Search

Delayed admission to the ICU is reported to be associated with worse outcomes in cancer patients.The main objective of this study was to compare the 180-day survival of cancer patients whether they were directly admitted to the ICU from the emergency department (ED) or secondarily from the wards after the ED visit.This was a retrospective observational study including all adult cancer patients that visited the ED in 2018 and that were admitted to the ICU at some point within 7 days from the ED visit.Delayed ICU admission.Survival at day 180 was plotted using Kaplan-Meier curves, and hazard ratio (HR) from Cox proportional-hazard models was used to quantify the association between admission modality (directly from the ED or later from wards) and survival at day 180, after adjustment to baseline characteristics.During the study period, 4560 patients were admitted to the hospital following an ED visit, among whom 136 (3%) patients had cancer and were admitted to the ICU, either directly from the ED in 101 (74%) cases or secondarily from the wards in 35 (26%) cases. Patients admitted to the ICU from the ED had a better 180-day survival than those admitted secondarily from wards (log-rank P = 0.006). After adjustment to disease status (remission or uncontrolled malignancy), survival at day 180 was significantly improved in the case of admission to the ICU directly from the ED with an adjusted HR of 0.50 (95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.95), P = 0.03.In ED patients with cancer, a direct admission to the ICU was associated with better 180-day survival compared with patients with a delayed ICU admission secondary from the wards. However, several confounders were not taken into account, which limits the validity of this result.

Study objective We seek to describe the medical history and clinical findings of patients attending the emergency department (ED) with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and estimate the diagnostic accuracy of patients' characteristics for predicting COVID-19. Methods We prospectively enrolled all patients tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction in our ED from March 9, 2020, to April 4, 2020. We abstracted medical history, physical examination findings, and the clinical probability of COVID-19 (low, moderate, and high) rated by emergency physicians, depending on their clinical judgment. We assessed diagnostic accuracy of these characteristics for COVID-19 by calculating positive and negative likelihood ratios. Results We included 391 patients, of whom 225 had positive test results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction result was more likely to be negative when the emergency physician thought that clinical probability was low, and more likely to be positive when he or she thought that it was high. Patient-reported anosmia and the presence of bilateral B lines on lung ultrasonography had the highest positive likelihood ratio for the diagnosis of COVID-19 (7.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.36 to 24.36; and 7.09, 95% CI 2.77 to 18.12, respectively). The absence of a high clinical probability determined by the emergency physician and the absence of bilateral B lines on lung ultrasonography had the lowest negative likelihood ratio for the diagnosis of COVID-19 (0.33, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.43; and 0.26, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.45, respectively). Conclusion Anosmia, emergency physician estimate of high clinical probability, and bilateral B lines on lung ultrasonography increased the likelihood of identifying COVID-19 in patients presenting to the ED.

International audience; INTRODUCTION:The benefit of reducing the time of antibiotic initiation in the emergency department (ED) for neutropenic patients is controversial and the research on the impact of antibiotic adherence to international guidelines in the ED is scarce. We aimed to investigate the effect of antibiotic timing and appropriateness on outcomes in patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) and to assess the performance of the MASCC risk-index to risk-stratify such patients in the ED.METHODS:We prospectively identified patients with FN who presented to our ED and assessed their Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) risk-index. The time to parenteral antibiotic initiation and the appropriateness of the antibiotic regimen according to international guidelines were retrospectively abstracted. The performance of the MASCC risk-index in predicting the absence of complication was assessed with sensitivity, specificity and the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). We investigated the effect of the time to antibiotic initiation and the appropriateness of the antibiotic regimen on the outcome (ICU admission or death) by logistic regression analyses.RESULTS:We included 249 patients. Median age was 60 years and 67.9% had hematological malignancies, 26 (10.4%) were admitted to the ICU and 23 (9.8%) died during hospital stay. Among the 173 patients at low risk according to the MASCC risk-index, 56 (32.4%) presented at least one complication including 11 deaths. The MASCC risk-index had a sensitivity and a specificity of 0.78% and 0.43%, respectively, in predicting the absence of complication and the AUC was 0.67. The time to antibiotic initiation in the ED was not associated with the outcome after adjusting for performance status and shock-index. Conversely, an inadequate ED antibiotic regimen was associated with higher ICU admission or death during hospital stay (OR = 3.50; 95% CI = 1.49 to 8.28).CONCLUSION:An inadequate ED antibiotic regimen in patients with FN was significantly associated with higher ICU admission or death during hospital stay.

