Give Intravenous Bolus Overdose a Brake: User Experience and Perception of Safety Device.

OBJECTIVES: Drugs can come in concentrated solutions that require dilution before intravenous bolus administration. Upon dilution, the syringe can contain more than the required amount of drug. The user may mistakenly administer the full contents of the syringe, resulting in an overdose. In this cross-sectional study, we evaluated user experience and perception of Syringe Brake, a dosage flow restrictor device, as part of the intravenous morphine bolus administration workflow. METHODS: From December 2018 to January 2019, doctors and nurses working in the emergency department of 3 public tertiary hospitals in Singapore were invited to complete a paper-based 11-item 5-point Likert scale survey questionnaire after 3 months of Syringe Brake implementation. RESULTS: Overall, 77.5% (290/374; 4.11 ± 0.83) of participants were satisfied with the use of Syringe Brake to prevent medication error. Our survey results showed that the top features of Syringe Brake were ease of setting the desired volume to be administered (86.1%; 4.21 ± 0.72), allowing the drug to be titrated safely (84.8%; 4.26 ± 0.77), and giving users the confidence to avoid overdosing the patient (82.1%; 4.21 ± 0.78). Those with hands-on experience with Syringe Brake rated significantly higher for all survey statements except on the perceived ability to prevent error arising from miscommunication (adjusted odds ratio, 1.58 [0.98-2.57]; P = 0.062). CONCLUSIONS: Syringe Brake shows promising potential for adoption to prevent medication errors. The device serves as a constraint to prevent accidental overdose, caused by user unfamiliarity or autopilot administration.

Reorganising the emergency department to manage the COVID-19 outbreak.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 disease outbreak that first surfaced in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, has taken the world by storm and ravaged almost every country in the world. Emergency departments (ED) in hospitals are on the frontlines, serving an essential function in identifying these patients, isolating them early whilst providing urgent medical care. This outbreak has reinforced the role of Emergency Medicine in public health. This paper documents the challenges faced and measures taken by a tertiary hospital's ED in Singapore, in response to the outbreak. MAIN BODY: The ED detected the first case of COVID-19 in Singapore on 22 January 2020 in a Chinese tourist and also the first case of locally transmitted COVID-19 on 3 February 2020. The patient journeys through the patient reception area in the ED and undergoes fever screening before being shunted to isolation areas within the ED. Management and disposition of suspect COVID-19 patients are guided by a close-knit collaboration between ED and department of infectious diseases. With increasing number of patients, back-up plans for expansion of space and staff augmentation have been enacted. Staff safety is also of utmost importance, with provision and guidelines for personal protective equipment and team segregation to ensure no cross-contamination across staff. These have been made possible with an early setup of an operational command and control structure within the ED, managing manpower, logistics, operations, communication and information management and liaison with other clinical departments. CONCLUSION: With the large numbers of undifferentiated patients managed by the ED to date, more than 820 patients with COVID-19 have been identified in the hospital. Not a single member of the staff of the SGH Emergency Department has come down with the illness. The various measures undertaken by the department have helped to ensure good staff morale and strict adherence to safety procedures. We share the lessons learnt so that others who manage EDs around the world can benefit from our experience.

Emergency department 'outbreak rostering' to meet challenges of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 outbreak has posed unique challenges to the emergency department rostering. Additional infection control, the possibility of quarantine of staff and minimising contact among staff have significant impact on the work of doctors in the emergency department. Infection of a single healthcare worker may require quarantine of close contacts at work. This may thus affect a potentially large number of staff. As such, we developed an Outbreak Response Roster. This Outbreak Response Roster had fixed teams of doctors working in rotation, each team that staff the emergency department in turn. Members within teams remained constant and were near equally balanced in terms of manpower and seniority of doctors. Each team worked fixed 12 hours shifts with as no overlapping of staff or staggering of shifts. Handovers between shifts were kept as brief as possible. All these were measures to limit interactions among healthcare workers. With the implementation of the roster, measures were also taken to bolster the psychological wellness of healthcare workers. With face-to-face contact limited, we also had to maintain clear, open channels for communication through technology and continue educating residents through innovative means.

Role of peak current in conversion of patients with ventricular fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Peak currents are the final arbiter of defibrillation in patients with ventricular fibrillation (VF). However, biphasic defibrillators continue to use energy in joules for electrical conversion in hopes that their impedance compensation properties will address transthoracic impedance (TTI), which must be overcome when a fixed amount of energy is delivered. However, optimal peak currents for conversion of VF remain unclear. We aimed to determine the role of peak current and optimal peak levels for conversion in collapsed VF patients. METHODS: Adult, non-pregnant patients presenting with non-traumatic VF were included in the study. All defibrillations that occurred were included. Impedance values during defibrillation were used to calculate peak current values. The endpoint was return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). RESULTS: Of the 197 patients analysed, 105 had ROSC. Characteristics of patients with and without ROSC were comparable. Short duration of collapse < 10 minutes correlated positively with ROSC. Generally, patients with average or high TTI converted at lower peak currents. 25% of patients with high TTI converted at 13.3 ± 2.3 A, 22.7% with average TTI at 18.2 ± 2.5 A and 18.6% with low TTI at 27.0 ± 4.7 A (p = 0.729). Highest peak current conversions were at < 15 A and 15-20 A. Of the 44 patients who achieved first-shock ROSC, 33 (75.0%) received < 20 A peak current vs. > 20 A for the remaining 11 (25%) patients (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: For best effect, priming biphasic defibrillators to deliver specific peak currents should be considered.