RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to evaluate the features of rabies suspected animal contact cases in the emergency department and the appropriateness of administering post-exposure prophylaxis procedures according to World Health Organization (WHO) instructions. METHODS: Rabies suspected animal contact cases that applied to the emergency department between August 2012 and December 2013 were included in the study. Patients' data were obtained retrospectively from patient files, records of hospital automation system, and the "Rabies Suspected Animal Contact Cases Examination Form". The post-exposure prophylaxis recommended by the WHO were compared to the prophylactic applications administered by the emergency department. RESULTS: A total of 515 cases were included in the study. According to WHO classification, cases involving category 3 injuries (n=378, 73.4%) were more common than the others (p>0.0001). Compared to post-exposure prophylaxis recommendations by the WHO, 44.7% of all cases (n=230) were administered inappropriate prophylaxis. Thirty-seven percent of cases received less rabies Ig than recommended, despite category 3 contact. Six percent of cases with category 2 contact were given unnecessary rabies Ig and all cases with category 1 contact (1.5% of all cases) were given unnecessary rabies vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that in 44.7% of cases, post-exposure prophylaxis was applied inappropriately according to WHO instructions. Not only were there unnecessary vaccine and Ig applications, there were also missing prophylaxis procedures. Updating the current "Rabies Prevention and Control Directive" plus educating and controlling healthcare personnel on a regular schedule may help prevent inadequacies in prophylactic application.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Ultrasonography (US) has gained popularity in the emergency medicine to assess intravascular volume status in critically ill patients. However, there are a limited number of studies on the interrater reliability of US examination of the inferior vena cava (IVC) by emergency residents. METHOD: One hundred eighty US examinations were performed on 90 emergency critical care unit patients by 6 emergency medicine residents. Minimum and maximum IVC diameters during normal passive inspiration were measured, and the IVC index was calculated. The interrater reliability of the measurable data was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The measurements of minimum and maximum IVC diameters were moderately reliable by emergency residents (κ = 0.60 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.45-0.72] and κ = 0.56 [95% CI, 0.41-0.69], respectively). In the patients with moderate IVC depth (8.5-12.5 cm), the interrater reliabilities of sonographers were κ = 0.51 (95% CI, 0.30-0.67) for maximum diameter and κ = 0.43 (95% CI, 0.21-0.61) for minimum diameter. In patients with superficial (≤8.5 cm) and profound located (≥12.5 cm) IVC, the interrater reliabilities of sonographers for maximum and minimum diameters were κ = 0.69 (95% CI, 0.29-0.89) and κ = 0.75 (95% CI, 0.4-0.91), and κ = 0.58 (95% CI, 0.09-0.85) and κ = 0.76 (95% CI, 0.39-0.92), respectively. CONCLUSION: The measurement of the IVC is moderately reliable by emergency residents. The interrater reliability of measurements in patients with profound and superficial located IVC is higher than that of measurements in patients with moderate-depth located IVC.