clinical score including RDW, to predict long-term mortality in patients discharged for CAP from a general ward.