No abstract

Introduction Pediatric poisonings represent a major and preventable cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world. Epidemiologic information about poisoning among children in many lower- and middle-income countries is scarce. This study describes the epidemiology of acute poisonings in children presenting to Ain Shams University's Poisoning Treatment Center (ASU-PTC) in Cairo and determines the causative agents and characteristics of acute poisoning in several pediatric age groups. Methods This retrospective study involved acutely poisoned patients, 0 to 18 years of age, who presented to the ASU-PTC between 1/1/2009 and 12/31/2013. Data were extracted from electronic records maintained by the ASU-PTC. Collected data included demographics, substance of exposure, circumstances of the poisoning, patient disposition, and outcome. Results During the 5-year study period, 38,470 patients meeting our criteria were treated by the ASU-PTC; 19,987 (52%) were younger than 6 years of age; 4,196 (11%) were 6 to 12 years; and 14,287 (37%) were >12 years. Unintentional poisoning accounted for 68.5% of the ingestions, though among adolescents 84.1% of ingestions were with self-harm intent. In all age groups, the most frequent causative drugs were non-opioid analgesics, antipyretics, and antirheumatics. The most common nonpharmaceutical agents were corrosives in preschool children and pesticides in adolescents. Most patients had no/minor effects (29,174 [75.8%]); hospitalization rates were highest among adolescents. There were 119 deaths (case fatality rate of 0.3), primarily from pesticide ingestion. Conclusion Poisoning in preschool children is mainly unintentional and commonly due to nonpharmaceutical agents while poisoning in adolescents is mainly intentional (self-harm). Pesticides, mainly organophosphorous compounds and carbamates, were the most frequent agent leading to morbidity and mortality.

Aims: To compare the clinical effectiveness and costs of minor injury services provided by nurse practitioners with minor injury care provided by an accident and emergency (A&E) department. Methods: A three part prospective study in a city where an A&E department was closing and being replaced by a nurse led minor injury unit (MIU). The first part of the study took a sample of patients attending the A&E department. The second part of the study was a sample of patients from a nurse led MIU that had replaced the A&E department. In each of these samples the clinical effectiveness was judged by comparing the "gold standard" of a research assessment with the clinical assessment. Primary outcome measures were the number of errors in clinical assessment, treatment, and disposal. The third part of the study used routine data whose collection had been prospectively configured to assess the costs and cost consequences of both models of care. Results: The minor injury unit produced a safe service where the total package of care was equal to or in some cases better than the A&E care. Significant process errors were made in 191 of 1447 (13.2%) patients treated by medical staff in the A&E department and 126 of 1313 (9.6%) of patients treated by nurse practitioners in the MIU. Very significant errors were rare (one error). Waiting times were much better at the MIU (mean MIU 19 minutes, A&E department 56.4 minutes). The revenue costs were greater in the MIU (MIU £41.1, A&E department £40.01) and there was a great difference in the rates of follow up and with the nurses referring 47% of patients for follow up and the A&E department referring only 27%. Thus the costs and cost consequences were greater for MIU care compared with A&E care (MIU £12.7 per minor injury case, A&E department £9.66 per minor injury case). Conclusion: A nurse practitioner minor injury service can provide a safe and effective service for the treatment of minor injury. However, the costs of such a service are greater and there seems to be an increased use of outpatient services.

No abstract

Objectives-To assess the safety and efficiency with which the accident and emergency (A&E) department provides thrombolytic treatment for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods-A prospective observational study based in a teaching hospital for one year. All patients who presented with the clinical and electrocardiographic indications for thrombolytic treatment were studied. Patients were grouped according to route of admission. After logarithmic transformation, the "door to needle times" ofthe groups were compared using a two tailed Student's t test. Arrhythmias and complications after thrombolytic treatment were noted. The appropriateness of the treatment was assessed retrospectively by review of the clinical records and electrocardiograms, judged against locally agreed eligibility criteria. Results-Data from 153 patients were analysed; 138/153 (90%) patients were admitted via the A&E department. The shortest door to needle times were seen in those patients thrombolysed by A&E staff within the A&E department (mean 43.8 minutes). The transfer of A&E patients to the coronary care unit (CCU) was associated with a significant increase in the door to needle time (mean 58.8 minutes, p = 0.004). Only one malignant arrhythmia occurred during the administration of thrombolysis in the A&E department, and this was managed effectively. No arrhythmias occurred during transfer of thrombolysed patients to the CCU. In every case, the decision to administer thrombolysis was retrospectively judged to have been appropriate. Conclusions-The A&E department provides appropriate, safe, and timely thrombolytic treatment for patients with AMI. Transferring A&E patients to the CCU before thrombolysis is associated with an unnecessary treatment delay. (JAccid Emerg Med 1999;16:325-330)

Aluminum phosphide (AlP) poisoning is a serious medical emergency with a high mortality rate. The absence of an exact antidote for AlP poisoning necessitates the quest for alternative treatment options. The study sought to assess the efficacy of adding L-carnitine or medicated paraffin oil to the conventional approach of treatment employed in cases of acute AlP poisoning. We conducted a 1 year, randomized, controlled, parallel-group, single-blind clinical study. 96 individuals with acute AlP poisoning were randomly assigned to one of three groups. The standard AlP therapy was administered to all groups according to the Poison Control Center guidelines at the Ain-Shams University hospitals. All patients underwent a medical history review, clinical examination, and laboratory tests. The outcomes were assessed. The participants in the study groups had mean ages ranging from 25.6 to 26.3 years. The cases analyzed were evenly distributed between genders, with the majority originating from rural areas. The average delay time varied from 2.9 to 4.2 h. All patients in the study reported ingesting AlP during suicide attempts. 12 hours after admission, many clinical and biochemical data improved in both intervention groups including cytochrome c oxidase, caspase-3, caspase-9, catalase, and superoxide dismutase. The intervention groups required significantly less mechanical ventilation and had a lower mortality rate than the control group. Decontamination with paraffin oil could be advantageous for reducing the severity of AlP poisoning, improving prognosis, and lowering the mortality rate.

Objectives-To examine the use of thrombolytic treatment in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and left bundle branch block (LBBB). To evaluate electrocardiographic criteria for the identification of AMI in the presence of LBBB, and examine the implications of using these criteria in the clinical setting. Methods-A retrospective study over two years, based in two Sheffield teaching hospitals. Patients presenting with LBBB and suspected AMI were studied by analysis of an AMI database. The proportion of patients with LBBB and AMI receiving thrombolysis, and the in-hospital delay before the start of treatment, were used as indicators of current performance.Three predictive criteria were applied to the electrocardiograms (ECGs) retrospectively, and their ability to identify acute ischaemic change assessed. The implications of using the predictive criteria in the clinical setting were explored.Result-Twenty three per cent (5122) of patients with LBBB and AMI did not receive thrombolysis, in the absence of documented contraindications. The mean in-hospital treatment delay for thrombolysed patients was 154 minutes. Forty eight per cent (16/33) of those thrombolysed did not have a final clinical diagnosis of AMI. In the majority of cases (8/12), the decision not to administer thrombolysis was based on a single ECG recording.The presence of any of the predictive electrocardiographic criteria was associated with a diagnosis ofAMI, with a sensitivity of 0.79 (95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.95), specificity 1, positive predictive value 1, and negative predictive value 0.79. The K scores between four independent observers showed either substantial or near perfect agreement.

No abstract