Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Malays J Med Sci ; 28(2): 72-83, 2021 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33958962

RESUMO

Background: Emergency departments (EDs) are frequently misused for non-emergency cases such as upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs). Flooding of these cases may contribute to inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. The aim of this study was to determine the patient factors associated with inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for URTIs in the EDs. Methods: This cross-sectional study involved patients over age 3 years old who presented with URTI to the green zone of the ED of a tertiary hospital on the east coast of Malaysia in 2018-2019. Convenient sampling was done. The patients were categorised into two groups according to their McIsaac scores: positive (≥ 2) or negative (< 2). Antibiotics given to the negative McIsaac group were considered inappropriate. Results: A total of 261 cases were included - 127 with positive and 134 with negative McIsaac scores. The most common symptoms were fever and cough. About 29% had inappropriate antibiotic prescribing with a high rate for amoxycillin. Duration of symptoms of one day or less (OR 18.5; 95% CI: 1.65, 207.10; P = 0.018), presence of chills (OR 4.36; 95% CI: 1.13, 16.88; P = 0.033) and diagnosis of acute tonsillitis (OR 5.26; 95% CI: 1.76, 15.72; P = 0.003) were significantly associated with inappropriate antibiotic prescription. Conclusion: Factors influencing inappropriate antibiotic prescribing should be pointed out to emergency doctors to reduce its incidence.

2.
West J Emerg Med ; 22(2): 196-203, 2021 Feb 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33856300

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Most experts recommend norepinephrine as the first-line agent in septic shock. Our objective was to determine the effectiveness and safety of norepinephrine in patients with septic shock. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Epistemonikos, as well as MEDLINE from 1966 till August 2019. Screening of full texts, evaluation for eligibility, and data extraction were done by four independent reviewers. We estimated risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) using a random-effects model with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The primary outcomes included the number of participants who achieved the target mean arterial pressure (MAP), time to achieve the target MAP, and number of participants with all-cause 28-day mortality. The secondary outcomes included the length of stay in the intensive care unit, length of hospital stay, incidence of arrhythmia and myocardial infarction, vasopressor-free days, and number of participants with all-cause 90-day mortality. RESULTS: We identified 11 randomized controlled trials with a total of 4,803 participants. There was no difference in the number of participants who achieved the target MAP between those patients receiving norepinephrine and other vasopressors (RR 1.44; 95% CI, 0.32 to 6.54; P = 0.640; I2 = 94%; two trials, 116 participants). There was no significant difference in time to achieve the target MAP (MD -0.05; 95%, CI, -0.32 to 0.21; P = 0.690; I2 = 26%; two trials, 1763 participants) and all-cause 28-day mortality (RR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.02; P = 0.160; I2 = 0%; seven trials, 4,139 participants). Regarding the secondary outcome, norepinephrine may significantly reduce the incidence of arrhythmia as compared to other vasopressors (RR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.97; P = 0.030; I2 = 64%; six trials, 3974 participants). There was no difference in the incidence of myocardial infarction (RR 1.28; 95% CI, 0.79 to 2.09), vasopressor-free day (RR 0.46; 95% CI, -1.82 to 2.74) and all-cause 90-day mortality (RR 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.21) between norepinephrine and vasopressors. CONCLUSION: In minimizing the occurrence of an arrhythmia, norepinephrine is superior to other vasopressors, making it safe to be used in septic shock. However, there was insufficient evidence concerning mortality and achievement of the target MAP outcomes.


Assuntos
Norepinefrina/uso terapêutico , Choque Séptico/tratamento farmacológico , Vasoconstritores/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Tempo de Internação , Choque Séptico/mortalidade
3.
BMC Emerg Med ; 20(1): 81, 2020 10 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33032544

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to elucidate the efficacy and side effects of ketofol in comparison to other anaesthetic agents during procedural sedation and analgesia. METHOD: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1996 to Feb 2019) and MEDLINE (1966 to Feb 2019) were searched, including the related randomised control trials and reviewed articles to find unpublished trials or trials not obtained via electronic searches. Inclusion criteria for the studies included comparing recovery time, recording clinician satisfaction, and assessing the adverse effects of ketofol. RESULTS: Eleven trials consisting of a total of 1274 patients met our criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. Five trials compared ketofol with a single agent, while six trials compared ketofol with combined agents. While comparing between ketofol and a single agent (either ketamine or propofol), ketofol showed significant effect on recovery time (MD: -9.88, 95% CI: - 14.30 to - 5.46; P = 0.0003; I2 = 92%). However, no significant difference was observed while comparing ketofol with combined agents (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: - 6.24 to 7.74; P < 0.001; I2 = 98%). During single-agent comparison, ketofol showed no significant differences in terms of clinician satisfaction (RR: 2.86, 95% CI: 0.64 to 12.69; P = 0.001; I2 = 90%), airway obstruction (RR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.35 to 11.48; P = 0.81; I2 = 0%), apnoea (RR: 0.9, 95% CI: 0.33 to 2.44; P = 0.88; I2 = 0%), desaturation (RR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.94; P = 0.28; I2 = 21%), nausea (RR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.91 to 1.41; P = 0.2; I2 = 38%), and vomiting (RR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.61; P = 0.18; I2 = 42%). During comparison with combined agents, ketofol was more effective in reducing hypotension (RR: 4.2, 95% CI: 0.2 to 0.85; P = 0.76; I2 = 0%), but no differences were observed in terms of bradycardia (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.14 to 03.63; P = 0.09; I2 = 53%), desaturation (RR: 1.9, 95% CI: 0.15 to 23.6; P = 0.11; I2 = 61%), and respiratory depression (RR: 1.98, 95% CI: 0.18 to 21.94; P = 0.12; I2 = 59%). CONCLUSION: There is low certainty of evidence that ketofol improves recovery time and moderate certainty of evidence that it reduces the frequency of hypotension. There was no significant difference in terms of other adverse effects when compared to other either single or combined agents. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019127278 .


Assuntos
Analgésicos/uso terapêutico , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/uso terapêutico , Ketamina/uso terapêutico , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Propofol/uso terapêutico , Criança , Sedação Consciente/métodos , Combinação de Medicamentos , Humanos
5.
J Immigr Minor Health ; 19(3): 774-777, 2017 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27160769

RESUMO

A neglected tropical disease, melioidosis is known to have variability in clinical presentations. Here, we described clinical features that should alert the physicians on the possibility of melioidosis. In this review of 86 cases from 2001 to 2011, the common presentations of melioidosis in the Emergency Department (ED), Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia were; male gender (79.1 %), in working age group (47.8 ± 15.2 year-old), worked in contact with soil (73.3 %), presented with fever (91.9 %), in rainy season (55.8 %), have underlying diabetes mellitus (79.1 %), have leukocytosis (67.4 %) and high blood glucose (62.8 %) during presentation. In 34.9 % of cases, the antimicrobials were initiated at the ED and only 10.5 % include antimelioid drugs. Thirty-one patients (36.0 %) died due to melioidosis and 51.6 % of this were within 48 h of admission. Despite high mortality rate, the clinical awareness on the possibility of melioidosis among emergency physicians is still low and need to be strengthened.


Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/estatística & dados numéricos , Melioidose/epidemiologia , Melioidose/fisiopatologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiologia , Fazendeiros/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Hiperglicemia/epidemiologia , Leucocitose/epidemiologia , Malásia/epidemiologia , Masculino , Melioidose/tratamento farmacológico , Melioidose/mortalidade , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estações do Ano , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...