Search

Background: The shortage of hospital beds for COVID-19 patients has been one critical cause of Emergency Department (ED) overcrowding. Purpose: We aimed at elaborating a strategy of conversion of hospital beds, from non-COVID-19 to COVID-19 care, minimizing both ED overcrowding and the number of beds eventually converted. Research Design: Observational retrospective study. Study Sample: We considered the centralized database of all ED admissions in the Lombardy region of Italy during the second "COVID-19 wave" (October to December 2020). Data collection and Analysis: We analyzed all admissions to 82 EDs. We devised a family of Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the performance of hospital beds' conversion strategies triggered by ED crowding of COVID-19 patients, determining a critical number of beds to be converted when passing an ED-specific crowding threshold. Results: Our results suggest that the maximum number of patients waiting for hospitalization could have been decreased by 70% with the proposed strategy. Such a reduction would have been achieved by converting 30% more hospital beds than the total number converted in the region. Conclusions: The disproportion between reduction in ED crowding and additionally converted beds suggests that a wide margin to improve the efficiency of the conversions exists. The proposed simulation apparatus can be easily generalized to study management policies synchronizing ED output and in-hospital bed availability., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: There is no ubiquitous definition of Emergency Department (ED) crowding and several indicators have been proposed to measure it. The National ED Overcrowding Study (NEDOCS) score is among the most popular, even though it has been severely criticised. We used the waiting time for the physician's initial assessment to evaluate the performance of the NEDOCS and proposed a new crowding indicator based on this objective measure., Methods: To evaluate the NEDOCS, we used the 2022 data of all the Lombardy EDs and compared the distribution of waiting times across the five levels of the NEDOCS at ED arrival. To construct the new indicator, we estimated the centre-specific relationship between the total number of ED patients and the waiting time of those with minor or deferrable urgency. We defined seven classes of waiting times and calculated how many patients corresponded to an average waiting time in the classes. These centre-specific cutoffs were used to define the 7-level crowding indicator. The indicator was then compared to the NEDOCS score and validated on the first six months of 2023 data., Results: Patients' waiting time did not increase at the increase of the NEDOCS score, suggesting the absence of a relationship between this score and the effect of ED crowding on the ED capacity of evaluating new patients. The indicator we propose is easy to estimate in real-time and based on centre-specific cutoffs, which depend on the volume of yearly accesses. We observed minimal agreement between the proposed indicator and the NEDOCS in most EDs, both in the development and validation datasets., Conclusions: We proposed to quantify ED crowding using the waiting time for physician's initial assessment of patients with minor or deferrable urgency, which increases in crowding situations due to the prioritization of urgent patients. The centre-specific cutoffs avoid the problem of the heterogeneity of the volume of accesses and organization among EDs, while enabling a fair comparison between centres., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The progressive aging of the population and the increasing complexity of health issues contribute to a growing number of older individuals seeking emergency care. This study aims to assess the state of the art of care provided to older people in the Emergency Departments of Lombardy, the most populous region in Italy, counting over 2 million people aged 65 years and older., Methods: An online cross-sectional survey was developed and disseminated among emergency medicine physicians and physicians affiliated to the Lombardy section of the Italian Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology (SIGG), during June and July 2023. The questionnaire covered hospital profiles, geriatric consultation practices, risk assessment tools, discharge processes and perspectives on geriatric emergency care., Results: In this mixed method research, 219 structured interviews were collected. The majority of physicians were employed in hospitals, with 54.7% being geriatricians. Critical gaps in older patient's care were identified, including the absence of dedicated care pathways, insufficient awareness of screening tools, and a need for enhanced professional training., Conclusions: Tailored protocols and geriatric educational programs are crucial for improving the quality of emergency care provided to older individuals. These measures might also help relieve the burden on the Emergency Departments, thereby potentially enhancing overall efficiency and ensuring better outcomes., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Early