Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Indications for intra-osseous (IO) infusion are increasing in adults requiring administration of fluids and medications during initial resuscitation. However, this route is rarely used nowadays due to a lack of knowlegde and training. We reviewed the current evidence for its use in adults requiring resuscitative procedures, the contraindications of the technique, and modalities for catheter implementation and skill acquisition. Methods A PubMed search for all articles published up to December 2015 was performed by using the terms “Intra-osseous” AND “Adult”. Additional articles were included by using the “related citations” feature of PubMed or checking references of selected articles. Editorials, comments and case reports were excluded. Abstracts of all the articles that the search yielded were independently screened for eligibility by two authors and included in the analysis after mutual consensus. In total, 84 full-text articles were reviewed and 49 of these were useful for answering the following question “when, how, and for which population should an IO infusion be used in adults” were selected to prepare independent drafts. Once this step had been completed, all authors met, reviewed the drafts together, resolved disagreements by consensus with all the authors, and decided on the final version. Results IO infusion should be implemented in all critical situations when peripheral venous access is not easily obtainable. Contraindications are few and complications are uncommon, most of the time bound to prolonged use. The IO infusion allows for blood sampling and administration of virtually all types of fluids and medications including vasopressors, with a bioavailability close to the intravenous route. Unfortunately, IO infusion remains underused in adults even though learning the technique is rapid and easy. Conclusions Indications for IO infusion use in adults requiring urgent parenteral access and having difficult intravenous access are increasing. Physicians working in emergency departments or intensive care units should learn the procedures for catheter insertion and maintenance, the contraindications of the technique, and the possibilities this access offers.

Prehospital care is a growing area in medicine, and emergency treatments are becoming more sophisticated as the potential to save lives grow. The fourth edition of this ABC has been thoroughly updated and includes new chapters on nuclear and biological emergencies. Each chapter gives concise and clear guidance and is accompanied by excellent photographs and diagrams. Edited and written by leading UK trauma authorities, this is a truly comprehensive and practical book for everyday use by emergency medicine staff, nurses, hospital doctors, paramedics, and ambulance services.

On Friday November 13th at 9:20 pm, three kamikaze bombs went off around the Stade de France a stadium in Saint-Denis just outside Paris, 4 different shootings took place and bombings in Paris and hundreds of people were held hostage in a theater. This multi-site terrorist attack was the first of this magnitude in France. Drawing the lessons of these attacks and those which occurred in other countries from a health perspective is essential to continuously adapt and improve the French response to possible future attacks. Several issues would need to be further explored: Management of uncertainties: When to trigger the plans: after the 1st attack, the 2nd? When do attacks end and when to release mobilized resources? Management of victims: How to ensure that all victims are secured or taken care of? How to provide assistance when attacks are ongoing? Management of teams: Proper follow-up of persons involved in the response: health professionals, police and firemen, emergency call centers but also civil servants within administration that contributed to the response. Communication: Reactivity of all is a key element to secure appropriate resource is mobilized for the response. All actors have to be able to communicate quickly in a secured way.

Prehospital Emergency Medicine (PHEM) is a new and evolving field within Prehospital Care and involves the delivery of safe prehospital critical care to seriously ill or injured patients, and safe transfer to or between hospitals. It covers a broad range of medical and traumatic conditions, interventions, clinical providers and physical environments. ABC of Prehospital Emergency Medicine is the first text to provide a comprehensive overview of this field and with an international team of expert authors is essential reading to anyone involved in the delivery of Prehospital Emergency Medicine and Prehospital Care.

