Correction to: Epidemiology of patients presenting to a pediatric emergency department in Karachi, Pakistan

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article

Epidemiology of patients presenting to a pediatric emergency department in Karachi, Pakistan

Background: There is little data describing pediatric emergencies in resource-poor countries, such as Pakistan. We studied the demographics, management, and outcomes of patients presenting to the highest-volume, public, pediatric emergency department (ED) in Karachi, Pakistan.Methods: In this prospective, observational study, we approached all patients presenting to the 50-bed ED during 28 12-h study periods over four consecutive weeks (July 2013). Participants’ chief complaints and medical care were documented. Patients were followed-up at 48-h and 14-days via telephone. Results: Of 3115 participants, 1846 were triaged to the outpatient department and 1269 to the ED. Patients triaged to the ED had a median age of 2.0 years (IQR 0.5–4.0); 30% were neonates (\u3c 28 days). Top chief complaints were fever (45.5%), diarrhea/vomiting (32.3%), respiratory (23.1%), abdominal (7.5%), and otolaryngological problems (5.8%). Temperature, pulse and respiratory rate, and blood glucose were documented for 66, 42, and 1.5% of patients, respectively. Interventions included medications (92%), IV fluids (83%), oxygen (35%), and advanced airway management (5%). Forty-five percent of patients were admitted; 11 % left against medical advice. Outcome data was available at time of ED disposition, 48-h, and 14 days for 83, 62, and 54% of patients, respectively. Of participants followed-up, 4.3% died in the ED, 11.5% within 48 h, and 19.6% within 14 days.Conclusions: This first epidemiological study at Pakistan’s largest pediatric ED reveals dramatically high mortality, particularly among neonates. Future research in developing countries should focus on characterizing reasons for high mortality through pre-ED arrival tracking, ED care quality assessment, and post-ED follow-up

Additional file 2: of Epidemiology of patients presenting to a pediatric emergency department in Karachi, Pakistan

Table S2. Logistic regression model for predictors of mortality for all patients (N = 679, c-statistic = 0.82): 85% of followed patients were included in this model, of which 17% of patients died. Model was controlled for gender. (DOCX 15 kb

Additional file 1: of Epidemiology of patients presenting to a pediatric emergency department in Karachi, Pakistan

Table S1. Logistic regression model for predictors of admission for children greater than 1 year of age (N = 470, c-statistic = 0.77): 85% of followed patients were included in the model. Of these patients, 36% were admitted, 64% were sent home. Model was controlled for gender. (DOCX 17 kb

Serious Asthma Events with Fluticasone plus Salmeterol versus Fluticasone Alone

BACKGROUND: The safe and appropriate use of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) for the treatment of asthma has been widely debated. In two large clinical trials, investigators found a potential risk of serious asthma-related events associated with LABAs. This study was designed to evaluate the risk of administering the LABA salmeterol in combination with an inhaled glucocorticoid, fluticasone propionate. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, adolescent and adult patients (age, ≥12 years) with persistent asthma were assigned to receive either fluticasone with salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. All the patients had a history of a severe asthma exacerbation in the year before randomization but not during the previous month. Patients were excluded from the trial if they had a history of life-threatening or unstable asthma. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization). Noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol to fluticasone alone was defined as an upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the risk of the primary safety end point of less than 2.0. The efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation. RESULTS: Of 11,679 patients who were enrolled, 67 had 74 serious asthma-related events, with 36 events in 34 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 38 events in 33 patients in the fluticasone-only group. The hazard ratio for a serious asthma-related event in the fluticasone-salmeterol group was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.66), and noninferiority was achieved (P=0.003). There were no asthma-related deaths; 2 patients in the fluticasone-only group underwent asthma-related intubation. The risk of a severe asthma exacerbation was 21% lower in the fluticasone-salmeterol group than in the fluticasone-only group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89), with at least one severe asthma exacerbation occurring in 480 of 5834 patients (8%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group, as compared with 597 of 5845 patients (10%) in the fluticasone-only group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone did not have a significantly higher risk of serious asthma-related events than did those who received fluticasone alone. Patients receiving fluticasone-salmeterol had fewer severe asthma exacerbations than did those in the fluticasone-only group