End-of-life Models and Emergency Department Care

Many people die in emergency departments (EDs) across the United States from sudden illnesses or injuries, an exacerbation of a chronic disease, or a terminal illness. Frequently, patients and families come to the ED seeking lifesaving or life-prolonging treatment. In addition, the ED is a place of transition-patients usually are transferred to an inpatient unit, transferred to another hospital, or discharged home. Rarely are patients supposed to remain in the ED. Currently, there is an increasing amount of literature related to end-of-life care. However, these end-of-life care models are based on chronic disease trajectories and have difficulty accommodating sudden-death trajectories common in the ED. There is very little information about end-of-life care in the ED. This article explores ED culture and characteristics, and examines the applicability of current end-of-life care models.     

Small proportions: what to report for confidence intervals?

The original article to which this Erratum refers was published in Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 2005; 14: 239–247.     

Liver and lung resection for colorectal metastasis

Aim: To examine the survival benefit of liver and lung resection for colorectal metastasis and the potential prognostic factors that affect patient survival. Methods: All patients who had resection of lung or liver metastasis for colorectal metastasis in Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong from 1995 to 2004 were retrospectively reviewed. The overall and disease‐free survival was analysed, in particularly between liver and lung metastasis. All factors that may have affected the survival were entered into Cox's proportional hazards regression model to identify significant variables associated with survival. Results: At 5 years, the overall survival of patients who had resection of lung and liver metastasis was 44% and 38%, respectively; the disease‐free survival was 26% and 24%, respectively. Overall and disease‐free survival of patients with resection of lung metastasis was comparable to those with resection of liver metastasis. The differentiations of primary tumour and time to metastasis were shown to be significant prognostic factors influencing overall survival. Those patients with systemic chemotherapy after resection of colorectal metastasis demonstrated a significantly higher probability of overall survival. Conclusion: Resection of lung and liver metastases from colorectal origin was safe and both procedures improved survival. The use of chemotherapy after resection of metastasis significantly improved the overall survival.     

Inguinal hernia repair in Hospital Authority hospitals: The role of laparoscopic hernioplasty

Objective: Two major changes have occurred in inguinal hernia repair during the last two decades: (i) the use of tension‐free mesh repair; and (ii) the application of laparoscopic technique for repair. The aims of the present study were to study: (i) how inguinal hernia repair was carried out; and (ii) the outcome of inguinal hernia repair in Hospital Authority (HA) hospitals. Methodology: This was a retrospective analysis on 8311 elective inguinal hernia repairs performed in 16 HA hospitals from January 2001 to December 2003. The mean age was 63.9 ± 14.2 years, and the male to female ratio was 22.0 : 1.0. Among these, 869 (10.5%) repairs were performed with the laparoscopic approach and 7442 (89.5%) repairs with the open approach. The proportion of laparoscopic hernia repair increased from 8.7% to 12.6%. Results: For open repair, 39% of cases were carried out with regional anaesthesia, 32% with general anaesthesia and 29% with local anaesthesia (LA). Furthermore, mesh repair was used in 88% of the patients. For laparosocpic repair, 98.4% of cases were carried out under general anaesthesia, and all patients had mesh repair using the totally extraperitoneal approach. A significantly higher proportion of bilateral repair and recurrent hernia repair was performed with the laparoscopic approach (P = 0.000). For primary unilateral repair, there was no significant difference in the postoperative length of stay (LOS) and the total LOS between the laparoscopic and the open surgery groups. No difference in LOS was found in recurrent hernia repair between the two groups. With respect to bilateral repair, both the preoperative LOS (P = 0.036) and total LOS (P = 0.039) were shorter in the laparoscopic group. Furthermore, a significantly higher proportion of day‐surgery patients was observed in the laparoscopic group than the open surgery group (21.3%vs 16.9%, P = 0.001). Nevertheless, when only the results of 2003 were analyzed, the postoperative LOS (P = 0.000) and total LOS (P = 0.000) were significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group than the open surgery group. The LOS parameters were significantly shorter in the open surgery LA subgroup compared with the non‐LA subgroup (P = 0.000), and they were not different from those in the laparoscopic group. Conclusions: The open mesh repair is the predominant approach for inguinal hernia repair in HA hospitals. The originally described local anaesthetic approach was under utilized, although it resulted in good outcome. The use of laparoscopic hernia repair is increasing and a learning curve was recently observed with improved outcome.