UNASSIGNED: Distinguishing between ruptured and non-ruptured acute appendicitis presents a significant challenge. This study aimed to validate the accuracy of RAMA-WeRA Risk Score in predicting ruptured appendicitis (RA) in emergency department.
UNASSIGNED: This study was a multicenter diagnostic accuracy study conducted across six hospitals in Thailand from February 1, 2022, to January 20, 2023. The eligibility criteria included individuals aged >15 years suspected of acute appendicitis, presenting to the ED, and having an available pathology report following appendectomy or intraoperative diagnosis by the surgeon. We assessed the screening performance characteristics of RAMA-WeRA Risk Score, in detecting the ruptured appendicitis (RA) cases.
UNASSIGNED: 860 patients met the study criteria. 168 (19.38%) had RA and 692 (80.62%) patients had non-RA. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AuROC) of RAMA-WeRA Risk Score was 75.11% (95% CI: 71.10, 79.11). The RAMA-WeRA Risk Score > 6 points (high-risk group) demonstrated a positive likelihood ratio (LR) of 3.22 in detecting the ruptured cases. The sensitivity and specificity of score in > 6 cutoff point was 43.8% (95%CI: 36.2, 51.6) and 86.4% (95%CI: 83.6, 88.9), respectively.
UNASSIGNED: The RAMA-WeRA Risk Score can predict rupture in patients presenting with suspected acute appendicitis in the emergency department with total accuracy of 75% for high-risk cases.

UNASSIGNED: Termination of resuscitation (TOR) rules may help guide prehospital decisions to stop resuscitation, with potential effects on patient outcomes and health resource use. Rules with high sensitivity risk increasing inappropriate transport of nonsurvivors, while rules without excellent specificity risk missed survivors. Further examination of the performance of TOR rules in estimating survival of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is needed.
UNASSIGNED: To determine whether TOR rules can accurately identify patients who will not survive an OHCA.
UNASSIGNED: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from database inception up to January 11, 2024. There were no restrictions on language, publication date, or time frame of the study.
UNASSIGNED: Two reviewers independently screened records, first by title and abstract and then by full text. Randomized clinical trials, case-control studies, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, retrospective analyses, and modeling studies were included. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were reviewed to identify primary studies. Studies predicting outcomes other than death, in-hospital studies, animal studies, and non-peer-reviewed studies were excluded.
UNASSIGNED: Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second. Two reviewers assessed risk of bias using the Revised Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. Cochrane Screening and Diagnostic Tests Methods Group recommendations were followed when conducting a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) statement and is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42019131010).
UNASSIGNED: Sensitivity and specificity tables with 95% CIs and bivariate summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were produced. Estimates of effects at different prevalence levels were calculated. These estimates were used to evaluate the practical implications of TOR rule use at different prevalence levels.
UNASSIGNED: This review included 43 nonrandomized studies published between 1993 and 2023, addressing 29 TOR rules and involving 1 125 587 cases. Fifteen studies reported the derivation of 20 TOR rules. Thirty-three studies reported external data validations of 17 TOR rules. Seven TOR rules had data to facilitate meta-analysis. One clinical study was identified. The universal termination of resuscitation rule had the best performance, with pooled sensitivity of 0.62 (95% CI, 0.54-0.71), pooled specificity of 0.88 (95% CI, 0.82-0.94), and a diagnostic odds ratio of 20.45 (95% CI, 13.15-31.83).
UNASSIGNED: In this review, there was insufficient robust evidence to support widespread implementation of TOR rules in clinical practice. These findings suggest that adoption of TOR rules may lead to missed survivors and increased resource utilization.

UNASSIGNED: Implantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a crucial therapeutic option for selected end-stage heart failure patients. However, major bleeding (MB) complications postimplantation are a significant concern.
UNASSIGNED: We evaluated current risk scores\' predictive accuracy for MB in LVAD recipients.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted an observational, single-center study of LVAD recipients (HeartWare or HeartMate-3, November 2010-December 2022) in the Netherlands. The primary outcome was the first post-LVAD MB (according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis [ISTH] and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support [INTERMACS], and INTERMACS combined with intracranial bleeding [INTERMACS+] criteria). Mortality prior to MB was considered a competing event. Discrimination (C-statistic) and calibration were evaluated for the Hypertension, Abnormal Renal/Liver Function, Stroke, Bleeding History or Predisposition, Labile INR, Elderly, Drugs/Alcohol Concomitantly score, Hepatic or Renal Disease, Ethanol Abuse, Malignancy, Older Age, Reduced Platelet Count or Function, Re-Bleeding, Hypertension, Anemia, Genetic Factors, Excessive Fall Risk and Stroke score, Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation score, Outpatient Bleeding Risk Index, venous thromboembolism score, atrial fibrillation score, and Utah Bleeding Risk Score (UBRS).
