The 2018 update of the Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations for Acute Stroke Management, 6th edition, is a comprehensive summary of current evidence-based recommendations, appropriate for use by healthcare providers and system planners caring for persons with very recent symptoms of acute stroke or transient ischemic attack. The recommendations are intended for use by a interdisciplinary team of clinicians across a wide range of settings and highlight key elements involved in prehospital and Emergency Department care, acute treatments for ischemic stroke, and acute inpatient care. The most notable changes included in this 6th edition are the renaming of the module and its integration of the formerly separate modules on prehospital and emergency care and acute inpatient stroke care. The new module, Acute Stroke Management: Prehospital, Emergency Department, and Acute Inpatient Stroke Care is now a single, comprehensive module addressing the most important aspects of acute stroke care delivery. Other notable changes include the removal of two sections related to the emergency management of intracerebral hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage. These topics are covered in a new, dedicated module, to be released later this year. The most significant recommendation updates are for neuroimaging; the extension of the time window for endovascular thrombectomy treatment out to 24 h; considerations for treating a highly selected group of people with stroke of unknown time of onset; and recommendations for dual antiplatelet therapy for a limited duration after acute minor ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack. This module also emphasizes the need for increased public and healthcare provider's recognition of the signs of stroke and immediate actions to take; the important expanding role of paramedics and all emergency medical services personnel; arriving at a stroke-enabled Emergency Department without delay; and launching local healthcare institution code stroke protocols. Revisions have also been made to the recommendations for the triage and assessment of risk of recurrent stroke after transient ischemic attack/minor stroke and suggested urgency levels for investigations and initiation of management strategies. The goal of this updated guideline is to optimize stroke care across Canada, by reducing practice variations and reducing the gap between current knowledge and clinical practice.

The 2017 update of The Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations for the Secondary Prevention of Stroke is a collection of current evidence-based recommendations intended for use by clinicians across a wide range of settings. The goal is to provide guidance for the prevention of ischemic stroke recurrence through the identification and management of modifiable vascular risk factors. Recommendations include those related to diagnostic testing, diet and lifestyle, smoking, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies, carotid artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and other cardiac conditions. Notable changes in this sixth edition include the development of core elements for delivering secondary stroke prevention services, the addition of a section on cervical artery dissection, new recommendations regarding the management of patent foramen ovale, and the removal of the recommendations on management of sleep apnea. The Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations include a range of supporting materials such as implementation resources to facilitate the adoption of evidence to practice, and related performance measures to enable monitoring of uptake and effectiveness of the recommendations. The guidelines further emphasize the need for a systems approach to stroke care, involving an interprofessional team, with access to specialists regardless of patient location, and the need to overcome geographic barriers to ensure equity in access within a universal health care system.

The 2020 update of the Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations (CSBPR) for the Secondary Prevention of Stroke includes current evidence-based recommendations and expert opinions intended for use by clinicians across a broad range of settings. They provide guidance for the prevention of ischemic stroke recurrence through the identification and management of modifiable vascular risk factors. Recommendations address triage, diagnostic testing, lifestyle behaviors, vaping, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, other cardiac conditions, antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies, and carotid and vertebral artery disease. This update of the previous 2017 guideline contains several new or revised recommendations. Recommendations regarding triage and initial assessment of acute transient ischemic attack (TIA) and minor stroke have been simplified, and selected aspects of the etiological stroke workup are revised. Updated treatment recommendations based on new evidence have been made for dual antiplatelet therapy for TIA and minor stroke; anticoagulant therapy for atrial fibrillation; embolic strokes of undetermined source; low-density lipoprotein lowering; hypertriglyceridemia; diabetes treatment; and patent foramen ovale management. A new section has been added to provide practical guidance regarding temporary interruption of antithrombotic therapy for surgical procedures. Cancer-associated ischemic stroke is addressed. A section on virtual care delivery of secondary stroke prevention services in included to highlight a shifting paradigm of care delivery made more urgent by the global pandemic. In addition, where appropriate, sex differences as they pertain to treatments have been addressed. The CSBPR include supporting materials such as implementation resources to facilitate the adoption of evidence into practice and performance measures to enable monitoring of uptake and effectiveness of recommendations.