identification of sepsis is particularly important in the emergency department (ED). However, data on the diagnosis of sepsis in the ED are scanty, especially within the Italian context. To quantify sepsis incidence and recognition in the ED from Lombardy, Italy, we used EUOL data from the Regional Emergency Agency for the years 2017-2022. Sepsis was identified based on the ED discharge diagnosis; recognized sepsis cases were those assigned to a high-priority code at triage, while unrecognized ones were those assigned to a low priority code. Odds ratios (ORs) for sepsis recognition according to various patient characteristics were estimated using multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression models. The rate of sepsis diagnosis in ED was 1.9 per 1000 (6626 patients) in 2017 and increased to 3.4 per 1000 in 2022 (11,508 patients). In 2022, 67% of sepsis cases were correctly identified. Death in the ED was more frequent in patients with recognized sepsis (10.4%) than in those with unrecognized sepsis (2.3%). The probability of sepsis being recognized at ED admission was higher in men (multivariable OR: 1.06), in individuals with advanced age (OR: 1.71 for age ≥ 90 years vs < 60), and in those with access to the second (OR: 1.48) and third ED level (OR: 1.87). Conversely, it was lower in patients arriving at the ED through autonomous transportation (OR: 0.36). This large real-world analysis indicates an increase in sepsis cases referred to the ED in recent years. About one-third of sepsis cases are not correctly identified at triage, although more severe cases appear to be promptly recognized., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Società Italiana di Medicina Interna (SIMI).)

Objectives: The fragmentation of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic at national, regional and local levels is a possible source of variability in the impact of the pandemic on society. This study aims to assess how much of this variability affected the burden of COVID-19, measured in terms of all-cause 2020 excess mortality., Design: Ecological retrospective study., Setting: Lombardy region of Italy, 2015-2020., Outcome Measures: We evaluated the relationship between the intensity of the epidemics and excess mortality, assessing the heterogeneity of this relationship across the 91 districts after adjusting for relevant confounders., Results: The epidemic intensity was quantified as the COVID-19 hospitalisations per 1000 inhabitants. Five confounders were identified through a directed acyclic graph: age distribution, population density, pro-capita gross domestic product, restriction policy and population mobility.Analyses were based on a negative binomial regression model with district-specific random effects. We found a strong, positive association between COVID-19 hospitalisations and 2020 excess mortality (p<0.001), estimating that an increase of one hospitalised COVID-19 patient per 1000 inhabitants resulted in a 15.5% increase in excess mortality. After adjusting for confounders, no district differed in terms of COVID-19-unrelated excess mortality from the average district. Minimal heterogeneity emerged in the district-specific relationships between COVID-19 hospitalisations and excess mortality (6 confidence intervals out of 91 did not cover the null value)., Conclusions: The homogeneous effect of the COVID-19 spread on the excess mortality in the Lombardy districts suggests that, despite the unprecedented conditions, the pandemic reactions did not result in health disparities in the region., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Sepsis and septic shock are major challenges and economic burdens to healthcare, impacting millions of people globally and representing significant causes of mortality. Recently, a large number of quality improvement programs focused on sepsis resuscitation bundles have been instituted worldwide. These educational initiatives have been shown to be associated with improvements in clinical outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the impact of a multi-faceted quality implementing program (QIP) on the compliance of a "simplified 1-h bundle" (Sepsis 6) and hospital mortality of severe sepsis and septic shock patients out of the intensive care unit (ICU)., Methods: Emergency departments (EDs) and medical wards (MWs) of 12 academic and non-academic hospitals in the Lombardy region (Northern Italy) were involved in a multi-faceted QIP, which included educational and organizational interventions. Patients with a clinical diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock according to the Sepsis-2 criteria were enrolled in two different periods: from May 2011 to November 2011 (before-QIP cohort) and from August 2012 to June 2013 (after-QIP cohort)., Measurements and Main Results: The effect of QIP on bundle compliance and hospital mortality was evaluated in a before-after analysis. We enrolled 467 patients in the before-QIP group and 656 in the after-QIP group. At the time of enrollment, septic shock was diagnosed in 50% of patients, similarly