Emergency management of deliberate self-poisoning (DSP) by drug overdose is common in emergency medicine. There is a paucity of data about the prehospital care of these patients. The principal aim was to describe the intensity of care received by patients with DSP who were managed by prehospital emergency medical service (EMS) physicians. A 48-h cross-sectional study was conducted in 319 EMS and emergency units in France. Patient and poisoning characteristics and treatments administered were recorded. Complications of poisoning, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission and death were recorded until day 30. The primary endpoint was the probability of receiving prehospital intensive care, including fluid resuscitation, vasopressor therapy, invasive ventilation, or antidotal treatments, depending whether prehospital treatment was carried out by an EMS physician or not. Data from 703 patients (median age was 43 [30–52] years, 288 (40%) men) were analyzed. One hundred and fifteen (16%) patients were attended by an EMS physician. Patients attended by EMS physicians were more likely to receive intensive treatment in the prehospital setting [odds ratio (OR) 7.4, 95% confidence interval 4.3–12.9]. These patients had more severe poisoning as suggested mainly by a lower Glasgow Coma Score (13 [8–15] vs. 15 [15–15]; p < 0.001) and a higher rate of admission to an intensive care unit [29 (25%) vs. 15 (2%), p < 0.001]. Patients with DSP attended by prehospital EMS physicians frequently received intensive care. The level of care seemed appropriate for the severity of the poisoning.

Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the major causes of death in younger age groups. In Umeå, Sweden, an intracranial pressure (ICP) targeted therapy protocol, the Lund concept, has been used in treatment of severe TBI since 1994. Decompressive craniectomy is used as a protocol-guided treatment step. The primary aim of the investigation was to study the effect of craniectomy on ICP changes over time in patients with severe TBI treated by an ICP-targeted protocol. In this retrospective study, all patients treated for severe TBI during 1998-2001 who fulfilled the following inclusion criteria were studied: GCS 10 mm Hg, arrival within 24 h of trauma, and need of intensive care for >72 h. Craniectomy was performed when the ICP could not be controlled by evacuation of hematomas, sedation, ventriculostomy, or low-dose pentothal infusion. Ninety-three patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean age was 37.6 years. Twenty-one patients underwent craniectomy as a treatment step. We found a significant reduction of the ICP directly after craniectomy, from 36.4 mm Hg (range, 18-80 mm Hg) to 12.6 mm Hg (range, 2-51 mm Hg). During the following 72 h, we observed an increase in ICP during the first 8-12 h after craniectomy, reaching approximately 20 mm Hg, and later levelling out at approximately 25 mm Hg. The reduction of ICP was statistically significant during the 72 h. The outcome as measured by Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) did not significantly differ between the craniectomized group (DC) and the non-craniectomized group (NDC). The outcome was favorable (GOS 5-4) in 71% in the craniectomized group, and in 61% in the non-craniectomized group. Craniectomy is a useful tool in achieving a significant reduction of ICP overtime in TBI patients with progressive intracranial hypertension refractory to medical therapy. The procedure seems to have a satisfactory effect on the outcome, as demonstrated by a high rate of favorable outcome and low mortality in the craniectomized group, which did not significantly differ compared with the non-craniectomized group.

Emergency department crowding is a major global healthcare issue. There is much debate as to the causes of the phenomenon, leading to difficulties in developing successful, targeted solutions. The aim of this systematic review was to critically analyse and summarise the findings of peer-reviewed research studies investigating the causes and consequences of, and solutions to, emergency department crowding. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. A structured search of four databases (Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE and Web of Science) was undertaken to identify peer-reviewed research publications aimed at investigating the causes or consequences of, or solutions to, emergency department crowding, published between January 2000 and June 2018. Two reviewers used validated critical appraisal tools to independently assess the quality of the studies. The study protocol was registered with the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO 2017: CRD42017073439). From 4,131 identified studies and 162 full text reviews, 102 studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority were retrospective cohort studies, with the greatest proportion (51%) trialling or modelling potential solutions to emergency department crowding. Fourteen studies examined causes and 40 investigated consequences. Two studies looked at both causes and consequences, and two investigated causes and solutions. The negative consequences of ED crowding are well established, including poorer patient outcomes and the inability of staff to adhere to guideline-recommended treatment. This review identified a mismatch between causes and solutions. The majority of identified causes related to the number and type of people attending ED and timely discharge from ED, while reported solutions focused on efficient patient flow within the ED. Solutions aimed at the introduction of whole-of-system initiatives to meet timed patient disposition targets, as well as extended hours of primary care, demonstrated promising outcomes. While the review identified increased presentations by the elderly with complex and chronic conditions as an emerging and widespread driver of crowding, more research is required to isolate the precise local factors leading to ED crowding, with system-wide solutions tailored to address identified causes.

