The American journal of emergency medicine
-
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) guidelines recommend that children ≤12-years-old with height < 145 cm should use safety/booster seats. However, national adherence and clinical outcomes for eligible children involved in motor vehicle collisions (MVCs) are unknown. We hypothesized that children recommended to use safety/booster seats involved in MVCs have a lower rate of serious injuries if a safety/booster seat is used, compared to children without safety/booster seat. ⋯ Despite AAP guidelines, less than half of recommended children in our study population presenting to a trauma center after MVC used safety/booster seats. Pediatric patients involved in a high-risk MVC suffered more serious injuries and were more likely to require surgical intervention without a safety/booster seat. A public health program to increase adherence to safety/booster seat use within this population appears warranted.
-
Among children treated for sepsis in a pediatric emergency department (ED), compare clinical features and outcomes between those with blood cultures positive versus negative for a bacterial pathogen. ⋯ Children meeting the IPSO Sepsis definition with blood culture positive for a bacterial pathogen have higher rates of organ dysfunction than those who are culture negative, although our 9% rate of blood culture positivity is lower than previously cited literature from the pediatric intensive care unit.
-
The 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines recommend administration of antimicrobials within the first hour of recognition of sepsis. Over the last decade, several studies have demonstrated improved time-to-antibiotic administration and antibiotic appropriateness when a pharmacist was involved in the care of patients with sepsis. To our knowledge, no studies evaluating the appropriate use of antibiotics in sepsis driven entirely by an Emergency Medicine (EM) Clinical Pharmacist Practitioner (CPP) have been published. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of an EM CPP-driven protocol on antimicrobial interventions in patients with sepsis in the emergency department (ED). ⋯ In this small, single-center study, an EM Clinical Pharmacist Practitioner-driven protocol for patients with sepsis in the emergency department improved the rate of appropriate empiric antimicrobial selection and time-to-antibiotic administration.
-
As artificial intelligence (AI) expands its presence in healthcare, particularly within emergency medicine (EM), there is growing urgency to explore the ethical and practical considerations surrounding its adoption. AI holds the potential to revolutionize how emergency physicians (EPs) make clinical decisions, but AI's complexity often surpasses EPs' capacity to provide patients with informed consent regarding its use. This article underscores the crucial need to address the ethical pitfalls of AI in EM. ⋯ The central question arises: Are EPs equipped with the necessary knowledge to offer well-informed consent regarding clinical AI? Collaborative efforts between EPs, bioethicists, AI researchers, and healthcare administrators are essential for the development and implementation of optimal AI practices in EM. To facilitate informed consent about AI, EPs should understand at least seven key areas: (1) how AI systems operate; (2) whether AI systems are understandable and trustworthy; (3) the limitations of and errors AI systems make; (4) how disagreements between the EP and AI are resolved; (5) whether the patient's personally identifiable information (PII) and the AI computer systems will be secure; (6) if the AI system functions reliably (has been validated); and (7) if the AI program exhibits bias. This article addresses each of these critical issues, aiming to empower EPs with the knowledge required to navigate the intersection of AI and informed consent in EM.