Evaluating the effectiveness of the Emergency Neurological Life Support educational framework in low-income countries.

BackgroundThe Emergency Neurological Life Support (ENLS) is an educational initiative designed to improve the acute management of neurological injuries. However, the applicability of the course in low-income countries in unknown. We evaluated the impact of the course on knowledge, decision-making skills and preparedness to manage neurological emergencies in a resource-limited country.MethodsA prospective cohort study design was implemented for the first ENLS course held in Asia. Knowledge and decision-making skills for neurological emergencies were assessed at baseline, post-course and at 6 months following course completion. To determine perceived knowledge and preparedness, data were collected using surveys administered immediately post-course and 6 months later.ResultsA total of 34 acute care physicians from across Nepal attended the course. Knowledge and decision-making skills significantly improved following the course (p=0.0008). Knowledge and decision-making skills remained significantly improved after 6 months, compared with before the course (p=0.02), with no significant loss of skills immediately following the course to the 6-month follow-up (p=0.16). At 6 months, the willingness to participate in continuing medical education activities remained evident, with 77% (10/13) of participants reporting a change in their clinical practice and decision-making, with the repeated use of ENLS protocols as the main driver of change.ConclusionsUsing the ENLS framework, neurocritical care education can be delivered in low-income countries to improve knowledge uptake, with evidence of knowledge retention up to 6 months

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

Lung maladies following aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage

Pulmonary complications are common in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. It is associated with adverse outcome in the form of higher incidence of vasospasm, poor neurological outcome, longer length of stay and higher mortality. These patients are at high risk for ventilator associated pneumonia. Preventive measures, early detection and timely appropriate treatment is important. Acute respiratory distress is common in patients with subarachnoid haemorrhage. Measures to minimize the second hit to the vulnerable lungs is crucial. Low tidal volume ventilation, application of PEEP and prone ventilation should be used with special emphasis to avoid hypercarbia and increase in intracranial pressure. Activation of sympathetic nervous system, release of catecholamine and damage to pulmonary endothelium can lead to neurogenic pulmonary edema. Treatment of underlying cause and supportive care is helpful. These patients are at high risk of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Measures to prevent deep vein thrombosis and administration of pharmacological prophylaxis when safe, needs to be considered

Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound in Critically ill Patients

Lung ultrasound is increasingly being used by the bedside physicians to complement the findings of physical examination. Lung ultrasound is non-invasive, devoid of radiation exposure and can be performed rapidly and repeatedly as needed at bedside. This review aims to elucidate the evidence base and the future directions for bedside point-of-care lung ultrasound in critically ill patients.Research articles, review papers and online contents related to point-of-care ultrasound in critically ill patients were reviewed.The diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound for common conditions like pleural effusion, pneumothorax, pulmonary edema and pneumonia is superior to chest radiograph and is comparable to chest CT scan. Lung ultrasound is helpful to evaluate the progress of lung pathology and response to treatment, over time. Ultrasound guidance for thoracocentesis decreases the complication rates.Bedside lung ultrasound in critically ill patients can serve as a tool to diagnose common lung pathologies, monitor its course and guide clinical management

Global lessons learned from COVID-19 mass casualty incidents

With healthcare systems rapidly becoming overwhelmed and occupied by patients during a pandemic, effective and safe care for patients is easily compromised. During the course of the current pandemic, numerous treatment guidelines have been developed and published that have improved care for patients with COVID-19. Certain lessons have only been learned during the course of the outbreak, from which we can learn for future pandemics. This editorial aims to raise awareness about the importance of timely stockpiling of sufficient amounts of personal protection equipment and medications, adequate oxygen supplies, uninterrupted electricity, and fair locally adapted triage strategies

Pragmatic recommendations for tracheostomy, discharge, and rehabilitation measures in hospitalized patients recovering from severe COVID-19 in low- And middle-income countries

New studies of COVID-19 are constantly updating best practices in clinical care. However, research mainly originates in resource-rich settings in high-income countries. Often, it is impractical to apply recommendations based on these investigations to resource-constrained settings in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We report on a set of pragmatic recommendations for tracheostomy, discharge, and rehabilitation measures in hospitalized patients recovering from severe COVID-19 in LMICs. We recommend that tracheostomy be performed in a negative pressure room or negative pressure operating room, if possible, and otherwise in a single room with a closed door. We recommend using the technique that is most familiar to the institution and that can be conducted most safely. We recommend using fit-tested enhanced personal protection equipment, with the fewest people required, and incorporating strategies to minimize aerosolization of the virus. For recovering patients, we suggest following local, regional, or national hospital discharge guidelines. If these are lacking, we suggest deisolation and hospital discharge using symptom-based criteria, rather than with testing. We likewise suggest taking into consideration the capability of primary caregivers to provide the necessary care to meet the psychological, physical, and neurocognitive needs of the patient