Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 11 de 11
Filtrar
1.
J Ultrasound Med ; 42(12): 2883-2895, 2023 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37688781

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Chest CT is the reference test for assessing pulmonary injury in suspected or diagnosed COVID-19 with signs of clinical severity. This study aimed to evaluate the association of a lung ultrasonography score and unfavorable clinical evolution at 28 days. METHODS: The eChoVid is a multicentric study based on routinely collected data that was conducted in 8 emergency units in France; patients were included between March 19, 2020 and April 28, 2020 and underwent lung ultrasonography, a short clinical assessment by 2 emergency physicians blinded to each other's assessment, and chest CT. Lung ultrasonography consisted of scoring lesions from 0 to 3 in 8 chest zones, thus defining a global score (GS) of severity from 0 to 24. The primary outcome was the association of lung damage severity as assessed by the GS at day 0 and patient status at 28 days. Secondary outcomes were comparing the performance between GS and CT scan and the performance between a new trainee physician and an ultrasonography expert in scores. RESULTS: For the 328 patients analyzed, the GS showed good performance in predicting clinical worsening at 28 days (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.83, sensitivity 84.2%, specificity 76.4%). The GS showed good performance in predicting the CT severity assessment (AUC 0.84, sensitivity 77.2%, specificity 83.7%). CONCLUSION: A lung ultrasonography GS is a simple tool that can be used in the emergency department to predict unfavorable assessment at 28 days in patients with COVID-19.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/diagnóstico por imagen , SARS-CoV-2 , Pulmón/diagnóstico por imagen , Ultrasonografía , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital
2.
Am J Emerg Med ; 72: 122-126, 2023 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37523992

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In 2018, the French "Yellow Vest" social protest movement spread with weekly demonstrations resulting in confrontations between protesters and law enforcement. Non-lethal weapons, such as defensive bullet launchers (DBL) were used, and significant injuries have been reported through media, leading to public controversy regarding their use. These injuries are not well-known to civilian emergency physicians. The aim of this study is to describe the injuries caused by DBL among Emergency Department (ED) patients during these demonstrations and to identify the characteristics that required specialized care and hospital admission. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was conducted in 7 EDs of academic hospitals in Paris, France. Adult ED patients who presented with DBL injuries during "yellow vest" strikes between November 2018 and May 2019 were included. The primary outcome was the rate of DBL patients requiring hospital admission. We also compared the characteristics of the injuries and the care provided between the admitted patients and other DBL patients. RESULTS: 152 patients were included. 17% were admitted to hospital, with 19% of them being transferred to intensive care units. 49% of all patients had head, face, eye or neck injuries including 4 cases of intracranial hemorrhage, 1 carotide dissection, 1 laryngeal edema, 1 pneumencephalus. 11% of all patients presented with multiple wounds, and 28% had fractures (77% of admitted patients vs 18%, p < 0.001). Surgery was required for 20% of all patients (62% of admitted patients vs 10%, p < 0.001). Maxillofacial surgery was performed on 38% of admitted patients, orthopedic surgery on 25%, and neurosurgery on 13%. No death were reported. CONCLUSION: The use of DBL during the "yellow vest" civil strikes was associated with a high rate of head, face, eye or neck injuries among injured ED patients. Hospital admission was associated with a higher rate of fractures, with most of them requiring maxillofacial, orthopedic and neurosurgeries.


Asunto(s)
Fracturas Óseas , Armas , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Hospitalización , Aplicación de la Ley , Fracturas Óseas/epidemiología , Fracturas Óseas/terapia
3.
Eur Heart J ; 42(33): 3146-3157, 2021 08 31.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34363386