Objectives: Hip and femoral neck fractures are common in elderly patients, who are at an increased risk of complications if their pain is suboptimally managed. This systematic review seeks to determine if regional nerve blocks reduce pain, reduce the need for parenteral opiates, and reduce complications, compared to standard pain management with opiates, acetaminophen, or NSAIDs. Data sources: Systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials found 401 articles, of which nine were selected for inclusion. Study selection: Randomized controlled trials including adult patients with a hip or femoral neck fracture (Population) who had a 3-in-1 femoral nerve block, traditional femoral nerve block, or fascia iliaca compartment block performed preoperatively (Intervention). Comparison must have been made with standard pain management with opiates, acetaminophen, or NSAIDs (Comparison) and outcomes must have included pain score reduction (Outcome). Data synthesis: Eight out of nine studies concluded pain scores were improved with the regional nerve block compared to standard pain management. A significant reduction in parenteral opiate use was seen in five out of six studies. No patients suffered life-threatening complications related to the nerve block; however, more minor complications were underreported. Most of the studies were at a moderate to high risk of bias. Conclusions: Regional nerve blocks for hip and femoral neck fractures have a benefit in reducing pain and the need for IV opiates. The use of these blocks can be recommended for these patients. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials are required. RÉSUMÉObjectifs: Les fractures de la hanche et du col du fémur sont fréquentes chez les personnes âgées, qui connaissent un risque accru de complications si le soulagement de la douleur n'est pas suffisant. La revue systématique présentée ici visait à déterminer si l'analgésie régionale par blocage nerveux permettait d'atténuer la douleur, de réduire la nécessité d'administrer des opiacés par voie parentérale et de diminuer le risque de complications comparativement au traitement habituel de la douleur par les opiacés, l'acétaminophène ou les anti-inflammatoires non stéroïdiens (AINS). Sources de données:Une revue systématique effectuée dans les bases de données MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL et Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials a permis de relever 401 articles, dont 9 ont été retenus pour l'étude.Sélection des études: Il s'agissait d'essais comparatifs à répartition aléatoire, menés chez des adultes qui avaient subi une fracture de la hanche ou du col du fémur (population) et qui avaient été traités par un bloc fémoral « 3 en 1 », un bloc fémoral classique ou un bloc de la loge du fascia iliaque en phase préopératoire (intervention). Les comparaisons devaient avoir été établies avec le traitement habituel de la douleur par les opiacés, l'acétaminophène ou les AINS (comparaison) et les résultats devaient faire état d'une réduction du score d...

Radiology performed ultrasonography is a valuable tool for identifying renal colic that will go on to receive a surgical intervention in the 16 weeks following an ED visit. Further studies are needed to confirm the utility of ultrasound findings of stone visualisation, stone size and moderate to severe hydronephrosis in determining which patients need outpatient urology follow-up.

Background: Despite increasing use of the flipped classroom (FC) technique in undergraduate medical education, the benefit in learning outcomes over lectures is inconsistent. Best practices in preclass video design principles are rarely used, and it is unclear if videos can replace lectures in contemporary medical education. Methods:We conducted a prospective quasi-experimental controlled educational study comparing theorybased videos to traditional lectures in a medical student curriculum. Medical students enrolled in an emergency medicine clerkship were randomly assigned to either a lecture group (LG) or a video group (VG). The slide content was identical, and the videos aligned with cognitive load theory-based multimedia design principles. Students underwent baseline (pretest), week 1 (posttest), and end-of-rotation (retention) written knowledge tests and an observed structured clinical examination (OSCE) assessment. We compared scores between both groups and surveyed student attitudes and satisfaction with respect to the two learning methods.Results: There were 104 students who participated in OSCE assessments (49 LG, 55 VG) and 101 students who participated in knowledge tests (48 LG, 53 VG). The difference in OSCE scores was statistically significant 1.29 (95% confidence interval = 0.23 to 2.35, t(102) = 2.43, p = 0.017), but the actual score difference was small from an educational standpoint (12.61 for LG, 11.32 for VG). All three knowledge test scores for both groups were not significantly different.Conclusions: Videos based on cognitive load theory produced similar results and could replace traditional lectures for medical students. Educators contemplating a FC approach should devote their valuable classroom time to active learning methods. M edical educators have increasingly proposed using a flipped classroom (FC) for medical student education. 1,2 In this model, the traditional lecture is a student's preclass homework, while in-class time is spent on active, inquiry-based learning facilitated by an instructor. 1,3-5 Most preclass lectures were recorded in the forms of podcasts, screencasts, and videos. 6 Despite the promise of FC to promote active learning, outcomes are inconsistent. 6-8 By dissecting how each element (preclass and in-class) contributes to learning,