Mechanical chest compression devices have the potential to help maintain high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), but despite their increasing use, little evidence exists for their effectiveness. We aimed to study whether the introduction of LUCAS-2 mechanical CPR into front-line emergency response vehicles would improve survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The pre-hospital randomised assessment of a mechanical compression device in cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC) trial was a pragmatic, cluster-randomised open-label trial including adults with non-traumatic, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest from four UK Ambulance Services (West Midlands, North East England, Wales, South Central). 91 urban and semi-urban ambulance stations were selected for participation. Clusters were ambulance service vehicles, which were randomly assigned (1:2) to LUCAS-2 or manual CPR. Patients received LUCAS-2 mechanical chest compression or manual chest compressions according to the first trial vehicle to arrive on scene. The primary outcome was survival at 30 days following cardiac arrest and was analysed by intention to treat. Ambulance dispatch staff and those collecting the primary outcome were masked to treatment allocation. Masking of the ambulance staff who delivered the interventions and reported initial response to treatment was not possible. The study is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN08233942. We enrolled 4471 eligible patients (1652 assigned to the LUCAS-2 group, 2819 assigned to the control group) between April 15, 2010 and June 10, 2013. 985 (60%) patients in the LUCAS-2 group received mechanical chest compression, and 11 (<1%) patients in the control group received LUCAS-2. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 30 day survival was similar in the LUCAS-2 group (104 [6%] of 1652 patients) and in the manual CPR group (193 [7%] of 2819 patients; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·86, 95% CI 0·64–1·15). No serious adverse events were noted. Seven clinical adverse events were reported in the LUCAS-2 group (three patients with chest bruising, two with chest lacerations, and two with blood in mouth). 15 device incidents occurred during operational use. No adverse or serious adverse events were reported in the manual group. We noted no evidence of improvement in 30 day survival with LUCAS-2 compared with manual compressions. On the basis of ours and other recent randomised trials, widespread adoption of mechanical CPR devices for routine use does not improve survival. National Institute for Health Research HTA – 07/37/69.

To determine the validity of the Manchester Triage System (MTS) in emergency care for the general population of patients attending the emergency department, for children and elderly, and for commonly used MTS flowcharts and discriminators across three different emergency care settings. This was a prospective observational study in three European emergency departments. All consecutive patients attending the emergency department during a 1-year study period (2010-2012) were included. Validity of the MTS was assessed by comparing MTS urgency as determined by triage nurses with patient urgency according to a predefined 3-category reference standard as proxy for true patient urgency. 288,663 patients were included in the analysis. Sensitivity of the MTS in the three hospitals ranged from 0.47 (95%CI 0.44-0.49) to 0.87 (95%CI 0.85-0.90), and specificity from 0.84 (95%CI 0.84-0.84) to 0.94 (95%CI 0.94-0.94) for the triage of adult patients. In children, sensitivity ranged from 0.65 (95%CI 0.61-0.70) to 0.83 (95%CI 0.79-0.87), and specificity from 0.83 (95%CI 0.82-0.83) to 0.89 (95%CI 0.88-0.90). The diagnostic odds ratio ranged from 13.5 (95%CI 12.1-15.0) to 35.3 (95%CI 28.4-43.9) in adults and from 9.8 (95%CI 6.7-14.5) to 23.8 (95%CI 17.7-32.0) in children, and was lowest in the youngest patients in 2 out of 3 settings and in the oldest patients in all settings. Performance varied considerably between the different emergency departments. Validity of the MTS in emergency care is moderate to good, with lowest performance in the young and elderly patients. Future studies on the validity of triage systems should be restricted to large, multicenter studies to define modifications and improve generalizability of the findings.