11 research outputs found

    Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on ophthalmic presentations to an Australian outer metropolitan and rural emergency department: a retrospective comparative study.

    Full text link
    BACKGROUND: To analyse ophthalmic presentations to an outer metropolitan and a rural emergency department (ED) during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. METHODS: A retrospective comparative study of ophthalmic emergency presentations to Campbelltown Hospital (fifth busiest NSW metropolitan ED; population 310,000) and Bowral and District Hospital (rural ED; population 48,000) before and during COVID-19 was conducted. Patient demographics, triage category, referral source, diagnosis, length of stay, departure status, and follow-up location were assessed from coding data between March 1st to May 31st in 2019 and 2020, corresponding to the peak case numbers and restrictions during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in NSW. Differences before and during COVID-19 were analysed using chi-squared tests or independent sample t-tests. RESULTS: There was no change in ophthalmic presentations at Campbelltown (n = 228 in 2019 vs. n = 232 in 2020; + 1.75%, p = 0.12) and an increase at Bowral (n = 100 in 2019 vs. n = 111 in 2020; + 11%, p < 0.01) during COVID-19. Urgent ophthalmic presentations (Triage Category 3) decreased at Bowral (p = 0.0075), while non-urgent ophthalmic presentations (Triage Category 5) increased at both hospitals (Campbelltown p < 0.05, Bowral p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: There was no change in the total number of ophthalmic presentations to an outer metropolitan and an increase to a rural ED during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in New South Wales, Australia. A change in the type of ophthalmic presentations at these peripheral EDs suggest that a high demand for ophthalmic services remained despite the pandemic and its associated gathering and movement restrictions. A flexible healthcare delivery strategy, such as tele-ophthalmology, may optimise patient care during and after COVID-19

    Papers Screening for gestational diabetes mellitus: the Sri Lankan experience

    No full text
    Objective To evaluate tests used for screening and confirmation of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in Sri Lanka. Methods Field based: Consecutive pregnant women in Homagama DDHS area (n = 853), were assessed for risk factors and subjected to random and postprandial urinary Benedict’s and Dipstick ® tests, fasting and 2 hour post 75 g glucose capillary blood glucose (FBG and 2 hBG) which were validated against 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) performed at 24–28 weeks (WHO criteria). Hospital based: Retrospective analysis of consecutive high-risk women (n = 999) and prospective study of randomly selected GDM women (n = 66) to assess predictive value of the OGTT. Results Field based: Sensitivity and specificity respectively of random urine Benedict’s, 10%, 99.2%; postprandia

    Futility in acute care surgery: first do no harm

    No full text
    The consequences of the delivery of futile or potentially ineffective medical care and interventions are devastating on the healthcare system, our patients and their families, and healthcare providers. In emergency situations in particular, determining if escalating invasive interventions will benefit a frail and/or severely critically ill patient can be exceedingly difficult. In this review, our objective is to define the problem of potentially ineffective care within the specialty of acute care surgery and describe strategies for improving the care of our patients in these difficult situations

    An observation-first strategy for liver injuries with blush on computed tomography is safe and effective.

    No full text
    INTRODUCTION: The management of liver injuries in hemodynamically stable patients is variable and includes primary treatment strategies of observation (OBS), angiography (interventional radiology [IR]) with angioembolization (AE), or operative intervention (OR). We aimed to evaluate the management of patients with liver injuries with active extravasation on computed tomography (CT) imaging, hypothesizing that AE will have more complications without improving outcomes compared with OBS. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, observational study. Patients who underwent CT within 2 hours after arrival with extravasation (e.g., blush) on imaging were included. Exclusion criteria included cirrhosis, nontraumatic hemorrhage, transfers from outside facilities, and pregnancy. No hemodynamic exclusion criteria were used. The primary outcome was liver-specific complications. Secondary outcomes include length of stay and mortality. Angioembolization patients were compared with patients treated without AE. Propensity score matching was used to match based on penetrating mechanism, liver injury severity, arrival vital signs, and early transfusion. RESULTS: Twenty-three centers enrolled 192 patients. Forty percent of patients (n = 77) were initially OBS. Eleven OBS patients (14%) failed nonoperative management and went to IR or OR. Sixty-one patients (32%) were managed with IR, and 42 (69%) of these had AE as an initial intervention. Fifty-four patients (28%) went to OR+/- IR. After propensity score matching (n = 34 per group), there was no difference in baseline characteristics between AE and OBS. The AE group experienced more complications with a higher rate of IR-placed drains for abscess or biloma (22% vs. 0%, p = 0.01) and an increased overall length of stay ( p = 0.01). No difference was noted in transfusions or mortality. CONCLUSION: Observation is highly effective with few requiring additional interventions. Angioembolization was associated with higher rate of secondary drain placement for abscesses or biloma. Given this, a trial of OBS and avoidance of empiric AE may be warranted in hemodynamically stable, liver-injured patient with extravasation on CT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level II

    Early VTE prophylaxis in severe traumatic brain injury: A propensity score weighted EAST multicenter study.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) are at high risk of venous thromboembolism events (VTE). We hypothesized that early chemical VTE prophylaxis initiation (≤24 hours of a stable head CT) in severe TBI would reduce VTE without increasing risk of intracranial hemorrhage expansion (ICHE). METHODS: A retrospective review of adult patients 18 years or older with isolated severe TBI (Abbreviated Injury Scale score, ≥ 3) who were admitted to 24 Level I and Level II trauma centers from January 1, 2014 to December 31 2020 was conducted. Patients were divided into those who did not receive any VTE prophylaxis (NO VTEP), who received VTE prophylaxis ≤24 hours after stable head CT (VTEP ≤24) and who received VTE prophylaxis \u3e24 hours after stable head CT (VTEP\u3e24). Primary outcomes were VTE and ICHE. Covariate balancing propensity score weighting was utilized to balance demographic and clinical characteristics across three groups. Weighted univariate logistic regression models were estimated for VTE and ICHE with patient group as predictor of interest. RESULTS: Of 3,936 patients, 1,784 met inclusion criteria. Incidences of VTE was significantly higher in the VTEP\u3e24 group, with higher incidences of DVT in the group. Higher incidences of ICHE were observed in the VTEP≤24 and VTEP\u3e24 groups. After propensity score weighting, there was a higher risk of VTE in patients in VTEP \u3e24 compared with those in VTEP≤24 (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-3.30; p = 0.307), however was not significant. Although, the No VTEP group had decreased odds of having ICHE compared with VTEP≤24 (odds ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-1.02, p = 0.070), the result was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: In this large multi-center analysis, there were no significant differences in VTE based on timing of initiation of VTE prophylaxis. Patients who never received VTE prophylaxis had decreased odds of ICHE. Further evaluation of VTE prophylaxis in larger randomized studies will be necessary for definitive conclusions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Care Management; Level III
    corecore