European journal of emergency medicine : official journal of the European Society for Emergency Medicine
-
Recognizing and prioritizing research areas in emergency care is crucial for generating evidence and advancing research programs, aiming to enhance health outcomes for both individuals and populations. The objective of this review is to document global clinical and nonclinical research priorities. The Emergency Medicine Education and Research by Global Experts network, consisting of 22 sites across six continents, conducted a mapping review of publications on emergency medicine research priorities (2000-2022) across seven databases. ⋯ Published research priorities in emergency medicine are heterogeneous and geographically limited, mostly containing groups of authors from the same country. The majority of publications in global research priority setting stem from Western countries, covering a broad spectrum of clinical and nonclinical topics. Research priorities from Africa and Asia tend to focus on specific issues more prevalent in those regions of the world.
-
Meta Analysis
Lidocaine patch for treatment of acute localized pain in the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Lidocaine patches are commonly prescribed for acute localized pain. Most of the existing evidence is, however, derived from postoperative or chronic pain. The objective of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of lidocaine patch compared to placebo patch or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for acute localized pain. ⋯ The risk of adverse events was similar between the groups (risk ratio: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.48-1.67; moderate-quality evidence). In the two trials comparing lidocaine patches with NSAIDs, there was no statistically significant difference in pain relief between the treatments. Low to moderate-quality evidence from small trials supports the efficacy and safety of lidocaine patch for the treatment of acute localized pain.
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus noninvasive ventilation in acute respiratory failure related to suspected or confirmed acute heart failure: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
The objective of this review is to compare high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen (High flow oxygen) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for the management of acute respiratory failure secondary to suspected or confirmed acute heart failure (AHF). A comprehensive and relevant literature search of MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was conducted using Medical Subject Heading and Free text terms from January 2010 to March 2024. All randomized clinical trials and observational retrospective and prospective studies reporting adult patients with acute respiratory failure due to suspected or confirmed AHF and comparing HFNC to NIV were included. ⋯ Tracheal intubation requirement was 7% and 5% of patients in the HFNC and NIV groups, respectively (OR: 1.4, 95% CI: 0.5-3.5) in randomized studies, and 20% and 9% in the high flow oxygen and NIV group, respectively (OR: 2.1, 95% CI: 0.5-9.4) in observational studies. Mortality was 13% and 8% in the high flow oxygen and the NIV groups, respectively (OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 0.8-1.1) in randomized studies and 14% and 9% in the high flow oxygen and the NIV groups, respectively (OR: 1.4, 95% CI: 0.5-3.7) in observational studies. Compared with NIV, high flow oxygen was not associated with a higher risk of treatment failure during initial management of patients with acute respiratory failure related to suspected or confirmed AHF.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Bedside-focused transthoracic echocardiography in acute atraumatic thoracic aortic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.
The objective of this review was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of bedside-focused transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in acute atraumatic thoracic aortic syndrome in adults. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of publications that described the use of bedside-focused TTE on adults presenting to emergency care settings with suspected atraumatic thoracic aortic syndrome. Studies were identified using keyword and MeSH on relevant databases as well as grey literature, followed by abstract screening and study selection by two independent reviewers. ⋯ For type B dissection, pooled sensitivity was 65% (95% CI, 45-80%) and specificity was 100% (95% CI, 0.69-100%). Regarding indirect TTE signs, pooled sensitivities and specificities were 64% (5.2-98.2%) and 94% (92-96.1%), respectively for aortic valve regurgitation, 92% (54-99.2%) and 87% (62-97%) for thoracic aortic aneurysm and 39% (33.8-45%) and 94% (92-95%) for pericardial effusion. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, bedside-focused TTE has high specificity for type A and B dissection, a moderate to high sensitivity for type A but poor for type B, and unclear diagnostic accuracy for intramural haematoma and penetrating aortic ulcer.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Bedside-focused transthoracic echocardiography in acute atraumatic thoracic aortic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.
The objective of this review was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of bedside-focused transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in acute atraumatic thoracic aortic syndrome in adults. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of publications that described the use of bedside-focused TTE on adults presenting to emergency care settings with suspected atraumatic thoracic aortic syndrome. Studies were identified using keyword and MeSH on relevant databases as well as grey literature, followed by abstract screening and study selection by two independent reviewers. ⋯ For type B dissection, pooled sensitivity was 65% (95% CI, 45-80%) and specificity was 100% (95% CI, 0.69-100%). Regarding indirect TTE signs, pooled sensitivities and specificities were 64% (5.2-98.2%) and 94% (92-96.1%), respectively for aortic valve regurgitation, 92% (54-99.2%) and 87% (62-97%) for thoracic aortic aneurysm and 39% (33.8-45%) and 94% (92-95%) for pericardial effusion. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, bedside-focused TTE has high specificity for type A and B dissection, a moderate to high sensitivity for type A but poor for type B, and unclear diagnostic accuracy for intramural haematoma and penetrating aortic ulcer.