Background Numerous publications focus on fever in returning travelers, but there is no known systematic review considering all diseases, or all tropical diseases causing fever. Such a review is necessary in order to develop appropriate practice guidelines. Objectives Primary objectives of this review were i) to determine the etiology of fever in travelers/migrants returning from (sub) tropical countries as well as the proportion of patients with specific diagnoses, and ii) to assess the predictors for specific tropical diseases. Method Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library were searched with terms combining fever AND travel/migrants. All studies focusing on causes of fever in returning travelers and/or clinical and laboratory predictors of tropical diseases were included. Meta-analyses were performed on frequencies of etiological diagnoses. Results 10064 studies were identified; 541 underwent full-text review; 30 met criteria for data extraction. Tropical infections accounted for 33% of fever diagnoses, with malaria causing 22%, dengue 5% and enteric fever 2%. Non-tropical infections accounted for 36% of febrile cases, with acute gastroenteritis causing 14% and respiratory tract infections 13%. Positive likelihood ratios demonstrated that splenomegaly, thrombocytopenia and hyperbilirubinemia were respectively 5–14, 3–11 and 5–7 times more likely in malaria than non-malaria patients. High variability of results between studies reflects heterogeneity in study design, regions visited, participants’ characteristics, setting, laboratory investigations performed, and diseases included. Conclusion Malaria accounted for one fifth of febrile cases, highlighting the importance of rapid malaria testing in febrile returning travelers, followed by other rapid tests for common tropical diseases. High variability between studies highlights the need to harmonize study designs and to promote multi-center studies investigating predictors of diseases, including of lower incidence, which may help to develop evidence-based guidelines. The use of clinical decision support algorithms by health workers which incorporate clinical predictors, could help standardize studies as well as improve quality of recommendations.

BackgroundCommunity-acquired pneumonia is a major cause of mortality worldwide. Early assessment and initiation of management improves outcomes. In higher-income countries, scores assist in predicting mortality from pneumonia. These have not been validated for use in most lower-income countries.AimTo validate a new score, the SWAT-Bp score, in predicting mortality risk of clinical community-acquired pneumonia amongst hospital admissions at Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital, Blantyre, Malawi.MethodsThe five variables constituting the SWAT-Bp score (male [S]ex, muscle [W]asting, non-[A]mbulatory, [T]emperature (>38°C or <35°C) and [B]lood [p]ressure (systolic<100 and/or diastolic<60)) were recorded for all patients with clinical presentation of a lower respiratory tract infection, presumed to be pneumonia, over four months (N=216). The sensitivity and specificity of the score were calculated to determine accuracy of predicting mortality risk.ResultsMedian age was 35 years, HIV prevalence was 84.2% amongst known statuses, and mortality rate was 12.5%. Mortality for scores 0–5 was 0%, 8.5%, 12.7%, 19.0%, 28.6%, 100% respectively. Patients were stratified into three mortality risk groups dependent on their score. SWAT-Bp had moderate discriminatory power overall (AUROC 0.744). A SWAT-Bp score of ≥2 was 82% sensitive and 51% specific for predicting mortality, thereby assisting in identifying individuals with a lower mortality risk.ConclusionIn this validation cohort, the SWAT-Bp score has not performed as well as in the derivation cohort. However, it could potentially assist clinicians identifying low-risk patients, enabling rapid prioritisation of treatment in a low-resource setting, as it helps contribute towards individual patient risk stratification.

Ensuring the safety of patients is a vital duty of a doctor. It is their responsibility to advise patients about activity limitations on discharge from hospital. This study aims to assess the current provision of driving advice for patients after abdominal surgery and institute improvements to this provision of information in North Bristol NHS Trust.A preliminary questionnaire ascertained current doctor's knowledge regarding limitations of driving postoperatively and whether information was communicated to patients. Baseline retrospective data were collected from electronic discharge summaries to determine documentation of advice provision. Educational interventions were introduced, followed by data collection after each intervention.Initial questionnaires demonstrated poor knowledge amongst doctors and a lack of provision of driving advice postoperatively. After multiple educational interventions, the provision of driving advice on electronic discharge summaries increased from 0% (0) at baseline to 75% (9).Initially, the provision of driving advice postoperatively was poorly documented for inpatients undergoing abdominal surgery; following multiple educational interventions, the provision of written advice improved. Future plans include the introduction of prewritten sentences onto the electronic discharge summaries to facilitate ease of information provision and a reaudit in 12 months.

Patient handover is paramount for effective patient care and is often poorly documented or incomplete. North Bristol NHS Trust weekend handover proformas identify medical patients requiring weekend review. Many patients seen during on-call shifts are not handed over. Our aim was to develop Friday ward round proforma sheets for medical patients, to encourage clear documentation of management plans in order to improve handover of important information, particularly ceiling of care decisions.Questionnaires were completed by F1 doctors regarding current handover systems. Baseline data collected by on-call F1s included time of understanding a patient's ceiling of care decision, and difficulty of comprehension of medical notes. Repeat data were collected with novel proformas in situ. Multiple cycles were performed to refine the sheets and target problems arising in their use.Ninety-three percent of F1s wanted improved patient handover, with ceiling of care (87%) and management plans (73%) being the most difficult areas to understand. Time taken to ascertain ceiling of care decisions improved with the introduction of Friday handover proformas; mean time 153 seconds before and 5 seconds after. Clarity and documentation of management plans improved, with 50% improvement in ease of understanding medical notes.Results demonstrate that introducing Friday ward round proformas for medical patients improves communication between weekday and on-call teams, highlights current escalation of care plans, and leads to faster decision-making. Future plans include the introduction of a short educational session to the new F1 doctors and continued progress with introduction into hospital stationary.