Formal escalation actions and their implementation in practice differed and varied in their effectiveness. Monitoring how escalation works in practice is essential in understanding whether and how escalation policies help to manage workload.

No abstract

RationaleHospitalised patients with acute exacerbation of COPD may deteriorate despite treatment, with early readmission being common.ObjectivesTo investigate whether neural respiratory drive, measured using second intercostal space parasternal muscle electromyography (EMGpara), would identify worsening dyspnoea and physician-defined inpatient clinical deterioration, and predict early readmission.MethodsPatients admitted to a single-site university hospital with exacerbation of COPD were enrolled. Spirometry, inspiratory capacity (IC), EMGpara, routine physiological parameters, modified early warning score (MEWS), modified Borg scale for dyspnoea and physician-defined episodes of deterioration were recorded daily until discharge. Readmissions at 14 and 28 days post discharge were recorded.Measurements and main results120 patients were recruited (age 70±9 years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of 30.5±11.2%). Worsening dyspnoea, defined as at least one-point increase in Borg scale, was associated with increases in EMGpara%max and MEWS, whereas an increase in EMGpara%max alone was associated with physician-defined inpatient clinical deterioration. Admission-to-discharge change (Δ) in the normalised value of EMGpara (ΔEMGpara%max) was inversely correlated with ΔFEV1 (r=−0.38, p<0.001) and ΔIC (r=−0.44, p<0.001). ΔEMGpara%max predicted 14-day readmission (OR 1.13, 95% 1.03 to 1.23) in the whole cohort and 28-day readmission in patients under 85 years (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.18). Age (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.14) and 12-month admission frequency (OR 1.29, 1.01 to 1.66), also predicted 28-day readmission in the whole cohort.ConclusionsMeasurement of neural respiratory drive by EMGpara represents a novel physiological biomarker that may be helpful in detecting inpatient clinical deterioration and identifying the risk of early readmission among patients with exacerbations of COPD.Trial registrationNCT01361451.

Background As user modification can alter the addictiveness and toxicity of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), more research is needed to understand the types, motivations, risks, and information sources that lead to these product alterations. YouTube has been identified as a major platform where ENDS users obtain and share information about ENDS products and modifications. However, a comprehensive study of ENDS modification videos on YouTube is lacking. Objective This study aimed to analyze the content of YouTube videos depicting modifications of ENDS. Methods YouTube was searched in March 2019 to identify videos depicting ENDS modifications. Search terms were derived from interviews with ENDS users and current literature. We used 28 search phrases that combined the words vape and vaping with modification-related key terms (eg, custom build, modification, and dripping). The final sample included 168 videos. Results Videos were 1 to 108 min long (median 9.55). Presenters were largely male (117/168, 69.6%), white (94/168, 56.0%), and older than 25 years (94/168, 56.0%). Most videos gave how to instructions (148/168, 88.1%), but few offered warnings (30/168, 17.9%) or mentioned commercial alternatives to modifications they presented (16/168, 9.5%). The ENDS devices most often featured were drippers (63/168, 37.5%) and refillable tanks (37/168, 22.0%). The most often modified ENDS components were coils (82/168, 48.8%) and e-liquids (34/168, 20.2%), which included adding other substances, such as cannabis, to the e-liquids (6/168, 3.6%). Most videos portrayed ENDS modifications positively (106/168, 63.1% positive; 60/168, 35.7% neutral; and 2/168, 1.2% negative) and were either neutral or positive in their overall portrayal of ENDS devices (78/168, 46.4% positive; 89/168, 53.0% neutral; and 1/168, 0.6% negative). Conclusions This study identified several concerning trends in popular YouTube videos on ENDS modifications, including lack of warnings, the addition of marijuana derivatives to e-liquids, and the positive portrayal of ENDS devices and modifications. By identifying the types of modifications (coil and e-liquid being the most prevalent), this study sets an agenda for research on the effects of modifications.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

IntroductionCommunicating to smokers that e-cigarettes deliver lower levels of harmful chemicals than combusted cigarettes is a challenging issue. This study qualitatively explored smokers’ interpretations of messages communicating the risk of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes (comparative risk messages).MethodWe developed 12 print comparative risk messages and evaluated them in 12 focus groups with 72 adult smokers (18+ years old) in Atlanta, Georgia.ResultsParticipants interpreted uncertainty about health effects of e-cigarettes as an indicator of significant unknown risks, which some believed to be potentially more severe than the known effects of cigarettes (such as cancer and heart disease). Also, participants were sceptical about the lower risk claims. Some participants misinterpreted what ‘switching completely’ or ‘switching 100% of the time’ means, perceiving switching from e-cigarettes to combusted cigarettes as comparable with the use of both products. When chemicals in e-cigarettes were mentioned (eg, nicotine or formaldehyde), participants viewed e-cigarettes as very harmful and had difficulty reconciling this belief with the reduced risk claim. Comparative risk messages emphasising smoking risks were perceived as effective. Participants also appreciated being given an option to switch if they cannot quit. Participants suggested the inclusion of more facts and statistics and a credible message source (eg, public health agencies) to increase message effectiveness.ConclusionComparative risk messages may be more acceptable to smokers if they show direct comparisons of the number of toxic chemicals in cigarettes and e-cigarettes, are attributed to a credible source(s), and emphasise smoking risks.