IntroductionFailure of early identification of sepsis in the emergency department (ED) leads to significant delays in antibiotic administration which adversely affects patient outcomes.AimThe primary objective of our Quality Improvement (QI) project was to reduce the door-to-antibiotic time (DTAT) by 30% from the preintervention in patients with suspected sepsis. Secondary objectives were to increase the blood culture collection rate by 30% from preintervention, investigate the predictors of improving DTAT and study the effect of these interventions on 24-hour in-hospital mortality.MethodsThis QI project was conducted in the ED of a tertiary care teaching hospital of North India; the ED receives approximately 400 patients per day. Adult patients with suspected sepsis presenting to our ED were included in the study, between January 2019 and December 2020. The study was divided into three phases; preintervention phase (100 patients), intervention phase (100 patients) and postintervention phase (93 patients). DTAT and blood cultures prior to antibiotic administration was recorded for all patients. Blood culture yield and 24-hour in-hospital mortality were also recorded using standard data templates. Change ideas planned by the Sepsis QI Team were implemented after conducting plan-do-study-act cycles.ResultsThe median DTAT reduced from 155 min in preintervention phase to 78 min in postintervention phase. Drawing of blood cultures prior to antibiotic administration improved by 67%. Application of novel screening tool at triage was found to be an independent predictor of reduced DTAT.ConclusionOur QI project identified the existing lacunae in implementation of the sepsis bundle which were dealt with in a stepwise manner. The sepsis screening tool and on-site training improved care of patients with sepsis. A similar approach can be used to deal with complex quality issues in other high-volume low-resource settings.

No abstract

Background Occupational hazards like sharp injury and splash exposure (SISE) are frequently encountered in health-care settings. The adoption of standard precautions by healthcare workers (HCWs) has led to significant reduction in the incidence of such injuries, still SISE continues to pose a serious threat to certain groups of HCWs. Materials and Methods This was a retrospective study which examined the available records of all patients from January 2015 to August 2019 who self-reported to our emergency department with history of sharp injury and/or splash exposure. Details of the patients, mechanism of injury, the circumstances leading to the injury, status of the source (hepatitis B surface antigen, human immunodeficiency virus, and hepatitis C virus antibody status), and the postexposure prophylaxis given were recorded and analyzed. Data were represented in frequency and percentages. Results During the defined period, a total of 834 HCWs reported with SISE, out of which 44.6% were doctors. Majority of the patients have SISE while performing medical procedures on patients (49.5%), while 19.2% were exposed during segregation of waste. The frequency of needle stick injury during cannulation, sampling, and recapping of needle were higher in emergency department than in wards. More than 80% of HCWs received hepatitis B vaccine and immunoglobulin postexposure. Conclusion There is need for periodical briefings on practices of sharp handling as well as re-emphasizing the use of personal protective equipment while performing procedures.

Emergency care is largely seen as synonymous with resuscitation and saving lives. In most of the developing world where Emergency Medicine (EM) is still evolving, the concept of EM palliative care is alien. Provision of palliative care in such settings poses its own challenges in terms of knowledge gaps, socio-cultural barriers, dismal doctor-to-patient ratio with limited time for communication with patients, and lack of established pathways to provide EM palliative care. Integrating the concept of palliative medicine is crucial for expanding the dimension of holistic, value-based, quality emergency care. However, glitches in decision-making processes, especially in high patient volume settings, may lead to inequalities in care provision, based on socio-financial disparities of patients or premature termination of challenging resuscitations. Pertinent, robust, validated screening tools and guides may assist physicians in tackling this ethical dilemma.

Abdominal trauma is difficult to identify, especially in a patient with multiple injuries. Mechanism of injury can guide us to the likely organs injured, but the extent and location cannot be accurately pinpointed in most cases. Owing to the multitude of structures located in the abdomen, timely identification and appropriate intervention are crucial to ensure the good patient outcomes. Focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) and its extended version (eFAST) has become the standard care as per ATLS guidelines in patient evaluation. The main goal is to identify hemoperitoneum, hemothorax, and/or pneumothorax. However, sonography can be applied to detect varying injuries to abdominal viscera, beyond the elementary eFAST examination. This includes assessment of solid organs, hollow viscus, vascular structures, and even soft tissues. Sonography, when wielded with necessary knowledge and practice, can be an incredible asset at the bedside. This chapter aims to explore these possible applications of point of care ultrasonography (POCUS) in abdominal trauma.