To assess the individual and community health effects of task shifting for emergency care in low-resource settings and underserved populations worldwide.
We systematically searched 13 databases and ...additional grey literature for studies published between 1984 and 2019. Eligible studies involved emergency care training for laypeople in underserved or low-resource populations, and any quantitative assessment of effects on the health of individuals or communities. We conducted duplicate assessments of study eligibility, data abstraction and quality. We synthesized findings in narrative and tabular format.
Of 19 308 papers retrieved, 34 studies met the inclusion criteria from low- and middle-income countries (21 studies) and underserved populations in high-income countries (13 studies). Targeted emergency conditions included trauma, burns, cardiac arrest, opioid poisoning, malaria, paediatric communicable diseases and malnutrition. Trainees included the general public, non-health-care professionals, volunteers and close contacts of at-risk populations, all trained through in-class, peer and multimodal education and public awareness campaigns. Important clinical and policy outcomes included improvements in community capacity to manage emergencies (14 studies), patient outcomes (13 studies) and community health (seven studies). While substantial effects were observed for programmes to address paediatric malaria, trauma and opioid poisoning, most studies reported modest effect sizes and two reported null results. Most studies were of weak (24 studies) or moderate quality (nine studies).
First aid education and task shifting to laypeople for emergency care may reduce patient morbidity and mortality and build community capacity to manage health emergencies for a variety of emergency conditions in underserved and low-resource settings.
Background
Opioids are often prescribed for acute pain to patients discharged from the emergency department (ED), but there is a paucity of data on their short‐term use. The purpose of this study was ...to synthesize the evidence regarding the efficacy of prescribed opioids compared to nonopioid analgesics for acute pain relief in ED‐discharged patients.
Methods
MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and gray literature databases were searched from inception to January 2023. Two independent reviewers selected randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy of prescribed opioids for ED‐discharged patients, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Authors were contacted for missing data and to identify additional studies. The primary outcome was the difference in pain intensity scores or pain relief. All meta‐analyses used a random‐effect model and a sensitivity analysis compared patients treated with codeine versus those treated with other opioids.
Results
From 5419 initially screened citations, 46 full texts were evaluated and six studies enrolling 1161 patients were included. Risk of bias was low for five studies. There was no statistically significant difference in pain intensity scores or pain relief between opioids versus nonopioid analgesics (standardized mean difference SMD 0.12; 95% confidence interval CI −0.10 to 0.34). Contrary to children, adult patients treated with opioid had better pain relief (SMD 0.28, 95% CI 0.13–0.42) compared to nonopioids. In another sensitivity analysis excluding studies using codeine, opioids were more effective than nonopioids (SMD 0.30, 95% CI 0.15–0.45). However, there were more adverse events associated with opioids (odds ratio 2.64, 95% CI 2.04–3.42).
Conclusions
For ED‐discharged patients with acute musculoskeletal pain, opioids do not seem to be more effective than nonopioid analgesics. However, this absence of efficacy seems to be driven by codeine, as opioids other than codeine are more effective than nonopioids (mostly NSAIDs). Further prospective studies on the efficacy of short‐term opioid use after ED discharge (excluding codeine), measuring patient‐centered outcomes, adverse events, and potential misuse, are needed.
Caring for patients with low-acuity conditions in Emergency Departments (ED) is often thought to cost more than treating those patients in other ambulatory settings. Understanding the relative cost ...of care between settings has critical implications for healthcare policy and system design.
We conducted a systematic review of papers comparing the cost of care for low-acuity and ambulatory care sensitive conditions in ED and other outpatient settings. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science for peer reviewed papers, plus Google for grey literature. We conducted duplicate screening and data extraction, and quality assessment of included studies using an adapted SIGN checklist for economic studies. We calculated an unweighted mean charge ratio across studies and summarized our findings in narrative and tabular format.
We identified one study comparing costs. 18 studies assessed physician or facility charges, conducted in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada, including cohort analyses (5), charge analyses (5), survey (1), and database searches (5) assessing populations ranging from 370 participants to 60 million. Charge ratios ranged from 0.60 to 13.45 with an unweighted mean of 4.20. Most (12) studies were of acceptable quality.
No studies since 2001 assess the comparative costs of ED versus non-ED care for low-acuity ambulatory conditions. Physician and facility charges for ED care are higher than in other ambulatory settings for low-acuity conditions. Empirical evidence is lacking to support that ED care is more costly than similar care in other ambulatory settings.