between the two periods. In the after-QIP group, we observed increased compliance to the "simplified rapid (1 h) intervention bundle" (the Sepsis 6 bundle - S6) at three time-points evaluated (1 h, 13.7 to 18.7%, p  = 0.018, 3 h, 37.1 to 48.0%, p  = 0.013, overall study period, 46.2 to 57.9%, p  < 0.001). We then analyzed compliance with S6 and hospital mortality in the before- and after-QIP periods, stratifying the two patients' cohorts by admission characteristics. Adherence to the S6 bundle was increased in patients with severe sepsis in the absence of shock, in patients with serum lactate <4.0 mmol/L, and in patients with hypotension at the time of enrollment, regardless of the type of admission (from EDs or MWs). Subsequently, in an observational analysis, we also investigated the relation between bundle compliance and hospital mortality by logistic regression. In the after-QIP cohort, we observed a lower in-hospital mortality than that observed in the before-QIP cohort. This finding was reported in subgroups where a higher adherence to the S6 bundle in the after-QIP period was found. After adjustment for confounders, the QIP appeared to be independently associated with a significant improvement in hospital mortality. Among the single S6 procedures applied within the first hour of sepsis diagnosis, compliance with blood culture and antibiotic therapy appeared significantly associated with reduced in-hospital mortality., Conclusion: A multi-faceted QIP aimed at promoting an early simplified bundle of care for the management of septic patients out of the ICU was associated with improved compliance with sepsis bundles and lower in-hospital mortality., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Monti, Rezoagli, Calini, Nova, Marchesi, Nattino, Carrara, Morra, Cortellaro, Savioli, Capra Marzani, Tresoldi, Villa, Greco, Bonfanti, Spitoni, Vesconi, Caironi, Fumagalli and “Lotta alla Sepsi” Team Study Group.)

While several studies have evaluated the prognostic weight of respiratory parameters in patients with COVID-19, few have focused on patients' clinical conditions at the first emergency department (ED) assessment. We analyzed a large cohort of ED patients recruited within the EC-COVID study over the year 2020, and assessed the association between key bedside respiratory parameters measured in room air (pO 2 , pCO 2 , pH, and respiratory rate [RR]) and hospital mortality, after adjusting for key confounding factors. Analyses were based on a multivariable logistic Generalized Additive Model (GAM). After excluding patients who did not perform a blood gas analysis (BGA) test in room air or with incomplete BGA results, a total of 2458 patients were considered in the analyses. Most patients were hospitalized on ED discharge (72.0%); hospital mortality was 14.3%. Strong, negative associations with hospital mortality emerged for pO 2 , pCO 2 and pH (p-values: < 0.001, < 0.001 and 0.014), while a significant, positive association was observed for RR (p-value < 0.001). Associations were quantified with nonlinear functions, learned from the data. No cross-parameter interaction was significant (all p-values were larger than 0.10), suggesting a progressive, independent effect on the outcome as the value of each parameter departed from normality. Our results collide with the hypothesized existence of patterns of breathing parameters with specific prognostic weight in the early stages of the disease., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Società Italiana di Medicina Interna (SIMI).)

Background and Aim: Covid-19 has profoundly changed the Emergency Department system in Lombardy, especially for the type of accesses and the number of diagnoses. Accordingly, the pre-hospital rescue system has undergone heavy changes, in particular regarding the times of rescue. Despite this, studies concerning the post-pandemic phase are lacking to understand whether the conditions of the emergency systems has resumed to the pre-pandemic period. The aim of the study is to evaluate the length of stay (LOS) phenomenon in the emergency departments (EDs) in the post-pandemic era., Methods: a retrospective observational study was conducted, which analyzed the first six months of the years 2019, 2021 and 2022. The pandemic peak phase, corresponding to the first months of 2020, wasn't included. The investigated area included the provinces of Milan and Monza, a metropolitan area with 4 million inhabitants., Results: The average time spent by patients in the ED increased by +3.8 hours in 2022 and by +1.3 hours in 2021 compared to 2019. The average time from ED access to hospitalization also increased by +4.8 hours in 2022 and +5.0 hours in 2021 compared to 2019. The percentage of time in ED recorded in a National Emergency Department Overcrowding Study (NEDOCS) in black code in 2022 reached 5.4% against 1.7% in 2021 and 0.5 % in 2019., Conclusions: data show an increase in the time spent in the EDs and an increase in the overcrowding, according to the NEDOCS index. New management models and a reorganization of EDs are needed as the workload has increased significantly.