RESUMEN

AIMS: The aim of this study is to compare the Hestia rule vs. the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (sPESI) for triaging patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) for home treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: Normotensive patients with PE of 26 hospitals from France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Switzerland were randomized to either triaging with Hestia or sPESI. They were designated for home treatment if the triaging tool was negative and if the physician-in-charge, taking into account the patient's opinion, did not consider that hospitalization was required. The main outcomes were the 30-day composite of recurrent venous thrombo-embolism, major bleeding or all-cause death (non-inferiority analysis with 2.5% absolute risk difference as margin), and the rate of patients discharged home within 24 h after randomization (NCT02811237). From January 2017 through July 2019, 1975 patients were included. In the per-protocol population, the primary outcome occurred in 3.82% (34/891) in the Hestia arm and 3.57% (32/896) in the sPESI arm (P = 0.004 for non-inferiority). In the intention-to-treat population, 38.4% of the Hestia patients (378/984) were treated at home vs. 36.6% (361/986) of the sPESI patients (P = 0.41 for superiority), with a 30-day composite outcome rate of 1.33% (5/375) and 1.11% (4/359), respectively. No recurrent or fatal PE occurred in either home treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: For triaging PE patients, the strategy based on the Hestia rule and the strategy based on sPESI had similar safety and effectiveness. With either tool complemented by the overruling of the physician-in-charge, more than a third of patients were treated at home with a low incidence of complications.


Asunto(s)
Embolia Pulmonar , Enfermedad Aguda , Humanos , Alta del Paciente , Pronóstico , Embolia Pulmonar/tratamiento farmacológico , Medición de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad
4.
JAMA ; 324(19): 1948-1956, 2020 11 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33201202

RESUMEN

Importance: Clinical guidelines for the early management of acute heart failure in the emergency department (ED) setting are based on only moderate levels of evidence, with subsequent low adherence to these guidelines. Objective: To test the effect of an early guideline-recommended care bundle on short-term prognosis in older patients with acute heart failure in the ED. Design, Setting, and Participants: Stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in 15 EDs in France of 503 patients 75 years and older with a diagnosis of acute heart failure in the ED from December 2018 to September 2019 and followed up for 30 days until October 2019. Interventions: A care bundle that included early intravenous nitrate boluses; management of precipitating factors, such as acute coronary syndrome, infection, or atrial fibrillation; and moderate dose of intravenous diuretics (n = 200). In the control group, patient care was left to the discretion of the treating emergency physician (n = 303). Each center was randomized to the order in which they switched to the "intervention period." After the initial 4-week control period for all centers, 1 center entered in the intervention period every 2 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the number of days alive and out of hospital at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included 30-day all-cause mortality, 30-day cardiovascular mortality, unscheduled readmission, length of hospital stay, and kidney impairment. Results: Among 503 patients who were randomized (median age, 87 years; 298 [59%] women), 502 were analyzed. In the intervention group, patients received a median (interquartile range) of 27.0 (9-54) mg of intravenous nitrates in the first 4 hours vs 4.0 (2.0-6.0) mg in the control group (adjusted difference, 23.8 [95% CI, 13.5-34.1]). There was a significantly higher percentage of patients in the intervention group treated for their precipitating factors than in the control group (58.8% vs 31.9%; adjusted difference, 31.1% [95% CI, 14.3%-47.9%]). There was no statistically significant difference in the primary end point of the number of days alive and out of hospital at 30 days (median [interquartile range], 19 [0- 24] d in both groups; adjusted difference, -1.9 [95% CI, -6.6 to 2.8]; adjusted ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.64-1.21]). At 30 days, there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups in mortality (8.0% vs 9.7%; adjusted difference, 4.1% [95% CI, -17.2% to 25.3%]), cardiovascular mortality (5.0% vs 7.4%; adjusted difference, 2.1% [95% CI, -15.5% to 19.8%]), unscheduled readmission (14.3% vs 15.7%; adjusted difference, -1.3% [95% CI, -26.3% to 23.7%]), median length of hospital stay (8 d in both groups; adjusted difference, 2.5 [95% CI, -0.9 to 5.8]), and kidney impairment (1% in both groups). Conclusions and Relevance: Among older patients with acute heart failure, use of a guideline-based comprehensive care bundle in the ED compared with usual care did not result in a statistically significant difference in the number of days alive and out of the hospital at 30 days. Further research is needed to identify effective treatments for acute heart failure in older patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03683212.


Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/mortalidad , Nitratos/administración & dosificación , Paquetes de Atención al Paciente , Enfermedad Aguda , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Diuréticos/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Francia , Furosemida/administración & dosificación , Adhesión a Directriz , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Infusiones Intravenosas , Masculino , Alta del Paciente , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto
5.
JAMA Intern Med ; 178(6): 812-819, 2018 06 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29710111

RESUMEN

Importance: Emergency departments (ED) are environments that are at high risk for medical errors. Previous studies suggested that the proportion of medical errors may decrease when more than 1 physician is involved. Objective: To reduce the proportion of medical errors by implementing systematic cross-checking between emergency physicians. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized crossover trial includes a random sample of 14 adult patients (age ≥18 years) per day during two 10-day period in 6 EDs (n = 1680 patients) in France. Interventions: Systematic cross-checking between emergency physicians, 3 times a day, which included a brief presentation of one physician's case to another, followed by the second physician's feedback to the first. Main Outcomes and Measures: Medical error in the ED, defined as an adverse event (either a near miss or a serious adverse event). The primary end point was identified using a 2-level error detection surveillance system, blinded to the strategy allocation. Results: Among the 1680 included patients (mean [SD] age, 57.5 [21.7] years), 144 (8.6%) had an adverse event. There were 54 adverse events among 840 patients (6.4%) in the cross-check group compared with 90 adverse events among 840 patients (10.7%) in the standard care group (relative risk reduction [RRR], 40% [95% CI, 12% to 59%]; absolute risk reduction [ARR], 4.3%; number needed to treat [NNT], 24). There was also a significant reduction rate of near misses (RRR, 47% [95% CI, 15% to 67%]; ARR, 2.7%; NNT, 37) but not of the rate of preventable serious adverse events (RRR, 29% [95% CI, -18% to 57%]; ARR, 1.2%; NNT, 83). Conclusions and Relevance: The implementation of systematic cross-checking between emergency physicians was associated with a significant reduction in adverse events, mainly driven by a reduction in near misses. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02356926.


Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/normas , Errores Médicos/prevención & control , Adulto , Anciano , Estudios Cruzados , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Errores Médicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Seguridad del Paciente
6.
PLoS One ; 10(4): e0122405, 2015.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25849778

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of S100-B protein and copeptin, in addition to clinical variables, in predicting outcomes of patients attending the emergency department (ED) following a seizure. METHODS: We prospectively included adult patients presented with an acute seizure, in four EDs in France and the United Kingdom. Participants were followed up for 28 days. The primary endpoint was a composite of seizure recurrence, all-cause mortality, hospitalization or rehospitalisation, or return visit in the ED within seven days. RESULTS: Among the 389 participants included in the analysis, 156 (40%) experienced the primary endpoint within seven days and 195 (54%) at 28 days. Mean levels of both S100-B (0.11 µg/l [95% CI 0.07-0.20] vs 0.09 µg/l [0.07-0.14]) and copeptin (23 pmol/l [9-104] vs 17 pmol/l [8-43]) were higher in participants meeting the primary endpoint. However, both biomarkers were poorly predictive of the primary outcome with a respective area under the receiving operator characteristic curve of 0.57 [0.51-0.64] and 0.59 [0.54-0.64]. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified higher age (odds ratio [OR] 1.3 per decade [1.1-1.5]), provoked seizure (OR 4.93 [2.5-9.8]), complex partial seizure (OR 4.09 [1.8-9.1]) and first seizure (OR 1.83 [1.1-3.0]) as independent predictors of the primary outcome. A second regression analysis including the biomarkers showed no additional predictive benefit (S100-B OR 3.89 [0.80-18.9] copeptin OR 1 [1.00-1.00]). CONCLUSION: The plasma biomarkers S100-B and copeptin did not improve prediction of poor outcome following seizure. Higher age, a first seizure, a provoked seizure and a partial complex seizure are independently associated with adverse outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Glicopéptidos/sangre , Subunidad beta de la Proteína de Unión al Calcio S100/sangre , Convulsiones/sangre , Convulsiones/diagnóstico , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Determinación de Punto Final , Femenino , Hospitalización , Humanos , Internacionalidad , Masculino , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Pronóstico , Recurrencia , Convulsiones/mortalidad , Convulsiones/terapia
7.
CJEM ; 17(1): 67-73, 2015 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25781386

