Temporal differences in gamma-hydroxybutyrate overdoses involving injecting drug users versus recreational drug users in Helsinki : a retrospective study

Peer reviewe

Cholesterol metabolism and weight reduction in subjects with mild obstructive sleep apnoea: a randomised, controlled study

Peer reviewe

Varavoimaa ja vesikelloja

Lääkinnällisten laitteiden käyttöön liittyy paljon ”läheltä piti” -tilanteita, joskus myös vakavia vaaratilanteita. Laitteita tulee käyttää vain valmistajan ilmoittamassa tarkoituksessa ja käyttöohjeiden mukaisesti

Prone Versus Sitting Position in Neurosurgery-Differences in Patients' Hemodynamic Management

OBJECTIVE: Neurosurgery in general anesthesia exposes patients to hemodynamic alterations in both the prone and the sitting position. We aimed to evaluate the hemodynamic profile during stroke volume-directed fluid administration in patients undergoing neurosurgery either in the sitting or the prone position. METHODS: In 2 separate prospective trials, 30 patients in prone and 28 patients in sitting position were randomly assigned to receive either Ringer acetate (RAC) or hydroxyethyl starch (HES; 130 kDa/0.4) for optimization of stroke volume. After combining data from these 2 trials, 2-way analysis of variance was performed to compare patients' hemodynamic profile between the 2 positions and to evaluate differences between RAC and HES consumption. RESULTS: To achieve comparable hemodynamics during surgery, a higher mean cumulative dose of RAC than HES was needed (679 mL +/- 390 vs. 455 mL +/- 253; P <0.05). When fluid consumption was adjusted with weight, statistical difference was lost. Fluid administration did not differ between the prone and sitting position. Mean arterial pressure was lower and cardiac index and stroke volume index were higher over time in patients in the sitting position. CONCLUSIONS: The sitting position does not require excess fluid treatment compared with the prone position. HES is slightly more effective than RAC in achieving comparable hemodynamics, but the difference might be explained by patient weight. With goal-directed fluid administration and moderate use of vasoactive drugs, it is possible to achieve stable hemodynamics in both positions.Peer reviewe

Paramedics' and pre-hospital physicians' assessments of anatomic injury in trauma patients: a cohort study

Peer reviewe

Pre-hospital severe traumatic brain injury - comparison of outcome in paramedic versus physician staffed emergency medical services

Background: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the leading causes of death and permanent disability. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel are often the first healthcare providers attending patients with TBI. The level of available care varies, which may have an impact on the patient's outcome. The aim of this study was to evaluate mortality and neurological outcome of TBI patients in two regions with differently structured EMS systems. Methods: A 6-year period (2005 - 2010) observational data on pre-hospital TBI management in paramedic-staffed EMS and physician-staffed EMS systems were retrospectively analysed. Inclusion criteria for the study were severe isolated TBI presenting with unconsciousness defined as Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score Results: During the 6-year study period a total of 458 patients met the inclusion criteria. One-year mortality was higher in the paramedic-staffed EMS group: 57 % vs. 42 %. Also good neurological outcome was less common in patients treated in the paramedic-staffed EMS group. Discussion: We found no significant difference between the study groups when considering the secondary brain injury associated vital signs on-scene. Also on arrival to ED, the proportion of hypotensive patients was similar in both groups. However, hypoxia was common in the patients treated by the paramedic-staffed EMS on arrival to the ED, while in the physician-staffed EMS almost none of the patients were hypoxic. Prehospital intubation by EMS physicians probably explains this finding. Conclusion: The results suggest to an outcome benefit from physician-staffed EMS treating TBI patients.Peer reviewe

Ketamiini ja kallonsisäinen paine : todellinen ongelma vai paljon melua tyhjästä

Ketamiinin käyttö ensihoidossa on lisääntynyt, sillä se ei lamaa hengitystä eikä verenkiertoa. Ketamiini saattaa kuitenkin nostaa kallonsisäistä painetta. Onko ketamiini turvallinen lääke ensihoidossa aivotapahtumapotilaita hoidettaessa? Kannattaako teho-osastolla aivotapahtumapotilaita lääkitä ketamiinilla?</p

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat