Epidemiological data on anaphylaxis in French emergency departments

BACKGROUND: Although anaphylaxis has been considered a priority public health issue in the world allergy community, epidemiological data on morbidity and mortality remain suboptimal. We performed the first multicenter epidemiological study in French emergency departments (EDs). The study covered 7 EDs over a period of 1 year. The objectives were to identify areas that are amenable to change and to support ongoing national and international efforts for better diagnosis, management, and prevention of anaphylaxis. METHODS: Ours was a descriptive study based on data routinely reported to French institutional administrative databases from 7 French public health institutions in the Lorraine region between January and December 2015. Data were collected based on the anaphylaxis-related codes of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10, and cases were clinically validated as anaphylaxis. RESULTS: Of the 202 079 admissions to the EDs, 4817 had anaphylaxis-related codes; of these, 323 were clinically validated as anaphylaxis. Although 45.8% were severe, adrenaline was prescribed in only 32.4% of cases. Of the 323 cases, 57.9% were subsequently referred for an allergy work-up or evaluation (after or during hospitalization), and 17.3% were prescribed autoinjectable epinephrine. CONCLUSION: Our results highlight an urgent need for improved public health initiatives with respect to recognition and treatment of anaphylaxis. We flag key problems that should be managed in the coming years through implementation of national and international actions

ANTECEDENTES: La anafilaxia es un problema prioritario de salud pública en la comunidad mundial alergológica. Sin embargo, los datos epidemiológicos disponibles de morbilidad y mortalidad son mejorables. Presentamos el primer estudio epidemiológico multicéntrico, realizado en siete departamentos de urgencias franceses durante un año, que tuvo como objetivo identificar las cuestiones relevantes para lograr cambios en futuras estrategias, nacionales e internacionales, que deriven en un mejor diagnóstico, tratamiento y prevención de la anafilaxia. MÉTODOS: Se trata de un estudio descriptivo que utilizó la información proveniente de las bases de datos de siete instituciones francesas de salud pública, de la región de Lorena, desde enero hasta diciembre de 2015. Se buscaron nomenclatura y códigos relacionados con la anafilaxia, de la Clasificación Internacional de Enfermedades (CIE-10), y los pacientes fueron validados clínicamente como casos de anafilaxia. RESULTADOS: De los 202.079 ingresos en urgencias, 4.817 tenían códigos relacionados con la anafilaxia CIE-10, 323 de los cuales se validaron clínicamente con el diagnóstico de anafilaxia. Aunque el 45,8% presentó criterios de gravedad, la adrenalina se prescribió solo en el 32,4% de estos casos. En total, 323 casos, el 57,9%, se remitieron posteriormente para un estudio o evaluación alergológica (después o durante la hospitalización) y el 17,3% recibió una receta de adrenalina autoinyectable . CONCLUSIÓN: Según los resultados de este estudio, existe una necesidad urgente e imperiosa de mejorar los planes de salud pública respecto al reconocimiento y tratamiento de la anafilaxia. Los problemas clave detectados en este trabajo, señalan el camino de la toma de decisiones e implementación de acciones de mejora, nacionales e internacionales, para una mejor atención de los pacientes con anafilaxia

Contribution of the ethics committee of the French society of intensive care medicine to a scenario for the implementation of organ donation after Maastricht III-type cardiac death in France.

French law allows organ donation after death due to cardiocirculatory arrest. In the Maastricht classification, type III non-heart-beating donors are those who experience cardiocirculatory arrest after the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments. French authorities in charge of regulating organ donation (Agence de la Biomédecine, ABM) are considering organ collection from Maastricht type III donors. We describe a scenario for Maastricht type III organ donation that fully complies with the ethical norms governing care to dying patients. That organ donation may occur after death should have no impact on the care given to the patient and family. The dead-donor rule must be followed scrupulously: the organ retrieval procedure must neither cause nor hasten death. The decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatments, withdrawal modalities, and care provided to the patient and family must adhere strictly to the requirements set forth in patient-rights legislation (the 2005 Léonetti law in France) and should not be influenced in any way by the possibility of organ donation. A major ethical issue regarding the family is how best to transition from discussing treatment-withdrawal decisions to discussing possible organ retrieval for donation should the patient die rapidly after treatment withdrawal. Close cooperation between the healthcare team and the organ retrieval team is crucial to minimize the distress of family members during this transition. Modalities for implementing Maastricht type III organ donation are discussed here, including the best location for withdrawing life-sustaining treatments (operating room or intensive care unit).

[Severe stroke: prognosis, intensive care admission and withhold and withdrawal treatment decisions]. / AVC graves : pronostic, critères d'admission en réanimation et décisions de limitations et arrêt de traitements.

INTRODUCTION: Stroke can produce irreversible brain damage of massive proportion leading to severe disability and poor quality of life. Resuscitation and mechanical ventilation of these patients remain controversial because of the high mortality and severe disability involved. STATE OF ART: When prognosis is very poor, do-not-resuscitate orders (DNR orders) and withhold or withdrawal of treatment may be discussed. Studies have shown that DNR orders are relatively frequent in acute stroke: up to 30% of all patients, and 50% of which are given upon admission. DNR orders are closely associated with severity of the neurological deficit and age. Precise estimates of withhold and withdrawal of treatment are not available, but terminal extubations in severe stroke could contribute to 40,000 to 60,000 acute stage deaths per year. Little is known about the decision making process and palliative care in these situations. The neurological prognosis is the main explicit criterion. However, evaluation of neurological outcome is highly uncertain and difficult, and does not always reflect quality of life. Several studies have raised the issue of this disability paradox. Thus, physician estimation of prognosis has a profound impact on decisions for life sustaining therapies, and may lead to self-fulfilling prophecies in case of false appreciation of published evidence. Other criteria could influence the withhold and withdrawal of treatment decision, such as social conditions and patient values. PERSPECTIVES AND CONCLUSION: Decisions for life-sustaining therapies in severe stroke are always difficult and often based on subjective and uncertain criteria. We have to improve prognosis estimation and our understanding of patient preferences to promote patient-centered care. An ethical approach may guide these complex decisions.