Journal of accident & emergency medicine
-
Comparative Study
Who should see eye casualties?: a comparison of eye care in an accident and emergency department with a dedicated eye casualty.
Emergency care for eye complaints is provided both by accident and emergency (A&E) departments as well as by dedicated eye casualty departments. This study examines the role of each type of department and the quality of eye care provided. Significant differences were found between the accident and emergency department and the eye casualty department in the history, examination and management of eye patients. ⋯ Most of the omissions related to a failure to perform an adequate, yet simple, ocular examination including failure to record visual acuity. In 44% (44-100) of A&E cases visual acuity was not recorded or recorded incorrectly. In comparison acuity omissions in eye casualty were present in only 4% (2/50) of cases.
-
Comparative Study
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: two and a half years experience of an accident and emergency department in Hong Kong.
The results are presented of 2 1/2 years of experience of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrests who were resuscitated in an accident and emergency department (A&E) attached to an acute district hospital in Hong Kong. Out of 263 cases of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest as a result of a variety of causes only seven patients survived (3%) and among the 135 patients with cardiac aetiology only four survived (3%). Ways to improve the outcome for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are discussed.
-
Forty-six patients were identified who attended an accident and emergency (A&E) department having previously attended a different A&E department in the same city for the same problem. Of these patients, 20% had been referred to the second department by the general practitioner (GP) or practice nurse. A diagnostic error had been made in 17.5% of patients at their first visit and some management errors were discovered. ⋯ A review of unplanned reattenders to an A&E department is an important opportunity for audit and normally an error will not be discovered if a patient attends a different department. We recommend that in cities where there is more than one A&E department a system should be set up whereby if a patient attends one department having previously attended another, the first department should be informed of the patients reattendance, especially if any diagnostic or management error has been discovered. Patients should be educated that if they have sought medical help for any problem and the condition does not improve, then they should return to see the same doctor or A&E department for continuity of care and avoidance of unnecessary duplication of investigations including exposure to X-rays.
-
Comparative Study
Management of minor head injuries in the accident and emergency department: the effect of an observation ward.
The management of 483 patients presenting with minor head injury to the accident and emergency (A&E) departments of two Scottish hospitals was studied prospectively. Such patients comprised 5.7 and 3.9% of the total attendances to each department. Of the 277 patients assessed in the former department, 83 (30%) fulfilled at least one of the currently accepted criteria for recommending admission to hospital and 49 (17.7%) patients were actually admitted. ⋯ However, significantly fewer, 10 (4.9%) patients, were actually admitted. The major relevant factor when comparing the two departments was the existence in the former of an observation ward. These results support the view that easy access to hospital beds is a major determinant of management in patients presenting with minor head injury to the A&E department and may be more influential than clinical findings.