Search

Introduction: Paediatric emergency medicine (PEM) is poorly developed in low and middle-income countries. The magnitude of challenges facing Paediatric Emergency Departments (PEDs) in Nigeria has not been well described. This study aimed to assess paediatric emergency care preparedness across PEDs in Nigeria., Methods: This was a prospective cross-sectional study that utilized a self-administered questionnaire and a check list to assess three key domains (managerial, medication and equipment) in tertiary care PED facilities that were recruited across Nigeria. Preparedness scores and other institutional attributes were compared between zones and regions., Results: Thirty-four tertiary-level PEDs across Nigeria were included. The mean number of patient visits over the 30-day period prior to data collection was 253.2 (±261.2). The mean (SD) managerial, medication and equipment performance scores of the included PEDs were 42.9% (±14.3%), 50.7% (±22.3%) and 43.9% (±11.8%) respectively. The mean (SD) total performance score was 46.9% (±15.3%). Only 13 PEDs had a total performance score of >50%. There was a statistically significant higher mean equipment score (p = 0.029) in the Southern region (47.6 ± 3.1) compared to the Northern region (38.9 ± 2.3) of the country., Conclusions: This study reports a global but remediable deficiency in emergency care preparedness amongst PEDs in tertiary care facilities in Nigeria. This study highlights the need for training of PED managers in basic and advanced life support and for the improvement in medication and equipment procurement across Nigeria., Competing Interests: This research was funded by the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund) scholarship award from the Federal government of Nigeria through The University of Calabar academic staff development scheme. The authors declared no other conflicts of interest., (© 2020 African Federation for Emergency Medicine. Publishing services provided by Elsevier.)

Introduction: Procedural sedation and analgesia allows the clinician to safely and efficiently administer sedation, analgesia, anxiolysis and sometimes amnesia to facilitate the performance of various procedures in the emergency centre. The aim of this study is to determine current sedation practices, common indications and major obstacles in selected emergency centres across Southern Gauteng, South Africa, with a view to improving future standards and practices., Methods: This was a prospective, questionnaire based, cross-sectional interview of emergency centre managers or their designee of selected private-sector and public-sector hospitals in Southern Gauteng., Results: Overall, 17 hospitals completed the interview, nine (53%) public-sector and eight (47%) private-sector hospitals, with 36% of hospitals being aligned to an academic institute. All hospitals performed procedural sedation in their emergency centre. Forty seven percent of managers had between ten and 19 years of clinical experience post internship. Although eleven (64.7%) managers achieved a postgraduate qualification in emergency medicine, only seven (41%) were accredited with a Fellowship of the College of Emergency Medicine (FCEM) qualification and only three (17.7%) centres employed three or more specialists. The majority of centres (52.3%) performed between ten and 30 procedures per month requiring sedation. Staff training in the practice of procedural sedation was mostly obtained internally (52.9%), from in-house seniors. Essential drugs, procedure monitors, resuscitation equipment and protocols were all available in 70.6% of centres., Conclusion: Although the safe practice and awareness of procedural sedation and analgesia in both public-sector and private-sector emergency centres in Southern Gauteng appears to be on the increase, there is still a need to enhance practitioner training and promote awareness of current local and international trends, protocols and recommendations.