Objectives: Due to factors that still remain under debate, both social and virological, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has continued to flare up in India, particularly in northern and western areas. This has led to an incidence of approximately 350,000 cases per day and a daily death toll of around 4000 in the weeks between May 1 and 14, 2021. The current pandemic is testing the adaptability of the oxygen distribution and consumption., Methods: Following India's request for support, the European Union (EU) Civil Protection Mechanism coordinated the response agreed by EU Member States providing shipments of oxygen and equipment. In this scenario, our Emergency Medical Team (EMT)-2, based in Italy, organized a cargo and a 12-member team of technicians and medical professionals with the main objective of installing a novel source of oxygen., Results: The installation of a Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA) oxygen plant provided the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) hospital in Greater Noida, India, with a sustainable solution to combat oxygen shortage in less than 48 h., Conclusions: The supply of oxygen could not be deemed a successful intervention without a proper plan to guarantee the rational use of the source so additional training was carried out. Our EMT were among the first responders in mitigating this public health crisis.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed a huge strain on the health care system globally. The metropolitan area of Milan, Italy, was one of the regions most impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide. Risk prediction models developed by combining administrative databases and basic clinical data are needed to stratify individual patient risk for public health purposes., Objective: This study aims to develop a stratification tool aimed at improving COVID-19 patient management and health care organization., Methods: A predictive algorithm was developed and applied to 36,834 patients with COVID-19 in Italy between March 8 and the October 9, 2020, in order to foresee their risk of hospitalization. Exposures considered were age, sex, comorbidities, and symptoms associated with COVID-19 (eg, vomiting, cough, fever, diarrhea, myalgia, asthenia, headache, anosmia, ageusia, and dyspnea). The outcome was hospitalizations and emergency department admissions for COVID-19. Discrimination and calibration of the model were also assessed., Results: The predictive model showed a good fit for predicting COVID-19 hospitalization (C-index 0.79) and a good overall prediction accuracy (Brier score 0.14). The model was well calibrated (intercept -0.0028, slope 0.9970). Based on these results, 118,804 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from October 25 to December 11, 2020, were stratified into low, medium, and high risk for COVID-19 severity. Among the overall study population, 67,030 (56.42%) were classified as low-risk patients; 43,886 (36.94%), as medium-risk patients; and 7888 (6.64%), as high-risk patients. In all, 89.37% (106,179/118,804) of the overall study population was being assisted at home, 9% (10,695/118,804) was hospitalized, and 1.62% (1930/118,804) died. Among those assisted at home, most people (63,983/106,179, 60.26%) were classified as low risk, whereas only 3.63% (3858/106,179) were classified at high risk. According to ordinal logistic regression, the odds ratio (OR) of being hospitalized or dead was 5.0 (95% CI 4.6-5.4) among high-risk patients and 2.7 (95% CI 2.6-2.9) among medium-risk patients, as compared to low-risk patients., Conclusions: A simple monitoring system, based on primary care data sets linked to COVID-19 testing results, hospital admissions data, and death records may assist in the proper planning and allocation of patients and resources during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic., (©Rossella Murtas, Nuccia Morici, Chiara Cogliati, Massimo Puoti, Barbara Omazzi, Walter Bergamaschi, Antonio Voza, Patrizia Rovere Querini, Giulio Stefanini, Maria Grazia Manfredi, Maria Teresa Zocchi, Andrea Mangiagalli, Carla Vittoria Brambilla, Marco Bosio, Matteo Corradin, Francesca Cortellaro, Marco Trivelli, Stefano Savonitto, Antonio Giampiero Russo. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 15.11.2021.)