Primary care (PC) is a unique clinical specialty and research discipline with its own perspectives and methods. Research in this field uses varied research methods and study designs to investigate ...myriad topics. The diversity of PC presents challenges for reporting, and despite the proliferation of reporting guidelines, none focuses specifically on the needs of PC. The Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Checklist guides reporting of PC research to include the information needed by the diverse PC community, including practitioners, patients, and communities. CRISP complements current guidelines to enhance the reporting, dissemination, and application of PC research findings and results. Prior CRISP studies documented opportunities to improve research reporting in this field. Our surveys of the international, interdisciplinary, and interprofessional PC community identified essential items to include in PC research reports. A 2-round Delphi study identified a consensus list of items considered necessary. The CRISP Checklist contains 24 items that describe the research team, patients, study participants, health conditions, clinical encounters, care teams, interventions, study measures, settings of care, and implementation of findings/results in PC. Not every item applies to every study design or topic. The CRISP guidelines inform the design and reporting of (1) studies done by PC researchers, (2) studies done by other investigators in PC populations and settings, and (3) studies intended for application in PC practice. Improved reporting of the context of the clinical services and the process of research is critical to interpreting study findings/results and applying them to diverse populations and varied settings in PC. Key words: guidelines; research report; checklist; primary care; research; consensus; stakeholder participation; Delphi studies; research impact; research design; surveys and questionnaires; authors; editors; reviewers; article; publishing; journals
We described the experiences and preferences of people with opioid use disorder who access emergency department (ED) services regarding ED care and ED-based interventions.
Between June and September ...2020, we conducted phone or in-person semistructured qualitative interviews with patients recently discharged from 2 urban EDs in Vancouver, BC, Canada, to explore experiences and preferences of ED care and ED-based opioid use disorder interventions. We recruited participants from a cohort of adults with opioid use disorder who were participating in an ED-initiated outreach program. We transcribed audio recordings verbatim. We iteratively developed a thematic coding structure, with interim analyses to assess for thematic saturation. Two team members with lived experience of opioid use provided feedback on content, wording, and analysis throughout the study.
We interviewed 19 participants. Participants felt discriminated against for their drug use, which led to poorer perceived health care and downstream ED avoidance. Participants desired to be treated like ED patients who do not use drugs and to be more involved in their ED care. Participants nevertheless felt comfortable discussing their substance use with ED staff and valued continuous ED operating hours. Regarding opioid use disorder treatment, participants supported ED-based buprenorphine/naloxone programs but also suggested additional options (eg, different initiation regimens and settings and other opioid agonist therapies) to facilitate further treatment uptake.
Based on participant experiences, we recommend addressing potentially stigmatizing practices, increasing patient involvement in their care during ED visits, and increasing access to various opioid use disorder-related treatments and community support.
Access to primary care is an important determinant of health, and data are sparse on primary care utilization for people who experience imprisonment. We aimed to describe primary care utilization for ...persons released from prison, and to compare utilization with the general population.
We linked correctional data for all persons released from provincial prison in Ontario, Canada in 2010 with health administrative data. We matched each person by age and sex with four general population controls. We compared primary care utilization rates using generalized estimating equations. We adjusted rate ratios for aggregated diagnosis groups, to explore this association independent of comorbidity. We examined the proportion of people using primary care using chi squared tests and time to first primary care visit post-release using the Kaplan-Meier method.
Compared to the general population controls, the prison release group had significantly increased relative rates of primary care utilization: at 6.1 (95% CI 5.9-6.2) in prison, 3.7 (95% CI 3.6-3.8) in the week post-release and between 2.4 and 2.6 in the two years after prison release. All rate ratios remained significantly increased after adjusting for comorbidity. In the month after release, however, 66.3% of women and 75.5% of men did not access primary care.
Primary care utilization is high in prison and post-release for people who experience imprisonment in Ontario, Canada. Increased use is only partly explained by comorbidity. The majority of people do not access primary care in the month after prison release. Future research should identify reasons for increased use and interventions to improve care access for persons who are not accessing care post-release.
Drug overdose causes approximately 183,000 deaths worldwide annually and 50,000 deaths in Canada and the United States combined. Drug-related deaths are concentrated among young people, leading to a ...substantial burden of disease and loss of potential life years. Understanding the epidemiology, patterns of care, and prognosis of drug-related prehospital emergencies may lead to improved outcomes.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests with drug-related and presumed cardiac causes between 2007 and 2013 using the Toronto Regional RescuNet Epistry database. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. We computed standardized case fatality rates, and odds ratios of survival to hospital discharge for cardiac arrests with drug-related versus presumed cardiac causes, adjusting for confounders using logistic regression.
The analysis involved 21,497 cardiac arrests, including 378 (1.8%) drug-related and 21,119 (98.2%) presumed cardiac. Compared with the presumed cardiac group, drug-related arrest patients were younger and less likely to receive bystander resuscitation, have initial shockable cardiac rhythms, or be transported to hospital. There were no significant differences in emergency medical service response times, return of spontaneous circulation, or survival to discharge. Standardized case fatality rates confirmed that these effects were not due to age or sex differences. Adjusting for known predictors of survival, drug-related cardiac arrest was associated with increased odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR1.44, 95%CI 1.15-1.81).
In out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, patients with drug-related causes are less likely than those with presumed cardiac causes to receive bystander resuscitation or have an initial shockable rhythm, but are more likely to survive after accounting for predictors of survival. The demographics and outcomes among drug-related cardiac arrest patients offers unique opportunities for prehospital intervention.
PDF