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Unenhanced computed tomography (CT) has become a standard imaging technique for uncomplicated renal colic in many countries. The appropriate timing of CT imaging has not been established, and guidelines recommend that this imaging be performed between 1 and 7 days of presentation. The primary objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of alternative diagnosis identified with low-dose unenhanced CT in the emergency department (ED) in patients with suspected uncomplicated renal colic. METHODS: This prospective single-centre study was carried out in a large university hospital ED. Over a 6-month period, all patients with clinically diagnosed renal colic and a plan to be discharged underwent low-dose unenhanced CT in the ED. Pregnant women, women of childbearing age not willing to have a pregnancy test, and patients who had already undergone diagnostic imaging were excluded. The primary outcome was the number and nature of the alternative diagnosis. Univariate analyses were performed to assess factors associated with the primary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 178 patients were screened, and 155 underwent CT in the ED. The mean age was 42.2 years; 69% were male. The diagnosis of uncomplicated renal colic was confirmed in 118 participants (76%); 27 (17%) had an inconclusive CT scan. Overall, 10 patients (6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3-10) had an alternative diagnosis, 5 of whom were subsequently hospitalized. CONCLUSION: Low-dose unenhanced CT in the ED detects alternative diagnoses in 6% (95% CI 3-10) of patients with suspected uncomplicated renal colic, half of whom are subsequently hospitalized. Our prospective findings, which were similar to those reported in retrospective studies, are a potential argument for a systematic approach to ED imaging in suspected renal colic. Future research involving intervention and control groups would be helpful.


Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Cólico Renal/diagnóstico por imagen , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos , Adulto , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados
9.
BMC Med Educ ; 14: 103, 2014 May 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24885005

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Oral presentations of clinical cases by medical students during medical rounds in hospital wards are a source of anxiety and little is known about how this anxiety can be alleviated. The objective of this study was to investigate whether video-based feedback of public oral presentations can reduce anxiety in 4th year medical students. METHODS: Multicentre randomized study conducted in six intensive care units (ICU) and emergency departments (ED) in France over a 9-month period in 2012. One hundred and forty two 4th year medical students were randomized to two groups: intervention and control. Students in the intervention group were recorded while making an oral presentation of a patient during morning ward rounds, followed by video-based feedback. Students in the control group conducted presented classical oral presentations without being filmed and with no formal feedback. Anxiety levels during a public oral presentation were assessed using the Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S). The primary outcome was the difference in STAI-S scores between groups at the beginning and at the end of a 3-month ICU or ED internship. RESULTS: Seventy four students were randomized to the 'video-based feedback' group and 68 were randomized to the control group. In both groups, STAI-S scores were significantly lower after 3 months of internship. However, the reduction in STAI-S scores was significantly greater in the "video-based feedback" group than in controls (-9.2 ± 9.3 vs. -4.6 ± 8.2, p = 0.024. Compared to the control group, significantly fewer students with high-level anxiety were observed in the "video-based feedback" group after 3 months of internship (68 vs. 28%, p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to "usual practice", video-assisted oral feedback reduced anxiety and significantly decreased the proportion of students experiencing severe anxiety.


Asunto(s)
Ansiedad/prevención & control , Retroalimentación , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Estudiantes de Medicina/psicología , Ansiedad/etiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Grabación en Video , Adulto Joven
10.
J Emerg Med ; 45(2): 157-62, 2013 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23433610

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The Emergency Department (ED) is an environment at risk for medical errors. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine the factors associated with the adverse events resulting from medical errors in the ED among patients who were admitted. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study. For a 1-month period, we included all ED patients who were subsequently admitted to the medical ward. Detection of medical errors was made by the admitting physician and then validated by two experts who reviewed all available data and medical charts pertaining to the patient's hospital stay, including the first review from the ward physician. Related adverse events resulting from medical errors were then classified by type and severity. Adverse events were defined as medical errors that needed an intervention or caused harm to the patient. Univariate analysis examined relationships between characteristics of both patients and physicians and the risk of adverse events. RESULTS: From 197 analyzed patients, 130 errors were detected, of these, 34 were categorized as adverse events among 19 patients (10%). Seventy-six percent of these were categorized as proficiency errors. The only factors associated with a lower risk of adverse events were the transition of care involving a handoff within the ED (0% vs. 19%; p = 0.03) and the involvement of a resident (junior doctor) in addition to the senior physician (37% vs. 67%; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the involvement of more than one physician was associated with a lower risk of adverse events.


Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Errores Médicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Admisión y Programación de Personal/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Francia , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Factores de Riesgo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...