Audit of protocols for treatment of paediatric burns in emergency departments in the Île de France

Pediatric Burns: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Epidemiology, Gender Distribution, Risk Factors, Management, and Outcomes in Emergency Departments

Pediatric burns pose a significant public health concern, ranking as the fifth most common nonfatal injury globally. This review consolidates data on the epidemiology, outcomes, and management of pediatric burns presenting to emergency departments. A systematic review was conducted across multiple databases, yielding 22 articles from 1992 to 2020. Utilizing the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) instrument, non-comparative studies scored from 2 to 11 with an average of 6.87, while comparative studies ranged from 12 to 16, averaging 13.67. The review included a total of 828,538 pediatric patients who were evaluated in the systematic review. Predominantly male victims ranged from 53% to 83%. The youngest victims were aged between 0 to 4 years. Burn etiology was largely attributed to scalds. A majority suffered from second-degree burns, with some studies reporting up to 89%. Limited data on total body surface area (TBSA) were documented, with only 2.5% requiring hospitalization. Common interventions included immediate resuscitation and skin grafting. Essential areas for future research are identified, including household risks, pre-treatment decisions, and the significant role of family dynamics in burn injury recovery. Pediatric burns remain a considerable concern, particularly among males and in household environments. The data underline the imperative for prevention strategies and optimized emergency care to positively influence outcomes for burn victims. Future research areas range from evaluating pre-treatment decisions to assessing community awareness regarding burn first aid.

Rédiger un protocole douleur : quelle méthode atraumatique pour l’urgentiste ?

Les protocoles « antalgie » sont des outils incontournables pour tous les services d’urgence dans le cadre de l’amélioration de la prise en charge de la douleur. Suivre les recommandations d’experts ne peut suffire. Un protocole doit proposer des conduites à tenir ciblées sur des situations définies, validées scientifiquement, adaptées au contexte du service et au personnel concerné, dans un cadre réglementaire et légal précis. Mais l’élaboration d’un protocole peut s’avérer une expérience pénible pour l’urgentiste, même si c’est une des missions extracliniques essentielles à la professionnalisation du métier. Pour le non-algologue, sa conception et sa rédaction peuvent être perçues comme fastidieuses et non prioritaires, mais cette inertie retarde dangereusement la mise à jour de nos stratégies thérapeutiques globales, en particulier en traumatologie. L’optimisation de cette tâche et un gain de temps sont pourtant possibles grâce à un guide méthodologique, des modèles, des documents types, tous accessibles, mais parfois mal référencés : l’expert pourra ainsi consacrer son temps au contenu et à l’adhésion des équipes plutôt qu’à la forme et, in fine, au patient. Une « protocolisation » de l’élaboration de nos protocoles est sans doute le moyen de les réaliser et de les mettre à jour plus efficacement, plus vite et sans douleur. Se doter d’un protocole d’antalgie est en fait une opportunité pour les équipes davantage qu’une contrainte, à condition de proposer une méthodologie adaptée à la culture de la médecine d’urgence, transversale, accessible, priorisée.

Perineural Nalbuphine in Ambulatory Upper Limb Surgery: A Comparison of Effects of Levobupivacaine with and without Nalbuphine as Adjuvant in Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block - A Prospective, Double-blinded, Randomized Controlled Study

Background and Aims:

Various opioid additives have been trialed to prolong brachial plexus block. We evaluated the effect of adding nalbuphine hydrochloride to levobupivacaine for supraclavicular brachial plexus blockade. The primary end-points were the onset and duration of sensory and motor blocks and duration of analgesia.

Materials and Methods:

Seventy-eight patients (aged 25–45 years) posted for ambulatory forearm and hand surgery under supraclavicular brachial plexus block were divided into two equal groups (Groups LN and LC) in a randomized, double-blind fashion. In Group LN (n = 39), 30 ml 0.5% levobupivacaine + 10 mg (diluted in 2 ml 0.9% saline) nalbuphine hydrochloride, and in Group LC (n = 39), 30 ml 0.5% levobupivacaine + 2 ml normal saline (0.9%) were administered in supraclavicular block. Sensory and motor block onset times and block durations, time to first analgesic use, total analgesic need, postoperative visual analog scale (VAS), hemodynamics, and side effects were recorded for each patient.

Results:

Although with similar demographic profile and block (sensory and motor) onset time, sensory and motor block duration and time to first analgesic use were significantly longer and the total need for rescue analgesics was lower in Group LN (P < 0.05) than Group LC. Postoperative VAS value at 24 h was significantly lower in Group LN (P < 0.05). Intraoperative hemodynamics was comparable between two groups, and no any appreciable side effect was noted throughout the study period.

Conclusion:

It can be concluded that adding nalbuphine hydrochloride to supraclavicular brachial plexus block increases the sensory and motor block duration and time to first analgesic use, and decreases total analgesic use with no side effects.

Pain management policies and practices in pediatric emergency care: a nationwide survey of Italian hospitals

BACKGROUND

Pain experienced by children in emergency departments (EDs) is often poorly assessed and treated. Although local protocols and strategies are important to ensure appropriate staff behaviours, few studies have focussed on pain management policies at hospital or department level. This study aimed at describing the policies and reported practices of pain assessment and treatment in a national sample of Italian pediatric EDs, and identifying the assocoated structural and organisational factors.

METHODS

A structured questionnaire was mailed to all the 14 Italian pediatric and maternal and child hospitals and to 5 general hospitals with separate pediatric emergency room. There were no refusals. Information collected included the frequency and mode of pain assessment, presence of written pain management protocols, use of local anaesthetic (EMLA cream) before venipuncture, and role of parents. General data on the hospital and ED were also recorded. Multiple Correspondence Analysis was used to explore the multivariable associations between the characteristics of hospitals and EDs and their pain management policies and practices.

RESULTS

Routine pain assessment both at triage and in the emergency room was carried out only by 26% of surveyed EDs. About one third did not use algometric scales, and almost half (47.4%) did not have local protocols for pain treatment. Only 3 routinely reassessed pain after treatment, and only 2 used EMLA. All EDs allowed parents' presence and most (17, 89.9%) allowed them to stay when painful procedures were carried out. Eleven hospitals (57.9%) allowed parents to hold their child during blood sampling. Pediatric and maternal and child hospitals, those located in the North of Italy, equipped with medico-surgical-traumatological ED and short stay observation, and providing full assessment triage over 24 hours were more likely to report appropriate policies for pain management both at triage and in ER. A nurses to admissions ratio ≥ median was associated with better pain management at triage.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite availability of national and international guidelines, pediatric pain management is still sub-optimal in Italian emergency departments. Multifaceted strategies including development of local policies, staff educational programs, and parental involvement in pain assessment should be carried out and periodically reinforced.

Management of Pain in the Emergency Department

Since pain is a primary impetus for patient presentation to the Emergency Department (ED), its treatment should be a priority for acute care providers. Historically, the ED has been marked by shortcomings in both the evaluation and amelioration of pain. Over the past decade, improvements in the science of pain assessment and management have combined to facilitate care improvements in the ED. The purpose of this review is to address selected topics within the realm of ED pain management. Commencing with general principles and definitions, the review continues with an assessment of areas of controversy and advancing knowledge in acute pain care. Some barriers to optimal pain care are discussed, and potential mechanisms to overcome these barriers are offered. While the review is not intended as a resource for specific pain conditions or drug information, selected agents and approaches are mentioned with respect to evolving evidence and areas for future research.