UNASSIGNED: One hundred four patients were included (median age, 64 years; female, 20.2%; HeartWare, 90.4%; HeartMate-3, 9.6%). The cumulative MB incidence was 75.7% (95% CI 65.5%-85.9%) by ISTH and INTERMACS+ criteria and 67.0% (95% CI 56.0%-78.0%) per INTERMACS criteria over a median event-free follow-up time of 1916 days (range, 59-4521). All scores had poor discriminative ability on their intended prediction timeframe. Cumulative area under the receiving operator characteristic curve ranged from 0.49 (95% CI 0.35-0.63, venous thromboembolism-BLEED) to 0.56 (95% CI 0.47-0.65, UBRS) according to ISTH and INTERMACS+ criteria and from 0.48 (95% CI 0.40-0.56, Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation) to 0.56 (95% CI 0.47-0.65, UBRS) per INTERMACS criteria. All models showed poor calibration, largely underestimating MB risk.
UNASSIGNED: Current bleeding risk scores exhibit inadequate predictive accuracy for LVAD recipients. There is a need for an accurate risk score to identify LVAD patients at high risk of MB who may benefit from patient-tailored antithrombotic therapy.

The decision to intubate a patient with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure who is not in apparent respiratory distress is one of the most difficult clinical decisions faced by intensivists. A conservative approach exposes patients to the dangers of hypoxemia, while a liberal approach exposes them to the dangers of inserting an endotracheal tube and invasive mechanical ventilation. To assist intensivists in this decision, investigators have used various thresholds of peripheral or arterial oxygen saturation, partial pressure of oxygen, partial pressure of oxygen-to-fraction of inspired oxygen ratio, and arterial oxygen content. In this review we will discuss how each of these oxygenation indices provides inaccurate information about the volume of oxygen transported in the arterial blood (convective oxygen delivery) or the pressure gradient driving oxygen from the capillaries to the cells (diffusive oxygen delivery). The decision to intubate hypoxemic patients is further complicated by our nescience of the critical point below which global and cerebral oxygen supply become delivery-dependent in the individual patient. Accordingly, intubation requires a nuanced understanding of oxygenation indexes. In this review, we will also discuss our approach to intubation based on clinical observations and physiologic principles. Specifically, we consider intubation when hypoxemic patients, who are neither in apparent respiratory distress nor in shock, become cognitively impaired suggesting emergent cerebral hypoxia. When deciding to intubate, we also consider additional factors including estimates of cardiac function, peripheral perfusion, arterial oxygen content and its determinants. It is not possible, however, to pick an oxygenation breakpoint below which the benefits of mechanical ventilation decidedly outweigh its hazards. It is futile to imagine that decision making about instituting mechanical ventilation in an individual patient can be condensed into an algorithm with absolute numbers at each nodal point. In sum, an algorithm cannot replace the presence of a physician well skilled in the art of clinical evaluation who has a deep understanding of pathophysiologic principles.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common presentation in the prehospital environment. At present, paramedics do not routinely use tools to identify low-risk patients who could be left at scene or taken to a local hospital rather than a major trauma centre. The Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR) was developed to guide the use of CT imaging in hospital. It has not been evaluated in the prehospital setting. We aim to address this gap by evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of implementing the CCHR to patients and paramedics, and the feasibility of conducting a full-scale clinical trial of its use.
METHODS: We will recruit adult patients who are being transported to an emergency department (ED) by ambulance after suffering a mild TBI. Paramedics will prospectively collect data for the CCHR. All patients will be transported to the ED, where deferred consent will be taken and the treating clinician will reassess the CCHR, blinded to paramedic interpretation. The primary clinical outcome will be neurosurgically significant TBI. Feasibility outcomes include recruitment and attrition rates. We will assess acceptability of the CCHR to paramedics using the Ottawa Acceptability of Decision Rules Instrument. Interobserver reliability of the CCHR will be assessed between paramedics and the treating clinician in the ED. Participating paramedics and patients will be invited to participate in semistructured interviews to explore the acceptability of trial processes and facilitators and barriers to the use of the CCHR in practice. Data will be analysed thematically. We anticipate recruiting approximately 100 patients over 6 months.
