Search

The COVID‐19 pandemic presented numerous challenges to acute malnutrition screening and treatment. To enable continued case identification and service delivery while minimising transmission risks, many organisations and governments implemented adaptations to community‐based management of acute malnutrition (CMAM) programmes for children under 5. These included: Family mid‐upper arm circumference (MUAC); modified admission and discharge criteria; modified dosage of therapeutic foods; and reduced frequency of follow‐up visits. This paper presents qualitative findings from a larger mixed methods study to document practitioners' operational experiences and lessons learned from these adaptations. Findings reflect insights from 37 interviews representing 15 organisations in 17 countries, conducted between July 2020 and January 2021. Overall, interviewees indicated that adaptations were mostly well‐accepted by staff, caregivers and communities. Family MUAC filled screening gaps linked to COVID‐19 disruptions; however, challenges included long‐term accuracy of caregiver measurements; implementing an intervention that could increase demand for inconsistent services; and limited guidance to monitor programme quality and impact. Modified admission and discharge criteria and modified dosage streamlined logistics and implementation with positive impacts on staff workload and caregiver understanding of the programme. Reduced frequency of visits enabled social distancing by minimising crowding at facilities and lessened caregivers' need to travel. Concerns remained about how adaptations impacted children's identification for and progress through treatment and programme outcomes. Most respondents anticipated reverting to standard protocols once transmission risks were mitigated. Further evidence, including multi‐year programmatic data analysis and rigorous research, is needed in diverse contexts to understand adaptations' impacts, including how to ensure equity and mitigate unintended consequences. Key messages: COVID‐19 CMAM programme adaptations enabled service continuity despite pandemic‐related challenges. Further evidence is needed on long‐term impacts.Family MUAC was well‐accepted and addressed screening gaps from COVID‐19 disruptions. Challenges included sustaining caregiver measurement accuracy; handling inaccurate self‐referrals to encourage health‐seeking behaviours; and limited programme design and monitoring guidance and tools.Modified admission criteria and therapeutic food dosage reduced contact between staff and children and streamlined logistics and implementation. Concerns remained about effects on programme admissions and outcomes.Reduced frequency of follow‐up visits successfully reduced facility crowding and need for caregiver travel. However, infrequent monitoring of childrenmay miss deterioration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explored post–pulmonary embolism (post‐PE) follow‐up at a large Australian regional city hospital health service. Over a 12‐month period, we identified 195 (49% male) patients with a median age of 62 years. Post‐PE follow‐up was not organised for 23 patients and delayed for seven patients. Post‐PE complication occurred in 21% of all patients reviewed in the clinic after discharge. Follow‐up imaging was arranged in 28% of patients. To deliver high‐quality care, we recommend implementing a local post‐PE follow‐up pathway, which balances individual physician preference with available resources and expert recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objective was to determine the impact of the HEART Pathway on health care utilization and safety outcomes at 1 year in patients with acute chest pain. Methods: Adult emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain (N = 282) were randomized to the HEART Pathway or usual care. In the HEART Pathway arm, ED providers used the HEART score and troponin measures (0 and 3 hours) to risk stratify patients. Usual care was based on American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE—cardiac death, myocardial infarction [MI], or coronary revascularization), objective testing (stress testing or coronary angiography), and cardiac hospitalizations and ED visits were assessed at 1 year. Randomization arm outcomes were compared using Fisher's exact tests. Results: A total of 282 patients were enrolled, with 141 randomized to each arm. MACE at 1 year occurred in 10.6% (30/282): 9.9% in the HEART Pathway arm (14/141; 10 MIs, four revascularizations without MI) versus 11.3% in usual care (16/141; one cardiac death, 13 MIs, two revascularizations without MI; p = 0.85). Among low‐risk HEART Pathway patients, 0% (0/66) had MACE, with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% (95% confidence interval = 93%–100%). Objective testing through 1 year occurred in 63.1% (89/141) of HEART Pathway patients compared to 71.6% (101/141) in usual care (p = 0.16). Nonindex cardiac‐related hospitalizations and ED visits occurred in 14.9% (21/141) and 21.3% (30/141) of patients in the HEART Pathway versus 10.6% (15/141) and 16.3% (23/141) in usual care (p = 0.37, p = 0.36). Conclusions: The HEART Pathway had a 100% NPV for 1‐year safety outcomes (MACE) without increasing downstream hospitalizations or ED visits. Reduction in 1‐year objective testing was not significant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: A significant proportion of low‐acuity emergency department (ED) visits are by patients under 18 years of age. Results from prior interventions designed to reduce low‐acuity pediatric ED use have been mixed or poorly sustained, perhaps because they were not informed by patient and caretakers’ perspectives. The objective of this study was to explore caretaker decision‐making processes, values, and priorities when deciding to seek care. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews of caretakers in both emergency and primary care settings, incorporating stimulated recall methodology. We also explored receptiveness to two care delivery innovations: use of community health workers (CHWs) and video teleconferencing. Results: Interviews of 57 caretakers identified multiple barriers to accessing primary care for their children's acute illness, including transportation, work constraints, and childcare. Frequent ED users lacked reliable social supports to overcome barriers. Fear of unforeseen health outcomes and a lack of trust in unfamiliar providers also influenced decision‐making, rather than lack of general knowledge about minor illness. Receptiveness to CHWs was mixed, reflecting concerns for privacy and level of expertise. The option of video teleconferencing for low‐acuity care was well received by caretakers. Conclusions: Caretakers who used the ED frequently had limited social support and reported difficulty accessing care when compared to other caretakers. Fear also motivated care seeking and a desire for immediate medical care. Teleconferencing for low‐acuity visits may be a useful health care delivery tool to reduce access barriers and provide rapid reassurance without engaging the ED. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adult critically ill patients often suffer from acute circulatory failure, necessitating use of vasopressor therapy. The aim of the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (SSAI) task force for Acute Circulatory Failure was to present clinically relevant, evidence-based treatment recommendations on this topic.Methods: This guideline was developed according to standards for trustworthy guidelines, including a systematic review of the literature and use of the GRADE methodology for assessment of the quality of evidence and for moving from evidence to recommendations. We assessed the following subpopulations of patients with acute circulatory failure: 1) shock in general, 2) septic shock, 3) cardiogenic shock, 4) hypovolemic shock and 5) other types of shock, including vasodilatory shock. We assessed patient-important outcome measures, including mortality, serious adverse reactions and quality-of-life.Results: For patients with shock in general and those with septic shock, we recommend using norepinephrine rather than dopamine, and we suggest using norepinephrine rather than epinephrine, vasopressin analogues, and phenylephrine. For patients with cardiogenic shock and those with hypovolemic shock, we suggest using norepinephrine rather than dopamine, and we provide no recommendations/suggestions of norepinephrine vs. epinephrine, vasopressin analogues, and phenylephrine. For patients with other types of shock, including vasodilatory shock, we suggest using norepinephrine rather than dopamine, epinephrine, vasopressin analogues, and phenylephrine.Conclusions: We recommend using norepinephrine rather than other vasopressors as first-line treatment for the majority of adult critically ill patients with acute circulatory failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Academic Emergency Medicine is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Academic Emergency Medicine is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Academic Emergency Medicine is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2011; 18:S87-S91 © 2011 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Abstract Pain is the most common reason people visit emergency departments (EDs); this implies that emergency physicians (EPs) should be experts in managing acute painful conditions. The current trend in the literature, however, demonstrates that EPs possess inadequate knowledge and lack formal training in acute pain management. The purpose of this article is to create a formal educational curriculum that would assist emergency medicine (EM) residents in proper assessment and treatment of acute pain, as well as in providing a solid theoretical and practical knowledge base for managing acute pain in the ED. The authors propose a series of lectures, case-oriented study groups, practical small group sessions, and class-specific didactics with the goal of enhancing the theoretical and practical knowledge of acute pain management in the ED. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic Emergency Medicine 2011; 18:1072-1080 © 2011 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Abstract The management of acutely ill and injured patients is an essential component of medical student education, yet the formal integration of emergency medicine (EM) into the medical school curriculum has progressed slowly since the inception of the specialty. Medical student interest and the number of resident positions in the National Resident Matching Program are higher than any time in the past, yet students often find access to EM faculty and clinical experience limited to a fourth-year rotation. Incorporating EM into all years of the undergraduate medical student curriculum can offer unique educational experiences and enhance exposure to the necessary and recommended knowledge and skills students must attain prior to graduation. Academic emergency physicians (EPs) should advocate our specialty's importance in their medical school curricula using a proactive approach and actively involve themselves in medical student education at all stages of training. The goals of this article are to describe several approaches for EM faculty to expand medical student exposure to the specialty and enhance student experiences in the core principles of EM throughout the undergraduate medical curriculum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Dysphagia is a common complication for emergency department (ED) patients presenting with acute stroke (AS). Recent stroke recommendations have suggested that EDs screen patients with AS for dysphagia prior to administering anything by mouth. This study sought to develop and test a novel ED dysphagia screen to be used in this population. Methods: A multidisciplinary approach was used to create a novel dysphagia screen performed by ED nurses during the initial evaluation of patients with suspected AS. The screen consists of five questions of which any single affirmative answer signified possible dysphagia. A prospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the performance of this screen in detecting dysphagia after AS. Patients were followed for 30 days, and true dysphagia was determined if the patient had an abnormal modified barium swallow study (MBS), had placement of a feeding tube, or was placed on a dysphagia diet after assessment by a speech pathologist. The authors performed a substudy to determine agreement using a blinded kappa (j) assessment with a convenience sample of 40 patients. Results: Over a 21-month period, 283 patients met eligibility for analysis. The rate of cerebral infarction in this cohort was 245 (87%). The rates for true dysphagia, pneumonia, and death were 91 (32%), 26 (9%), and 18 (6%), respectively. The dysphagia screen had a sensitivity of 95% (95% confidence [CI] = 88% to 98%) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.1 (95% CI = 0.04 to 0.2). The inter-rater agreement assessed by kappa was substantial (0.69, 95% CI = 0.55 to 0.83). Conclusions: These data suggest that this dysphagia screen may be a valuable tool for detecting dysphagia in ED patients presenting with AS. The simple screen can be performed by nursing personnel and appears to perform well with good agreement. Given the overall rate of dysphagia in one-third of AS patients, the use of an ED dysphagia screen appears warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]