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of individuals needing hospital admission has sometimes exceeded the availability of hospital beds. Since hospitalization can have detrimental effects on older individuals, preference has been given to younger patients. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of hospitalization for elderly affected by COVID-19. We hypothesized that their mortality decreases when there is greater access to hospitals., Methods: This study examined 1902 COVID-19 patients consecutively admitted to three large hospitals in Milan, Italy. Overall mortality data for Milan from the same period was retrieved. Based on emergency department (ED) data, both peak and off-peak phases were identified. The percentage of elderly patients admitted to EDs during these two phases were compared by calculating the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) of the individuals younger than, versus older than, 80 years., Results: The median age of the patients hospitalized during the peak phase was lower than the median age during the off-peak phase (64 vs. 75 years, respectively; p <0.001). However, while the SMR for the younger patients was lower during the off-peak phase (1.98, 95% CI: 1.72-2.29 versus 1.40, 95% CI: 1.25-1.58, respectively), the SMR was similar between both phases for the elderly patients (2.28, 95% CI: 2.07-2.52 versus 2.48, 95% CI: 2.32-2.65, respectively)., Conclusions: Greater access to hospitals during an off-peak phase did not affect the mortality rate of COVID-19-positive elderly patients in Milan. This finding, if confirmed in other settings, should influence future decisions regarding resource management of health care organizations., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

The diffusion of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) worldwide prompted the World Health Organization to declare the status of pandemic. The molecular diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is based on the detection of viral RNA on different biological specimens. Unfortunately, the test may require several hours to be performed. In the present study, we evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of lung point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in a cohort of symptomatic patients admitted to one emergency department (ED) in a high-prevalence setting. This retrospective study enrolled all patients who visited one ED with suspected respiratory infection in March 2020. All the patients were tested (usually twice if the first was negative) for SARS-CoV-2 on ED admission. The reference standard was considered positive if at least one specimen was positive. If all the specimens tested negative, the reference was considered negative. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value. Of the 444 symptomatic patients who were admitted to the ED in the study period, the result of the lung POCUS test was available for 384 (86.5%). The sensitivity of the test was 92.0% (95% CI 88.2-94.9%), and the specificity was 64.9% (95% CI 54.6-74.4%). We observed a prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection of 74.7%. In this setting, the positive and negative predicted values were 88.6% (95% CI 84.4-92.0) and 73.3% (95% CI 62.6-82.2%), respectively. Lung POCUS is a sensitive first-line screening tool for ED patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Several studies address the accuracy of lung ultrasound (LUS) in the diagnosis of cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE) evaluating the interstitial syndrome, which is characterized by multiple and diffuse vertical artifacts (B-lines), and correlates with extravascular lung water. We studied the potential role of LUS in monitoring CPE response to therapy, by evaluating the clearance of interstitial syndrome within the first 24 h after Emergency Department (ED) admission. LUS was performed at arrival (T0), after 3 (T3) and 24 (T24) hours. Eleven regions were evaluated in the antero-lateral chest; the B-lines burden was estimated in each region (0 = no B-lines, 1 = multiple B-lines, 2 = confluent B-lines/white lung) and a mean score (B-Score, range 0-2) was calculated. Patients received conventional CPE treatment. Blood chemistry, vital signs, blood gas analysis, diuresis at T0, T3, T24 were also recorded. A complete echocardiography was obtained during hospitalization. Forty-one patients were enrolled. Respiratory and hemodynamic parameters improved in all patients between T0 and T3 and between T3 and T24. Mean B-score significantly decreased at T3 (from 1.59 ± 0.40 to 0.73 ± 0.44, P < 0.001) and between T3 and T 24 (from 0.73 ± 0.44 to 0.38 ± 0.33, P < 0.001). B-score was higher in the lower pulmonary regions at any time. At final evaluation (T24) 75 % of apical and only 38 % of basal regions were cleared. LUS allows one to assess the clearance of interstitial syndrome and its distribution in the early hours of treatment of CPE, thus representing a possible tool to guide therapy titration.

