Dyspnea is a common symptom in ED patients contributing substantially to ED, hospital, and ICU workload. It is also associated with significant mortality. There are a wide variety of causes however chronic disease accounts for a large proportion.

Background: Overutilisation of the Accident and Emergency Department is an increasingly serious healthcare challenge. Online symptom checkers could help alleviate this challenge by allowing patients to self-triage before visiting the Accident and Emergency Department. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the triage accuracy of online symptom checkers, which would help determine the potential roles of symptom checkers in an Accident and Emergency Department setting. Methods: A total of 100 random Accident and Emergency Department records were sampled from the Queen Mary Hospital in Hong Kong. The inclusion criteria were patients over the age of 18 attending the Queen Mary Hospital Accident and Emergency Department in 2016. Symptom checkers by Drugs.com and FamilyDoctor were selected as representative tools. One triage recommendation was generated by each symptom checker for each case record. Each symptom checker’s triage accuracy was then evaluated using a few outcome measures: overall sensitivity, sensitivity for emergency cases and specificity for non-emergency cases, when compared with the triage categories assigned by the triage nurses. Results: The results showed that Drugs.com had a higher overall triage accuracy than FamilyDoctor (74% and 50%, respectively), but both checkers are inadequately sensitive to emergency cases (70% and 45%, respectively) with low negative predictive values (43% and 24%, respectively). Conclusion: In their current states, symptom checkers are not yet suitable as alternatives to Accident and Emergency Department triage protocols due to their low overall sensitivities and negative predictive values. However, symptom checkers might serve as useful Accident and Emergency Department adjuncts in other ways, such as to provide more information prior to a patient’s arrival to streamline the triage and preparation process at the Accident and Emergency Department.

Background The safety and effectiveness of intramuscular olanzapine or haloperidol compared to midazolam as the initial pharmacological treatment for acute agitation in emergency departments (EDs) has not been evaluated. Methods A pragmatic, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial was conducted from December 2014 to September 2019, in six Hong Kong EDs. Patients (aged 18–75 years) with undifferentiated acute agitation requiring parenteral sedation were randomised to 5 mg intramuscular midazolam ( n = 56), olanzapine ( n = 54), or haloperidol ( n = 57). Primary outcomes were time to adequate sedation and proportion of patients who achieved adequate sedation at each follow-up interval. Sedation levels were measured on a 6-level validated scale (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02380118). Findings Of 206 patients randomised, 167 (mean age, 42 years; 98 [58·7%] male) were analysed. Median time to sedation for IM midazolam, olanzapine, and haloperidol was 8·5 (IQR 8·0), 11·5 (IQR 30·0), and 23·0 (IQR 21·0) min, respectively. At 60 min, similar proportions of patients were adequately sedated (98%, 87%, and 97%). There were statistically significant differences for time to sedation with midazolam compared to olanzapine ( p = 0·03) and haloperidol ( p = 0·002). Adverse event rates were similar across the three arms. Dystonia ( n = 1) and cardiac arrest ( n = 1) were reported in the haloperidol group. Interpretation Midazolam resulted in faster sedation in patients with undifferentiated agitation in the emergency setting compared to olanzapine and haloperidol. Midazolam and olanzapine are preferred over haloperidol's slower time to sedation and potential for cardiovascular and extrapyramidal side effects. Funding Research Grants Council, Hong Kong.

Background: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation can improve the survival rate of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Teaching cardiopulmonary resuscitation in schools by teachers is one of the ways to increase the number of bystanders who can perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Nevertheless, there have been no studies on the readiness of teachers in Hong Kong to teach cardiopulmonary resuscitation in their schools. Objective: To assess whether secondary school teachers are prepared to teach their students cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Methods: This was a questionnaire survey. Teachers from 22 local secondary schools were recruited. The questionnaires were designed with questions covering their knowledge about cardiopulmonary resuscitation and attitudes towards teaching their students cardiopulmonary resuscitation. A knowledge score and attitude score were calculated. Result: 557 teachers completed the questionnaires. Most had never witnessed a cardiac arrest and over half of them had never been trained cardiopulmonary resuscitation or use of an automated defibrillator. About 25% of them answered all questions on knowledge wrong. Only 25% supported teaching cardiopulmonayr resuscitation in schools and 32% were willing to teach it. Legal liability was a major concern. Conclusion: Local teachers' readiness for teaching students cardiopulmonary resuscitation in secondary schools is likely poor. More efforts are required to raise their knowledge level on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and instill a positive attitude towards cardiopulmonary resuscitation education in schools.

Background A straight line–based model is often used to calculate the distance between an out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest ( OHCA ) and the location of an automated external defibrillator ( AED ). This model may be inaccurate as it overlooks any obstacles between the OHCA and AED . This study aimed to elucidate the effect of the straight line–based and walking route–based calculation on the average distance between an historical OHCA and the closest AED and the coverage rate of AEDs, ie, the proportion of historical OHCAs that were within 100 meters of an AED . It is hoped that the findings will help policy makers in deploying AEDs in optimal urban settings. Methods and Results This was an observational study conducted in Hong Kong. The average distance between an historical OHCA and its closest AED and the coverage rate of AEDs were calculated with both the straight line–based and walking route–based model. A total of 1637 AEDs and 5119 cases of OHCA were included for analysis. The average distances calculated by the straight line–based and walking route–based model were 230.8 and 545.3 meters, respectively. The coverage rate calculated by the straight line–based model was 30.04%, while that by the walking route–based model was 11.17%. Conclusions The straight line–based model may underestimate the average distances and overestimate the coverage rate in an urban setting. The walking route–based model may be more useful for studies of AED deployment in urban cities.