Background In Canada, 30%-60% of patients presenting to emergency departments are ambulatory. This category has been labeled as a source of emergency department overuse. Acting on the presumption that primary care practices and walk-in clinics offer equivalent care at a lower cost, governments have invested massively in improving access to these alternative settings in the hope that patients would present there instead when possible, thereby reducing the load on emergency departments. Data in support of this approach remain scarce and equivocal. Objective The aim of this study is to compare the value of care received in emergency departments, walk-in clinics, and primary care practices by ambulatory patients with upper respiratory tract infection, sinusitis, otitis media, tonsillitis, pharyngitis, bronchitis, influenza-like illness, pneumonia, acute asthma, or acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Methods A multicenter prospective cohort study will be performed in Ontario and Québec. In phase 1, a time-driven activity-based costing method will be applied at each of the 15 study sites. This method uses time as a cost driver to allocate direct costs (eg, medication), consumable expenditures (eg, needles), overhead costs (eg, building maintenance), and physician charges to patient care. Thus, the cost of a care episode will be proportional to the time spent receiving the care. At the end of this phase, a list of care process costs will be generated and used to calculate the cost of each consultation during phase 2, in which a prospective cohort of patients will be monitored to compare the care received in each setting. Patients aged 18 years and older, ambulatory throughout the care episode, and discharged to home with one of the aforementioned targeted diagnoses will be considered. The estimated sample size is 1485 patients. The 3 types of care settings will be compared on the basis of primary outcomes in terms of the proportion of return visits to any site 3 and 7 days after the initial visit and the mean cost of care. The secondary outcomes measured will include scores on patient-reported outcome and experience measures and mean costs borne wholly by patients. We will use multilevel generalized linear models to compare the care settings and an overlap weights approach to adjust for confounding factors related to age, sex, gender, ethnicity, comorbidities, registration with a family physician, socioeconomic status, and severity of illness. Results Phase 1 will begin in 2021 and phase 2, in 2023. The results will be available in 2025. Conclusions The end point of our program will be for deciders, patients, and care providers to be able to determine the most appropriate care setting for the management of ambulatory emergency respiratory conditions, based on the quality and cost of care associated with each alternative. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/25619

Background and objectiveDespite firearms contributing to significant morbidity and mortality globally, firearm injury epidemiology is seldom described outside of the USA. We examined firearm injuries among youth in Canada, including weapon type, and intent.DesignPopulation-based, pooled cross-sectional study using linked health administrative and demographic databases.SettingOntario, Canada.ParticipantsAll children and youth from birth to 24 years, residing in Ontario from 1 April 2003 to 31 March 2018.ExposureFirearm injury intent and weapon type using the International Classification of Disease-10 CM codes with Canadian enhancements. Secondary exposures were sociodemographics including age, sex, rurality and income.Main outcomesAny hospital or death record of a firearm injury with counts and rates of firearm injuries described overall and stratified by weapon type and injury intent. Multivariable Poisson regression stratified by injury intent was used to calculate rate ratios of firearm injuries by weapon type.ResultsOf 5486 children and youth with a firearm injury (annual rate: 8.8/100 000 population), 90.7% survived. Most injuries occurred in males (90.1%, 15.5/100 000 population). 62.3% (3416) of injuries were unintentional (5.5/100 000 population) of which 1.9% were deaths, whereas 26.5% (1452) were assault related (2.3/100 00 population) of which 18.7% were deaths. Self-injury accounted for 3.7% (204) of cases of which 72.0% were deaths. Across all intents, adjusted regression models showed males were at an increased risk of injury. Non-powdered firearms accounted for half (48.6%, 3.9/100 000 population) of all injuries. Compared with handguns, non-powdered firearms had a higher risk of causing unintentional injuries (adjusted rate ratio (aRR) 14.75, 95% CI 12.01 to 18.12) but not assault (aRR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.00).ConclusionsFirearm injuries are a preventable public health problem among youth in Ontario, Canada. Unintentional injuries and those caused by non-powdered firearms were most common and assault and self-injury contributed to substantial firearm-related deaths and should be a focus of prevention efforts.