Objective: The third international consensus definition for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis 3) task force recently introduced qSOFA (quick sequential organ failure assessment) as a score for detection of patients at risk of sepsis outside of intensive care units. We performed this study to evaluate the validity of qSOFA for early detection and risk stratification of septic patients in emergency department. Methods: We conducted this study in an emergency department of the largest university affiliated hospital in northwest of Iran from Sept 2015 to Sept 2016. One hundred and forty patients who were SIRS positive with a suspected infection without alternative diagnosis and a microbiological proven infection were enrolled in this study. qSOFA was calculated for each patient and correlated with sepsis grades and mortality. Results: From 140 patients 84 (60%) had positive qSOFA score and 56 (40%) patients had negative qSOFA score. Our results showed that near half of patients with positive qSOFA expired during their stay in hospital while this was about 5% for patients with negative qSOFA. ROC curve of study regarding prediction of outcome with qSOFA showed an area under curve of 0.59. (P value: 0.04). Time spent to sepsis detection was 16 minutes shorter with qSOFA score compared to SIRS criteria in this study. Conclusion: In patients with suspected sepsis, qSOFA has acceptable value for risk stratification of severity, multi organ failure and mortality. It seems that education of medical staff and frequent screening of patients for warning signs can help to increase the value of qSOFA in prediction of mortality in critically ill septic patients. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.4.2031 How to cite this:Shahsavarinia K, Moharramzadeh P, Arvanagi RJ, Mahmoodpoor A. qSOFA score for prediction of sepsis outcome in emergency department. Pak J Med Sci. 2020;36(4):---------. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.4.2031 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Objectives: COVID-19 patients develop Life-threatening complications like pneumomediastinum/pneumothorax and emphysema which might experience prolonged hospital stays and additional costs might be imposed on the patient and the health system. The clinical features and outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 infection who develop a pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum and subcutaneous emphysema has not been rigorously described or compared to those who do not develop these complications. So a systematic review of studies conducted on this subject was carried out to better manage these complications by investigating the underlying factors in COVID-19 patients. Methods: The search was conducted between early January and late December 2020 in databases including PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, using the following keywords and their combinations: COVID-19 Complication, Pneumothorax, Pneumomediastinum, Pneumopericardium, and Subcutaneous Emphysema. The extracted studies were screened separately by two researchers based on the PRISMA statement. After eliminating the duplicate studies, the title, abstract, and full text of the remaining studies were reviewed. Disagreements in the screening and selection of the studies were resolved by consensus or through a third-party opinion.  Results: A total of 793 articles were retrieved through the literature search, and 99 studies conducted on a total of 139 patients were finally included The patient mortality was found to have a significant relationship with positive pressure ventilation (P=0.0001). There was no significant relationship between the patients’ death and chest tube insertion (P=0.2) or between the interval of time from the onset of symptoms to the diagnosis of pneumothorax (P=0.7). The mean age was higher in the deceased cases, and the mean difference observed was statistically significant (P=0.001).  Conclusion: With the expansion of our clinical understanding of COVID-19, recognition of the uncommon complications of COVID-19 especially pneumothorax is crucial. Although in our review we couldn’t find a causal relationship between COVID-19 and pneumothorax or association between pneumothorax and death, as it is limited by many variables such as included studies’ design, or incomplete outcome data especially more information about the associated risk factors, we recommend performing more well-designed studies to describe the pneumothoraxes› incidence, risk factors, and outcomes in COVID-19 patients. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.38.3.5529 How to cite this:Shahsavarinia K, Rahvar G, Soleimanpour H, Saadati M, Vahedi L, Mahmoodpoor A. Spontaneous pneumomediastinum, pneumothorax and subcutaneous emphysema in critically ill COVID-19 patients: A systematic review. Pak J Med Sci. 2022;38(3):---------. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.38.3.5529 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Bell's palsy is a rare complication reported after COVID-19 vaccination. Given the importance of neurological manifestations, the necessity to highlight and scrutinize the incidence of them following vaccination is needed.

: To the best of our knowledge, aspirin (ASA) is known as a commonly used medication worldwide. Although the cardiovascular aspects of ASA are well-established, recently, it has been identified that ASA can yield multiple extra-cardiovascular therapeutic potencies in facing neurodegenerative disorders, various cancers, inflammatory responses, and the COVID-19 pandemic. In this review, we aimed to highlight the proven role of ASA administration in the variety of non-cardiovascular diseases, particularly in the field of anesthesiology.

: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global public health problem. Pain is one of the most generally experienced symptoms by CKD patients. Pain management is a key clinical activity; nonetheless, insufficient pain management by health professionals keeps it up. Opioids as pain relievers are a class of naturally-derived and synthetic medications. They act through interactions with receptors in peripheral nerves. Numerous pharmacokinetic alterations happen with aging that influence drug disposition, metabolism, and quality of life. Acetaminophen alone, or combined with low-potency opioid does is regarded as the safest pain-relieving choice for CKD. Morphine and codeine are probably eluded in renal impairment patients and used with excessive carefulness. Tramadol, oxycodone, and hydromorphone can be used by patient monitoring, while methadone, transdermal fentanyl, and buprenorphine seem to be safe to use in older non-dialysis patients with renal impairment. Consistent with the available literature, the main aim of this review was to explore the occurrence of chronic pain and its opioid treatment in CKD patients. Ac-cording to this review, more and well-made randomized controlled trials are necessary to find appropriate opioid doses and explore the occurrence of side effects.