Sepsis is a rapidly evolving disease with a high mortality rate. The early identification of sepsis and the implementation of early evidence-based therapies have been recognized to improve outcome and decrease sepsis-related mortality. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of the standard diagnostic work-up of septic patients with an integrated approach using early point of care ultrasound (POCUS) to identify the source of infection and to speed up the time to diagnosis. We enrolled a consecutive sample of adult patients admitted to the ED who met the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) criteria for sepsis. For every patient, the emergency physician was asked to identify the septic source after the initial clinical assessment and after POCUS. Patients were then addressed to the standard predefined work-up. The impression at the initial clinical assessment and POCUS-implemented diagnosis was compared with the final diagnosis of the septic source, determined by independent review of the entire medical record after discharge. Two hundred consecutive patients entered the study. A final diagnosis of the septic source was obtained in 178 out of 200 patients (89 %). POCUS-implemented diagnosis had a sensitivity of 73 % (95 % CI 66-79 %), a specificity of 95 % (95 % CI 77-99 %), and an accuracy of 75 %. Clinical impression after the initial clinical assessment (T0) had a sensitivity of 48 % (CI 95 % 41-55 %) and a specificity of 86 % (CI 95 % 66-95 %). POCUS improved the sensitivity of the initial clinical impression by 25 %. POCUS-implemented diagnoses were always obtained within 10 min. Instead the septic source was identified within 1 h in only 21.9 % and within 3 h in 52.8 % with a standard work-up. POCUS-implemented diagnosis is an effective and reliable tool for the identification of septic source, and it is superior to the initial clinical evaluation alone. It is likely that a wider use of POCUS in an emergency setting will allow a faster diagnosis of the septic source, leading to more appropriate and prompt antimicrobial therapy and source control strategies.

Introduction: Early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) in septic shock defined by Rivers et al was proven to reduce mortality and validated by observational studies. However, criticism is centered in particular on the early requirement of a central venous catheter (CVC) and on central venous pressure (CVP) as an indicator of volume responsiveness. The present study is a pivotal study to investigate the reliability of a less invasive approach, which uses inferior vena cava (IVC) and lung ultrasounds (US) to guide the infusion of fluids and lactate clearance to monitor tissue perfusion., Methods: We enrolled 51 patients with septic shock. As a marker of preload optimization, we measured IVC collapse in place of CVP and serum lactate clearance in place of central venous oxygen saturation as a marker of tissue perfusion. As outcomes, we considered the accomplishment of the noninvasive EGDT goals, the number of patients treated without the need of a CVC, the amount of fluids administered in the first 6 hours, the development of pulmonary edema, and the overall mortality rate., Results: Inferior vena cava US evaluation resulted feasible in 92% of patients. Lung US was performed in 100% of cases. In the first 6 hours, only 61.7% of patients received a CVC, an average of 5.5 L of crystalloids were administered, and only 4 patients developed clinical overt pulmonary edema. Mortality was 34% at 28 days and 38.3% at 60 days., Conclusions: Our approach to resuscitation in septic shock appears feasible in the emergency department and needs further study with a randomized controlled trial., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purposes: We aimed to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of contrast enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS), compared with chest x-ray (CXR), in the detection of correct central venous line (CVL) placement. Our hypothesis was to verify whether CEUS could substitute CXR as a reference standard for correct placement of CVL or function as a triage test to limit the execution of CXR only for selected patients., Basic Procedures: CEUS was carried out in 71 non consecutive patients to verify the correct positioning of a central venous line. