Objective This study describes the predictors of in‐hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) within 24 h of ED triage and evaluates their ability to predict patients at risk of IHCA. Methods A case–control study was conducted in the ED. ‘Cases’ are herein defined as hospitalised patients who experienced IHCA within 24 h after ED triage. The exclusion criteria were those younger than 16 years old, cases of traumatic arrest, or had do‐not‐resuscitate orders. The controls were adults, non‐traumatic cases, who did not experience IHCA within 24 h of ED triage. A multivariable regression model was used to identify significant predictors of IHCA. The ability to discriminate was quantified by utilising an area under receiver operating characteristic (AuROC) curve. Results Two hundred and fifty IHCAs were compared with 1000 controls. Five predictors emerged that were: higher National Early Warning Score (NEWS) at triage, equal or increase of NEWS after ED management, coronary artery disease as a comorbid disease, the use of a vasoactive agent, and initial serum bicarbonate level lower than 23.5 mmoL/L, independently associated with IHCA. The AuROC of the final model from all predictors was 0.91 (95% CI 0.89–0.93) higher than NEWS alone model (AuROC at 0.78, 95% CI 0.74–0.81). Conclusions We conclude that a combination of NEWS and four independent predictors identify patients at risk of IHCA more effectively than NEWS alone.

Basic life support (BLS) training is crucial in improvement of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) outcomes. Many studies have demonstrated improvement of skills after BLS training but the skills significantly decrease over time. Our study aimed to evaluate the retention of knowledge and skills after training following 2010 BLS guidelines in second year medical students at Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University. Materials and Methods: One hundred and forty-nine second-year medical students were enrolled in the prospective cohort study. Participants were tested for knowledge and skills of BLS prior to training (pre-test), immediately after training (post-test) and six months after training (retention test). Results: The mean scores of pre-test, immediate post-test and retention-test were 8.52 (SD 1.88), 12.12 (SD 1.52) and 10.83 (SD 1.95), respectively. Improvement in knowledge score post-test and retention test were 3.60 (95% CI 3.22,3.99 P<0.001) and 2.31 (95% CI 1.92,2.70 P<0.001) respectively, compared with pre-test score. In post-test, detection skill, activation skill and compression skill were improved 1.67 (95% CI 1.28,2.19 P<0.001), 5.15 (95% CI 3.41,7.77 P<0.001) and 3.88 times (95% CI 2.24,6.71 P<0.001) compared with pretest evaluation. Comparison between retention test and pre-test was improved detection skill 1.72 (95% CI 1.31,2.26 P<0.001), activation skill 4.4 (95% CI 2.93,6.75 P<0.001) and compression skill 2.56 (95% CI 1.44,4.57 P=0.001). Knowledge decreased 1.29 times in retention test compared with post-test (95% CI −1.67,0.92 P<0.001). In retention test, detection skill increased 1.03 times (95% CI 0.81,1.29 P = 0.810), activation skill decreased 0.86 times (95% CI 0.98,1.10 P =0.24) and compression skill decreased 0.66 times (95% CI 0.45,0.98 P=0.04) compared with post-test. Conclusion: Knowledge and skills of BLS significantly improved after training in second year medical students. However, the knowledge decreased at 6 months after training although the BLS skills still remained.

Patients with sepsis often require emergency intubation. In emergency departments (EDs), rapid-sequence intubation with a single-dose induction agent is standard practice, but the best choice of induction agent in sepsis remains controversial. We conducted a randomized, controlled, single-blind trial in the ED. We included septic patients who were aged at least 18 years and required sedation for emergency intubation. Patients were randomly assigned by a blocked randomization to receive 0.2–0.3 mg/kg of etomidate or 1–2 mg/kg of ketamine for intubation. The objectives were to compare the survival outcomes and adverse events after intubation between etomidate and ketamine. Two hundred and sixty septic patients were enrolled; 130 patients/drug arm whose baseline characteristics were well balanced at baseline. In the etomidate group, 105 patients (80.8%) were alive at 28 days, compared with 95 patients (73.1%) in the ketamine group (risk difference [RD], 7.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], − 2.5 to 17.9%; P = 0.092). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who survived at 24 h (91.5% vs. 96.2%; P = 0.097) and survived at 7 days (87.7% vs. 87.7%; P = 0.574). A significantly higher proportion of the etomidate group needed a vasopressor within 24 h after intubation: 43.9% vs. 17.7%, RD, 26.2% (95% CI, 15.4 to 36.9%; P < 0.001). In conclusion, there were no differences in early and late survival rates between etomidate and ketamine. However, etomidate was associated with higher risks of early vasopressor use after intubation. Trial registration: The trial protocol was registered in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry (identification number: TCTR20210213001). Registered 13 February 2021—Retrospectively registered, https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/export/pdf/TCTR20210213001.

Background: Patients with sepsis often require emergency intubation. In emergency departments (EDs), rapid-sequence intubation with a single-dose induction agent is standard practice but the best choice of induction agent in sepsis remains controversy. High quality RCTs are needed to determine the optimal induction agents in sepsis. Methods: We conducted a randomized, controlled, single-blind trial in the ED. We included septic patients who were aged at least 18 years and required sedation for emergency intubation. Patients were randomly assigned by a blocked randomization to receive 0.2-0.3 mg/kg of etomidate or 1-2 mg/kg of ketamine for intubation. Outcomes were compared with intention-to-treat analysis. The primary objective was to compare the 28-day survival outcomes between etomidate and ketamine. The secondary objectives outcomes were to compare 24-hour and 7-day survival rates, and adverse events after intubation. Results: 260 septic patients were enrolled; 130 patients/ drug arm whose baseline characteristics were well balance at baseline. In the etomidate group, 105 patients (80.8%) were alive at 28 days, as compared with 95 patients (73.1%) in the ketamine group (risk difference [RD], 7.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.5% to 17.9%; P=0.092). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who survived at 24 hours (91.5% vs. 96.2%; P=0.097) and survived at 7 days (87.7% vs. 87.7%; P=0.574). A significantly higher proportion of the etomidate group needed a vasopressor within 24 hours after intubation: 43.9% vs. 17.7%, RD, 26.2% (95% CI, 15.4% to 36.9%; P<0.001). Conclusions: In patients with sepsis who needed emergency intubation in the ED, there were no differences in early and late survival rates between etomidate and ketamine. However, etomidate associated with higher risks of early vasopressor needed after intubation. Trial registration: The trial protocol was registered in Thai Clinical Trials Registry (identification number; TCTR20210213001). Registered 13 February 2021 – Retrospectively registered, https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/export/pdf/TCTR20210213001.

Introduction: The characteristics and treatment outcomes of status asthmaticus patients in emergency department (ED) have not been described previously especially in Thailand.