Safety issues with an inter-hospital transport of a patient with a Berlin Heart Excor biventircular assist device.

BACKGROUND: Interhospital transfers of pediatric patients on the Berlin Heart Excor have been published on an occasional basis. METHODS: Nowadays medicine evolves away from just feasibility towards quality and safety issues. Management tools like risk analysis have found their way into clinical practice. RESULTS: Exemplary, we present a case of a 20 months old boy on a Berlin Heart BiVAD Excor who underwent a 224 km ground transport. After a systematic review of the published literature, we describe our safety management with the aim was to provide highest quality of care for the transport. CONCLUSION: Besides a risk analysis, we also describe our training and simulation protocol.

Factors that trigger emergency physicians to contact a poison centre: findings from a Swiss study.

OBJECTIVE: Poison centres offer rapid and comprehensive support for emergency physicians managing poisoned patients. This study investigates institutional, case-specific and poisoning-specific factors which influence the decision of emergency physicians to contact a poison centre. METHODS: Retrospective, consecutive review of all poisoning-related admissions to the emergency departments (EDs) of a primary care hospital and a university hospital-based tertiary referral centre during 2007. Corresponding poison centre consultations were extracted from the poison centre database. Data were matched and analysed by logistic regression and generalised linear mixed models. RESULTS: 545 poisonings were treated in the participating EDs (350 (64.2%) in the tertiary care centre, 195 (35.8%) in the primary care hospital). The poison centre was consulted in 62 (11.4%) cases (38 (61.3%) by the tertiary care centre and 24 (38.7%) by the primary care hospital). Factors significantly associated with poison centre consultation included gender (female vs male) (OR 2.99; 95% CI 1.69 to 5.29; p<0.001), number of ingested substances (>1 vs 1) (OR 2.84; 95% CI 1.65 to 4.9; p<0.001) and situation (accidental vs intentional) (OR 2.76; 95% CI 1.05 to 7.25; p=0.039). In contrast, age, medical history and hospital size did not influence poison centre consultation. Poison centre consultation was significantly higher during the week, and significantly less during night shifts. The poison centre was consulted significantly more when patients were admitted to intensive care units (OR 5.81; 95% CI 3.25 to 10.37; p<0.001). Asymptomatic and severe versus mild cases were associated with more frequent consultation (OR 4.48; 95% CI 1.78 to 11.26; p=0.001 and OR 2.76; 95% CI 1.42 to 5.38; p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: We found low rates of poison centre consultation by emergency physicians. It appears that intensive care unit admission and other factors reflecting either complexity or uncertainty of the clinical situation are the strongest predictors for poison centre consultation. Hospital size did not influence referral behaviour.

Impact of social characteristics on the treatment of patients with ischaemic events and patent foramen ovale.

OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous closure of a patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a technically simple and safe procedure. PFO is a common finding present in up to one third of the population. Although several conditions such as stroke, migraine, and sleep apnoea have been associated with a PFO, as underlined by observational studies, no causal relationship has been documented so far. As this setting may potentially leave more space for the involved physicians for the choice of treatment, we hypothesized that social characteristics of the patient with a PFO might play a role. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the data of 153 patients with a cerebrovascular and/or peripheral ischaemic event with the diagnosis of a PFO as documented in echocardiography from 2000 until 2005 at the University Hospital in Zurich, Switzerland. RESULTS: Forty-four patients (= 23%) underwent catheter-based PFO closure. There was no significant difference with respect to age (<40 years: P = 0.094, ns; 40-59 years: P = 0.923, ns; > or =60 years: P= 0.234, ns), gender (P = 0.356, ns) and insurance status (<40 years: P= 0.15, ns; 40-59 years: P= 0.37, ns; 60 years: P = 0.26, ns) between those who underwent percutaneous PFO closure and those who did not. CONCLUSION: We conclude from this single-centre experience that social characteristics of patients only have a marginal impact on the indication of percutaneous closure of a PFO, if at all.

Nasal nalbuphine analgesia in prehospital trauma managed by first-responder personnel on ski slopes in Switzerland: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pain is one of the major symptoms complained about by patients in the prehospital setting, especially in the case of trauma. When there is mountainous topography, as in Switzerland, there may be a time delay between injury and arrival of professional rescuers, in particular on ski slopes. Administration of a safe opioid by first responders may improve overall treatment. We therefore assessed administration of nasal nalbuphine as an analgesic treatment for trauma patients in Switzerland. METHODS: This observational cohort study examined 267 patients who were treated with nasal nalbuphine by first responders in six ski resorts in Switzerland. All first responders were instructed to begin treatment by assessing the feasibility of using nalbuphine to treat pain in the patient. A treatment algorithm was developed and distributed to assure that nalbuphine was only administered following a strict protocol. Data regarding pain scores and pain reduction after administration of nalbuphine were collected on-site. Refills were handed out to the first responders with the return of each completed questionnaire. RESULTS: Nalbuphine provided effective pain relief, with the median level of pain on the numeric rating scale for pain reduced by 3 units on average, from 8 points (p < 0.001). The multivariate regression model showed that pain reduction was more pronounced in patients with higher initial pain levels. Nalbuphine was more effective in adolsecents than in patients aged 20 to 60 years (p = 0.006). No major side effects were observed. CONCLUSION: Nasal administration of nalbuphine by first responders is a presumably safe and effective noninvasive pain management strategy for acutely injured patients in the prehospital setting. This may be an alternative, especially in the case of severe pain and prolonged time between arrival of the first responders and arrival of EMS/HEMS personnel on scene.