Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Placement Time (placement + time)
Selected AbstractsThe Effect of Emergency Department Crowding on Analgesia in Patients with Back Pain in Two HospitalsACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 3 2010Jesse M. Pines MD Abstract Objectives:, The authors assessed the association between measures of emergency department (ED) crowding and treatment with analgesia and delays to analgesia in ED patients with back pain. Methods:, This was a retrospective cohort study of nonpregnant patients who presented to two EDs (an academic ED and a community ED in the same health system) from July 1, 2003, to February 28, 2007, with a chief complaint of "back pain." Each patient had four validated crowding measures assigned at triage. Main outcomes were the use of analgesia and delays in time to receiving analgesia. Delays were defined as greater than 1 hour to receive any analgesia from the triage time and from the room placement time. The Cochrane-Armitage test for trend, the Cuzick test for trend, and relative risk (RR) regression were used to test the effects of crowding on outcomes. Results:, A total of 5,616 patients with back pain presented to the two EDs over the study period (mean ± SD age = 44 ± 17 years, 57% female, 62% black or African American). Of those, 4,425 (79%) received any analgesia while in the ED. A total of 3,589 (81%) experienced a delay greater than 1 hour from triage to analgesia, and 2,985 (67%) experienced a delay more than 1 hour from room placement to analgesia. When hospitals were analyzed separately, a higher proportion of patients experienced delays at the academic site compared with the community site for triage to analgesia (87% vs. 74%) and room to analgesia (71% vs. 63%; both p < 0.001). All ED crowding measures were associated with a higher likelihood for delays in both outcomes. At the academic site, patients were more likely to receive analgesia at the highest waiting room numbers. There were no other differences in ED crowding and likelihood of receiving medications in the ED at the two sites. These associations persisted in the adjusted analysis after controlling for potential confounders of analgesia administration. Conclusions:, As ED crowding increases, there is a higher likelihood of delays in administration of pain medication in patients with back pain. Analgesia administration was not related to three measures of ED crowding; however, patients were actually more likely to receive analgesics when the waiting room was at peak levels in the academic ED. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:276,283 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine [source] Bronchial blocker compared to double-lumen tube for one-lung ventilation during thoracoscopyACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, Issue 2 2001C. Bauer Background: Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) requires one-lung ventilation with a properly collapsed lung. This study compared the Broncho-Cath double-lumen endotracheal tube with the Wiruthan bronchial blocker to determine the advantages of one device over the other during anaesthesia with one-lung ventilation for thoracoscopy. Methods: Thirty-five patients undergoing VATS were randomly assigned to one of two groups. Sixteen patients received a left-sided double-lumen tube (DLT) and nineteen a Wiruthan bronchial blocker (BB). The BB group was subdivided in two: BB in the right mainstem bronchus (BBR) for right-sided VATS (9 patients), BB in the left mainstem bronchus (BBL) for left-sided VATS (10 patients). The position of the devices was checked using a fibreoptic bronchoscope. The following variables were measured: 1) number of unsuccessful placement attempts; 2) number of malpositions of the devices; 3) time required to place the device in the correct position; 4) number of secondary dislodgements of the devices after turning the patient into the lateral decubitus position. The quality of lung deflation was evaluated by the surgeons who were blinded to the type of tube being used. Results: The number of unsuccessful placement attempts was one in the DLT group (1/16), three in the BBL group (3/10) and none in the BBR group (0/9). The number of malpositions was significantly greater in the BBL group (10/10) compared to the DLT group (2/16) and to the BBR group (1/9) (P<0.001). The time (mean±SD) required to place a BBL was 4.21 min±1.28, significantly longer than the time required to place a DLT (2.26 