Objective: In 2018, we developed and implemented a novel approach to recognition and response to occupational violence and aggression (OVA). It included routine use of the Brøset Violence Checklist for all ED patients integrated with a scorebased notification and response framework. The present study evaluated the impact of the new process on staff knowledge, perceptions and confidence regarding OVA in ED and the rate of security events related to OVA. Methods: The present study was conducted in a metropolitan hospital ED in Australia. Evaluation was by online before and after survey of nursing staff, point prevalence study of risk classification and comparison of OVA-related events involving security in the year before implementation and the year after the programme was embedded. Results: One percent of patients were assessed as high violence risk with a further 4% at moderate risk. The introduction of the Brøset Violence Checklist increased documentation of violence risk assessment. It also improved staff perception of organisational support and awareness of behaviours associated with the risk of violence. There was a statistically significant reduction in unplanned OVA-related security responses (relative risk 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.62-0.89). There was also a statistically significant shift to proactive management through early detection and intervention (relative risk 2.22, 95% confidence interval 1.85-2.66). Conclusion:A process including routine OVA risk assessment and a notification and response framework reduced unplanned security events due to OVA and increased staff confidence in recognition and management of OVA. This approach may be suitable for use more broadly in ED.

In reference to the recent work on understanding economic evaluation alongside emergency medicine research by Singh et al 1 , we would like to draw attention to the selection of the discount rate when performing an economic analysis. This choice has implications in that a figure in the lower ranges may overestimate the value of an outcome or the cost of an intervention or project. A higher rate may result in less promising results and may even be enough to send a potential capital investment's Net Present Value into the negative.There are three different options to selecting an appropriate discount rate, depending on what the aim of the calculations are.

Shock is a common presentation to the ED, with the incidence of septic shock increasing in Australasia over the last decade. The choice of inotropic agent is likely dependent on previous experience and local practices of the emergency and other critical care departments. The relatively short duration of stay in the ED before transfer leaves little room for evaluating the appropriateness of and response to the agent chosen. Delays in transfer to inpatient facilities means that patients receive advanced critical care within the ED for longer, requiring initiation and titration of vasoactive agents in the ED. This article discusses the general concepts of shock and the indicators for inotrope and vasopressor use, revises the various agents available and reviews the current evidence for their use.

No abstract

Objective: To determine characteristics, precipitating circumstances, clinical care, outcome and disposition of patients brought to the ED under section 351 (s351, police detention and transport) powers of the Mental Health Act 2014 (Vic) (MHAV). Methods: This is an observational cohort study conducted in two metropolitan teaching hospitals in Victoria. Participants were adult patients brought to ED under s351 of the MHAV. Data collected included demographics, event circumstances, pre-hospital and ED interventions and outcome. Analyses are descriptive. Results: The present study included 438 patient encounters. Median age was 34 years. In 84% of encounters (368/438) patients were co-transported with ambulance. The most common primary reason for detainment was suicide risk/intent (296/438, 67.6%) followed by abnormal behaviour without threat to self or others (92/438, 21%). In ED, parenteral sedation was administered in 11% (48/438). Physical restraint was applied in 17.6% (77/438). Psychiatric admission was required in 23.5% (103/438). In 63 cases, psychiatric admission was involuntary (14.4%). Most patients (297/438, 67.8%) were discharged home. A subset of patients had recurrent s351 presentations. Eighteen (5.6%) patients accounted for 22% (96/438) of all events. Conclusion: Most patients brought to ED under s351 of the MHAV had expressed intention to self-harm, did not require medical intervention and were discharged home. It could be questioned whether the current application of s351 is consistent with the least restrictive principles of the MHAV, especially as there is no apparent monitoring or reporting of the use of these powers. There were a concerning number of patients with multiple s351 events over a short period.