Internal and emergency medicine
-
Intervention by members of the public during an out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHAC) including resuscitation attempts and accessible automated external defibrillator (AED) has been shown to improve survival. This study aimed to investigate the OHCA and AED knowledge and confidence, and barriers to intervention, of the public of North East England, UK. This study used a face-to-face cross-sectional survey on a public high street in Newcastle, UK. ⋯ The most common barrier to helping during an OHCA was lack of knowledge (29.9%, n = 126/421). Although most participants reported they would know what to do during an OHCA and had knowledge of an AED, low numbers of participants spontaneously mentioned specific OHCA and AED actions. Improving public knowledge would help improve the public's confidence of intervening during an OHCA and may improve OHCA survival.
-
Recognized risk factors for acetaminophen overdose include alcohol, opioids, and mood disorders. The aim of this study is to assess additional risk factors for acetaminophen overdose evaluated in the emergency department (ED). ⋯ In addition to previously recognized risks, our study demonstrated that cannabis use and hematologic/oncologic comorbidities were more common among acetaminophen-overdose ED visits. These new findings are concerning because of rapid legalization of cannabis and the increasing incidence of cancer worldwide. Additional investigation into these risks should be a priority for clinicians, policymakers, and researchers.
-
To evaluate the prognostic stratification ability of 4C Mortality Score and COVID-19 Mortality Risk Score in different age groups. Retrospective study, including all patients, presented to the Emergency Department of the University Hospital Careggi, between February, 2020 and May, 2021, and admitted for SARS-CoV2. Patients were divided into four subgroups based on the quartiles of age distribution: patients < 57 years (G1, n = 546), 57-71 years (G2, n = 508), 72-81 years (G3, n = 552), and > 82 years (G4, n = 578). ⋯ Both scores were higher among non-survivors than survivors in all subgroups (4C-MS, G1: 6 [3-7] vs 3 [2-5]; G2: 10 [7-11] vs 7 [5-8]; G3: 11 [10-14] vs 10 [8-11]; G4: 13 [12-15] vs 11 [10-13], all p < 0.001; COVID-19 MRS, G1: 8 [7-9] vs 9 [9-11], G2: 10 [8-11] vs 11 [10-12]; G3: 11 [10-12] vs 12 [11-13]; G4: 11 [10-13] vs 13 [12-14], all p < 0.01). The ability of both scores to identify patients at higher risk of in-hospital mortality, was similar in different age groups (4C-MS: G1 0.77, G2 0.76, G3 0.68, G4 0.72; COVID-19 MRS: G1 0.67, G2 0.69, G3 0.69, G4 0.72, all p for comparisons between subgroups = NS). Both scores confirmed their good performance in predicting in-hospital mortality in all age groups, despite their different mortality rate.