min±0.55, P<0.0006) or a BBR (2.41 min±0.53, P<0.008). The difference in placement time between DLT and BBR was not significant. The number of secondary dislodgements was one in the DLT group, one in the BBR group and none in the BBL group (NS). The quality of lung deflation was judged excellent or fair in all patients in the DLT and the BBL groups and poor in 44% of the patients in the BBR group. Conclusion: It took significantly longer to place a left BB than a DLT (P<0.0006) or a right BB (P<0.008). The number of initial malpositionings of the left BB was significantly greater than in the other groups (P<0.001). The quality of lung deflation was better in the BBL and in the DLT groups than in the BBR group. We conclude that for routine use during left-sided VATS, the use of a DLT is preferable to a left BB because of its greater ease of placement. For right-sided VATS, DLT and right BB showed the same facility of placement but the DLT provided a better quality of lung deflation. [source] Initial Clinical Experience with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Utilizing a Magnetic Navigation SystemJOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, Issue 2 2007PETER GALLAGHER M.D. Introduction: The placement of left ventricular (LV) leads during cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) involves many technical difficulties. These difficulties increase procedural times and decrease procedural success rates. Methods and Results: A total of 50 patients with severe cardiomyopathy (mean LV ejection fraction was 21 ± 6%) and a wide QRS underwent CRT implantation. Magnetic navigation (Stereotaxis, Inc.) was used to position a magnet-tipped 0.014, guidewire (CronusÔ guidewire) within the coronary sinus (CS) vasculature. LV leads were placed in a lateral CS branch, either using a standard CS delivery sheath or using a "bare-wire" approach without a CS delivery sheath. The mean total procedure time was 98.1 ± 29.1 minutes with a mean fluoroscopy time of 22.7 ± 15.1 minutes. The mean LV lead positioning time was 10.4 ± 7.6 minutes. The use of a delivery sheath was associated with longer procedure times 98 ± 32 minutes vs 80 ± 18 minutes (P = 0.029), fluoroscopy times 23 ± 15 minutes vs 13 ± 4 minutes (P = 0.0007) and LV lead positioning times 10 ± 6 minutes vs 4 ± 2 minutes (P = 0.015) when compared to a "bare-wire" approach. When compared with 52 nonmagnetic-assisted control CRT cases, magnetic navigation reduced total LV lead positioning times (10.4 ± 7.6 minutes vs 18.6 ± 18.9 minutes; P = 0.005). If more than one CS branch vessel was tested, magnetic navigation was associated with significantly shorter times for LV lead placement (16.2 ± 7.7 minutes vs 36.4 ± 23.4 minutes; P = 0.004). Conclusions: Magnetic navigation is a safe, feasible, and efficient tool for lateral LV lead placement during CRT. Magnetic navigation during CRT allows for control of the tip direction of the CronusÔ 0.014, guidewire using either a standard CS delivery sheath or "bare-wire" approach. Although there are some important limitations to the 0.014, CronusÔ magnetic navigation can decrease LV lead placement times compared with nonmagnetic-assisted control CRT cases, particularly if multiple CS branches are to be tested. [source] A prospective, randomised, cross-over trial comparing the EndoFlex® and standard tracheal tubes in patients with predicted easy intubationANAESTHESIA, Issue 11 2009W. H. L. Teoh Summary We aimed to determine if using the EndoFlex® tracheal tube on the first intubation attempt provided improved placement times and intubation success compared with a standard-type tracheal tube in 50 patients undergoing gynaecological surgery in a prospective, randomised, cross-over trial. We found that using the EndoFlex resulted in shorter intubation times (mean (SD) 14.8 (9.7) vs 30.1 (30.5) s), easier intubation (VAS, median (range) 10 (0,70) vs 20 (0,100)), and an increased rate of successful insertion at the first attempt; all p < 0.001. Flexing the distal tip of the EndoFlex was used in 18 patients. There were reductions in the use of external laryngeal pressure, advancement of laryngoscope blade and increased lifting force when intubating with the EndoFlex. Furthermore, patients with a grade 2 (19/50) or 3 (6/50) laryngoscopic view had shorter intubation times, easier intubation and reduced insertion attempts with the EndoFlex. The EndoFlex is a satisfactory alternative to a standard-type tracheal tube, even with an anterior larynx. [source] | ||||||||||