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and likelihood ratios of CEUS compared to CXR, with their respective 95% confidence interval (CI), were calculated., Main Findings: CXR identified 6 CVL misplacements (8,4%, CI 95% 3,2%-18%). Four of these were intravascular and 2 in the right atrium. CEUS identified only 3 misplacements, of which 1 was intravascular and 2 intracardiac. Using CXR as a reference standard, and considering intravascular and intracardiac malpositioning altogether, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratio of CEUS were 33% (95% CI, 0%-71%), 98% (95% CI, 95%-100%), 21%, 7%, 0%, and 68%, respectively. The negative and positive predictive values were 94% (95% CI, 89%-100%) and 67% (95% CI, 13%-100%)., Principal Conclusions: CEUS can't substitute CXR, or become a triage test in selected patients, in evaluating the correct tip position after CVL placement., (© 2013.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of bedside lung ultrasound and chest radiography (CXR) in patients with suspected pneumonia compared with CT scan and final diagnosis at discharge. Design A prospective clinical study., Methods: Lung ultrasound and CXR were performed in sequence in adult patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) for suspected pneumonia. A chest CT scan was performed during hospital stay when clinically indicated., Results: 120 patients entered the study. A discharge diagnosis of pneumonia was confirmed in 81 (67.5%). The first CXR was positive in 54/81 patients (sensitivity 67%; 95% CI 56.4% to 76.9%) and negative in 33/39 (specificity 85%; 95% CI 73.3% to 95.9%), whereas lung ultrasound was positive in 80/81 (sensitivity 98%; 95% CI 93.3% to 99.9%) and negative in 37/39 (specificity 95%; 95% CI 82.7% to 99.4%). A CT scan was performed in 30 patients (26 of which were positive for pneumonia); in this subgroup the first CXR was diagnostic for pneumonia in 18/26 cases (sensitivity 69%), whereas ultrasound was positive in 25/26 (sensitivity 96%). The feasibility of ultrasound was 100% and the examination was always performed in less than 5 min., Conclusions: Bedside chest ultrasound is a reliable tool for the diagnosis of pneumonia in the ED, probably being superior to CXR in this setting. It is likely that its wider use will allow a faster diagnosis, conducive to a more appropriate and timely therapy.

Objective: This study compared noninvasive pressure support ventilation (NIPSV) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in patients with acute hypercapnic pulmonary edema with regard to resolution time., Design and Setting: Randomized prospective study in an emergency department., Patients and Participants: We randomly assigned 36 patients with respiratory failure due to acute pulmonary edema and arterial hypercapnia (PaCO(2) >45 mmHg) to NIPSV (n=18) or CPAP through a face mask (n=18)., Measurements and Results: Electrocardiographic and physiological measurements were made over 36 h. There was no difference in resolution time defined as clinical improvement with a respiratory rate of fewer than 30 breaths/min and SpO(2)of 96% or more between CPAP and NIPSV groups. Arterial carbon dioxide tension was significantly decreased after 1 h of ventilation (CPAP, 60.5+/-13.6 to 42.8+/-4.9 mmHg; NIPSV, 65.7+/-13.6 to 44.0+/-5.5 mmHg); respective improvements were seen in pH (CPAP, 7.22+/-0.11 to 7.37+/-0.04; NIPSV, 7.19+/-0.11 to 7.38+/-0.04), SpO(2) (CPAP, 86.9+/-3.7% to 95.1+/-2.6%; NIPSV, 83.7+/-6.6% to 96.0+/-2.9%), and respiratory rate (CPAP, 37.9+/-4.5 to 21.3+/-5.1 breaths/min; NIPSV, 39.8+/-4.4 to 21.2+/-4.6 breaths/min). No significant differences were seen with regards to endotracheal intubation and in-hospital mortality., Conclusions: NIPSV proved as effective as CPAP in the treatment of patients with acute pulmonary edema and hypercapnia but did not improve resolution time.