Search

Background: We aimed to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of the VitalScan magnetocardiograph (MCG) for suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS)., Methods: We undertook a prospective cohort study evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of the MCG in adults with suspected ACS. The reference standard of ACS was determined by an independent adjudication committee based on 30-day investigations and events. The cohort was split into a training sample, to derive the MCG algorithm and an algorithm combining MCG with a modified Manchester Acute Coronary Syndrome (MACS) clinical probability score, and a validation sample, to estimate diagnostic accuracy., Results: We recruited 756 participants and analysed data from 680 (293 training, 387 validation), of whom 96 (14%) had ACS. In the training sample, the respective area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves were the following: MCG 0.66 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.74), MACS 0.64 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.73) and MCG+MACS 0.70 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.77). MCG specificity was 0.16 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.21) at the threshold achieving acceptable sensitivity for rule-out (>0.98). In the validation sample (n=387), the respective AUROCs were the following: MCG 0.56 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.64), MACS 0.69 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.77) and MCG+MACS 0.64 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.72). MCG sensitivity was 0.89 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.95) and specificity 0.15 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.20) at the rule-out threshold. MCG+MACS sensitivity was 0.85 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.92) and specificity 0.30 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.35)., Conclusion: The VitalScan MCG is currently unable to accurately rule out ACS and is not yet ready for use in clinical practice. Further developmental research is required., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The University of Sheffield received funding from Creavo Medical Technologies for the time committed to the study by its employees (SG, SJW)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: The combination of constrained resources, patient complexity and rapidly increasing demand has meant that healthcare productivity constitutes a significant problem for emergency medicine. However, healthcare productivity remains a contentious issue, with some criticising the level of professional engagement. This paper will propose that productivity improvements in healthcare could occur (and be sustained) if professionals' perceptions and views of productivity were better understood., Methods: An 8-month ethnographic study was conducted in a large UK ED, using semistructured interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) (n=26), a focus group and observation. Thematic analysis of the data was undertaken based on an interpretivist philosophy., Results: The data demonstrate that HCPs accept productivity improvement as part of their contemporary professional role. In particular, their understanding of productivity is focused around five key domains: the patient; the professional; the culture; the process of work and the economic., Conclusions: By exploring how these HCPs experienced and made sense of productivity improvement and productive healthcare, the data reveals how HCPs may reconcile a culture of caring with one of efficiency. Understanding healthcare productivity from this perspective has potential implications for service improvement design and performance measurement., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Background: Childhood unintentional and suspected poisonings are a serious public health problem. Evidence from systematic reviews demonstrates that home safety education in combination with safety equipment provision increases the safe storage of medicines and other products. There is lack of evidence that poisoning prevention practices reduce poisoning rates., Objectives: To estimate ORs for medically attended poisonings in children aged 0-4 years for items of safety equipment, home hazards and parental safety practices aimed at preventing poisoning, and to explore differential effects by child and family factors., Design: Multicentre case-control study in UK hospitals with validation of parent-reported exposures using home observations. Cases are aged 0-4 years with a medically attended poisoning occurring at home, matched on age and sex with community controls. Children attending hospital for other types of injury will serve as unmatched hospital controls. Matched analyses will use conditional logistic regression; unmatched analyses will use unconditional logistic regression to adjust for confounding variables. The study requires 266 poisoning cases and 1064 matched controls to detect an OR of 0.64 for safe storage of medicinal products and of 0.65 for non-medicinal products, with 80% power, a 5% significance level and a correlation between exposures in cases and controls of 0.1., Main Outcome Measures: Unintentional childhood poisoning., Discussion: This will be the largest study to date exploring modifiable risk factors for poisoning in young children. Findings will inform: policy makers developing poison prevention strategies, practitioners delivering poison prevention interventions, parents to reduce the risk of poisoning in their homes., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Objective: To evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of methoxyflurane for the treatment of acute pain in patients presenting to an emergency department (ED) with minor trauma., Methods: STOP! was a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled study conducted at six sites in the UK. A total of 300 patients, 90 of whom were adolescent patients (age 12-17 years), were randomised 150:150 to receive either methoxyflurane via a Penthrox inhaler or placebo. The primary end point of the study was the change in pain intensity as measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS) from baseline to 5, 10, 15 and 20 min after the start of study drug inhalation. Patients were supplied with one inhaler containing 3 mL methoxyflurane or 5 mL placebo after enrolment and initial assessments. Age group (adolescent/adult) and baseline VAS score were controlled for in the statistical analyses., Results: A total of 149 patients received methoxyflurane, and 149 patients received placebo. Demographic and baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. Methoxyflurane reduced pain severity significantly more than placebo (p<0.0001) at all time points tested, with the greatest estimated treatment effect of -18.5 mm (adjusted change from baseline) seen at 15 min after the start of treatment. Methoxyflurane was well tolerated, with the majority of adverse reactions being mild, transient and in line with anticipated pharmacological action., Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that methoxyflurane administered via the Penthrox inhaler is an efficacious, safe, and rapidly acting analgesic., Trial Registration Number: NCT01420159., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background: Childhood falls result in considerable morbidity, mortality and health service use. Despite this, little evidence exists on protective factors or effective falls prevention interventions in young children., Objectives: To estimate ORs for three types of medically attended fall injuries in young children in relation to safety equipment, safety behaviours and hazard reduction and explore differential effects by child and family factors and injury severity., Design: Three multicentre case-control studies in UK hospitals with validation of parental reported exposures using home observations. Cases are aged 0-4 years with a medically attended fall injury occurring at home, matched on age and sex with community controls. Children attending hospital for other types of injury will serve as unmatched hospital controls. Matched analyses will use conditional logistic regression to adjust for potential confounding variables. Unmatched analyses will use unconditional logistic regression, adjusted for age, sex, deprivation and distance from hospital in addition to other confounders. Each study requires 496 cases and 1984 controls to detect an OR of 0.7, with 80% power, 5% significance level, a correlation between cases and controls of 0.1 and a range of exposure prevalences., Main Outcome Measures: Falls on stairs, on one level and from furniture., Discussion: As the largest in the field to date, these case control studies will adjust for potential confounders, validate measures of exposure and investigate modifiable risk factors for specific falls injury mechanisms. Findings should enhance the evidence base for falls prevention for young children.

Aim: To determine the potential of the Canadian Cervical Spine Rule (CCR) to safely reduce the number of cervical spine (c-spine) radiographs performed in the UK emergency department setting., Methods: The study was conducted in two UK emergency departments with a combined annual attendance of >150,000 adult patients. Over the 24 month trial period, 148 doctors were provided training in the use of the CCR and instructed to assess eligible patients presenting with potential c-spine injury. Doctors were instructed to manage patients according to existing practice and not according to the decision obtained from the rule. A subsample of patients was reassessed by a second doctor to test interobserver reliability., Results: A total of 1420 patients were enrolled in the study (50.4% male). 987 (69.5%) had c-spine radiography performed, with 8 (0.6%) having a c-spine injury. If the decision for radiography had been made according to the outcome of the CCR, only 815 (57.4%) would have had c-spine radiography and all 8 abnormal cases would have undergone imaging. Doctors were comfortable using the rule in 91% of cases. Interobserver reliability was good (κ=0.75 95% CI 0.44 to 1.06)., Conclusion: The CCR can be applied successfully in the UK. Had the CCR been in use during the study period, a 17.4% reduction in radiography could have been achieved without compromising patient care.