BACKGROUND: This study was approved by the Health Research Authority and the Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 22/NW/0358). The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at conferences and will be incorporated into a doctoral thesis.
BACKGROUND: ISRCTN92566288.

BACKGROUND: Cervical spine injuries in children are uncommon but potentially devastating; however, indiscriminate neck imaging after trauma unnecessarily exposes children to ionising radiation. The aim of this study was to derive and validate a paediatric clinical prediction rule that can be incorporated into an algorithm to guide radiographic screening for cervical spine injury among children in the emergency department.
METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study, we screened children aged 0-17 years presenting with known or suspected blunt trauma at 18 specialised children\'s emergency departments in hospitals in the USA affiliated with the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN). Injured children were eligible for enrolment into derivation or validation cohorts by fulfilling one of the following criteria: transported from the scene of injury to the emergency department by emergency medical services; evaluated by a trauma team; and undergone neck imaging for concern for cervical spine injury either at or before arriving at the PECARN-affiliated emergency department. Children presenting with solely penetrating trauma were excluded. Before viewing an enrolled child\'s neck imaging results, the attending emergency department clinician completed a clinical examination and prospectively documented cervical spine injury risk factors in an electronic questionnaire. Cervical spine injuries were determined by imaging reports and telephone follow-up with guardians within 21-28 days of the emergency room encounter, and cervical spine injury was confirmed by a paediatric neurosurgeon. Factors associated with a high risk of cervical spine injury (>10%) were identified by bivariable Poisson regression with robust error estimates, and factors associated with non-negligible risk were identified by classification and regression tree (CART) analysis. Variables were combined in the cervical spine injury prediction rule. The primary outcome of interest was cervical spine injury within 28 days of initial trauma warranting inpatient observation or surgical intervention. Rule performance measures were calculated for both derivation and validation cohorts. A clinical care algorithm for determining which risk factors warrant radiographic screening for cervical spine injury after blunt trauma was applied to the study population to estimate the potential effect on reducing CT and x-ray use in the paediatric emergency department. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05049330.
RESULTS: Nine emergency departments participated in the derivation cohort, and nine participated in the validation cohort. In total, 22 430 children presenting with known or suspected blunt trauma were enrolled (11 857 children in the derivation cohort; 10 573 in the validation cohort). 433 (1·9%) of the total population had confirmed cervical spine injuries. The following factors were associated with a high risk of cervical spine injury: altered mental status (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score of 3-8 or unresponsive on the Alert, Verbal, Pain, Unresponsive scale [AVPU] of consciousness); abnormal airway, breathing, or circulation findings; and focal neurological deficits including paresthesia, numbness, or weakness. Of 928 in the derivation cohort presenting with at least one of these risk factors, 118 (12·7%) had cervical spine injury (risk ratio 8·9 [95% CI 7·1-11·2]). The following factors were associated with non-negligible risk of cervical spine injury by CART analysis: neck pain; altered mental status (GCS score of 9-14; verbal or pain on the AVPU; or other signs of altered mental status); substantial head injury; substantial torso injury; and midline neck tenderness. The high-risk and CART-derived factors combined and applied to the validation cohort performed with 94·3% (95% CI 90·7-97·9) sensitivity, 60·4% (59·4-61·3) specificity, and 99·9% (99·8-100·0) negative predictive value. Had the algorithm been applied to all participants to guide the use of imaging, we estimated the number of children having CT might have decreased from 3856 (17·2%) to 1549 (6·9%) of 22 430 children without increasing the number of children getting plain x-rays.
CONCLUSIONS: Incorporated into a clinical algorithm, the cervical spine injury prediction rule showed strong potential for aiding clinicians in determining which children arriving in the emergency department after blunt trauma should undergo radiographic neck imaging for potential cervical spine injury. Implementation of the clinical algorithm could decrease use of unnecessary radiographic testing in the emergency department and eliminate high-risk radiation exposure. Future work should validate the prediction rule and care algorithm in more general settings such as community emergency departments.
BACKGROUND: The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the Health Resources and Services Administration of the US Department of Health and Human Services in the Maternal and Child Health Bureau under the Emergency Medical Services for Children programme.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a prediction model for 1-year mortality in patients with a hematologic malignancy acutely admitted to the ICU.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study.
METHODS: Five university hospitals in the Netherlands between 2002 and 2015.
METHODS: A total of 1097 consecutive patients with a hematologic malignancy were acutely admitted to the ICU for at least 24 h.
METHODS: None.
RESULTS: We created a 13-variable model from 22 potential predictors. Key predictors included active disease, age, previous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, mechanical ventilation, lowest platelet count, acute kidney injury, maximum heart rate, and type of malignancy. A bootstrap procedure reduced overfitting and improved the model\'s generalizability. This involved estimating the optimism in the initial model and shrinking the regression coefficients accordingly in the final model. We assessed performance using internal-external cross-validation by center and compared it with the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II model. Additionally, we evaluated clinical usefulness through decision curve analysis. The overall 1-year mortality rate observed in the study was 62% (95% CI, 59-65). Our 13-variable prediction model demonstrated acceptable calibration and discrimination at internal-external validation across centers (C-statistic 0.70; 95% CI, 0.63-0.77), outperforming the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II model (C-statistic 0.61; 95% CI, 0.57-0.65). Decision curve analysis indicated overall net benefit within a clinically relevant threshold probability range of 60-100% predicted 1-year mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Our newly developed 13-variable prediction model predicts 1-year mortality in hematologic malignancy patients admitted to the ICU more accurately than the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II model. This model may aid in shared decision-making regarding the continuation of ICU care and end-of-life considerations.

BACKGROUND: Strategies to enhance clinicians\' adherence to validated imaging decision rules and increase the appropriateness of imaging remain unclear.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of various implementation strategies for increasing clinicians\' use of five validated imaging decision rules (Ottawa Ankle Rules, Ottawa Knee Rule, Canadian C-Spine Rule, National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study and Canadian Computed Tomography Head Rule).
METHODS: Systematic review.
METHODS: The inclusion criteria were experimental, quasi-experimental study designs comprising randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials, and single-arm trials (i.e. prospective observational studies) of implementation interventions in any care setting. The search encompassed electronic databases up to March 11, 2024, including MEDLINE (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus. Two reviewers assessed the risk of bias of studies independently using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group (EPOC) risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was clinicians\' use of decision rules. Secondary outcomes included imaging use (indicated, non-indicated and overall) and knowledge of the rules.
RESULTS: We included 22 studies (5-RCTs, 1-non-RCT and 16-single-arm trials), conducted in emergency care settings in six countries (USA, Canada, UK, Australia, Ireland and France). One RCT suggested that reminders may be effective at increasing clinicians\' use of Ottawa Ankle Rules but may also increase the use of ankle radiography. Two RCTs that combined multiple intervention strategies showed mixed results for ankle imaging and head CT use. One combining educational meetings and materials on Ottawa Ankle Rules reduced ankle injury imaging among ED physicians, while another, with similar efforts plus clinical practice guidelines and reminders for the Canadian CT Head Rule, increased CT imaging for head injuries. For knowledge, one RCT suggested that distributing guidelines had a limited short-term impact but improved clinicians\' long-term knowledge of the Ottawa Ankle Rules.
CONCLUSIONS: Interventions such as pop-up reminders, educational meetings, and posters may improve adherence to the Ottawa Ankle Rules, Ottawa Knee Rule, and Canadian CT Head Rule. Reminders may reduce non-indicated imaging for knee and ankle injuries. The uncertain quality of evidence indicates the need for well-conducted RCTs to establish effectiveness of implementation strategies.

UNASSIGNED: Large vessel occlusion (LVO) strokes are associated with worse functional outcomes and higher mortality rates. In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluated the diagnostic yield of the Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale (CPSS) in detecting LVO.
UNASSIGNED: We performed an extensive systematic search among online databases including Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus, until July 31st, 2023. We also conducted a manual search on Google and Google scholar, along with citation tracking to supplement the systematic search in retrieving all studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the CPSS in detecting LVO among patients suspected to stroke.
UNASSIGNED: Fourteen studies were included in the present meta-analysis. CPSS showed the sensitivity of 97% (95% CI: 87%-99%) and the specificity of 17% (95% CI: 4%-54%) at the cut-off point of ≥1. The optimal threshold was determined to be ≥2, with a sensitivity of 82% (95% CI: 74%-88%) and specificity of 62% (95% CI: 48%-74%) in detecting LVO. At the highest cut-off point of ≥3, the CPSS had the lowest sensitivity of 60% (95% CI: 51%-69%) and the highest specificity of 81% (95% CI: 71%-88%). Sensitivity analyses showed the robustness of the results regardless of study population, inclusion of hemorrhagic stroke patients, pre-hospital or in-hospital settings, and the definition of LVO.
UNASSIGNED: A very low level of evidence demonstrated that CPSS, with a threshold set at ≥2, is a useful tool for identifying LVO stroke and directing patients to CSCs, both in prehospital and in-hospital settings.