Objective: We sought to describe the medical history and clinical findings of patients attending the ED with suspected COVID-19 and estimate the diagnostic accuracy of patients’ characteristics for predicting COVID-19. Methods: We prospectively enrolled all patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR in our ED from March 9, 2020 to April 4, 2020. We abstracted medical history, physical examination findings, and the clinical probability of COVID-19 (“low”, “moderate”, “high”) rated by emergency physicians depending on their clinical judgment. We assessed diagnostic accuracy of these characteristics for COVID-19 by calculating positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+/LR-). Results: We included 391 patients of whom 225 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. RT-PCR was more likely to be negative when the emergency physician thought that clinical probability was low, and more likely to be positive when she or he thought that clinical probability was high. Patient-reported anosmia and the presence of bilateral B-lines on lung ultrasound had the highest LR+ for the diagnosis of COVID-19 (7.58; 95% CI 2.36–24.36 and 7.09; 95% CI 2.77–18.12 respectively). The absence of a high clinical probability determined by the emergency physician and the absence of bilateral B-lines on lung ultrasound had the lowest LR- for the diagnosis of COVID-19 (0.33; 95% CI 0.25–0.43 and 0.26; 95% CI 0.15–0.45 respectively). Conclusions: Anosmia, emergency physician estimate of high clinical probability and bilateral B-lines on lung ultrasound increased the likelihood of identifying COVID-19 in patients presenting to the ED.

Central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) is easily observable in oncology patients with long-term central venous catheters (CVC), and has been studied as a prognostic factor in patients with sepsis. We sought to investigate the association between ScvO2 and early complications in cancer patients presenting to the ED. We prospectively enrolled adult cancer patients with pre-existing CVC who presented to the ED. ScvO2 was measured on their CVC. The outcome was admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) or mortality by day 7. ScvO2 was first studied as a continuous variable (%) with a ROC analysis and as a categorical variable (cut-off at 1 and a performance status > 2 (OR 4.76; 95% CI 1.81–12.52 and OR 6.23, 95% CI 2.40–16.17, respectively). This study does not support the use of ScvO2 to risk stratify cancer patients presenting to the ED.

Background Ultrasound (US) has been a regular practice in emergency departments for several decades. Thus, train our students to US is of prime interest. Because US image acquisition ability can be very different from a patient to another (depending on image quality), it seems relevant to adapt US learning curves (LCs) to patient image quality using tools based on cumulative summation (CUSUM) as the risk-adjusted LC CUSUM (RLC). Objectives The aim of this study was to monitor LC of medical students for the acquisition of abdominal emergency US views and to adapt these curves to patient image quality using RLC. Methods We asked medical students to perform abdominal US examinations with the acquisition of 11 views of interest on emergency patients after a learning session. Emergency physicians reviewed the student examinations for validation. LCs were plotted and the student was said proficient for a specific view if his LC reached a predetermined limit fixed by simulation. Results Seven students with no previous experience in US were enrolled. They performed 19 to 50 examinations of 11 views each. They achieve proficiency for a median of 9 (6-10) views. Aorta and right pleura views were validated by seven students; inferior vena cava, right kidney, and bladder by six; gallbladder and left kidney by five; portal veins and portal hilum by four; and subxyphoid and left pleura by three. The number of US examinations required to reach proficiency ranged from five to 41 depending on the student and on the type of view. LC showed that students reached proficiency with different learning speeds. Conclusions This study suggests that, when monitoring LCs for abdominal emergency US, there is some heterogeneity in the learning process depending on the student skills and the type of view. Therefore, rules based on a predetermined number of examinations to reach proficiency are not satisfactory.

Aims The aim of this study was to describe the tolerability of high-dose baclofen taken by patients with alcohol disorders during their first year of treatment. Methods The medical records of all patients prescribed baclofen by one general practitioner were examined and all patients who could be contacted were retrospectively interviewed about adverse effects. Results Of the 146 eligible patients, 116 (79%) could be interviewed. Ninety (78%) reported at least one adverse effect (mean number per patient: 2.8 ± 2.7). The mean dosage of baclofen at the onset of the first adverse effect was 83 ± 57 mg/day. The most frequent group of adverse effects involved disruption of the wake–sleep cycle and affected 73 patients (63%). Persistent adverse effects occurred in 62 patients (53%). Eight patients (7%) had adverse effects that led them to stop taking baclofen. Their dosages were