Advanced practice nurses in emergency care settings: A demographic profile.

INTRODUCTION: Very little is known about clinical nurse specialists and nurse practitioners (advance practice nurses [APNs]) who practice in emergency care settings. The Advanced Practice Committee of the ENA sought to determine a profile of these individuals. METHODS: Surveys were distributed to all registrants at 2 ENA conferences and posted on the ENA Web site. This survey asked 17 questions concerning the demographic characteristics of the APN respondents (eg, education, experience, certification, state recognition, and practice area). The survey was completed by 166 APNs. RESULTS: APNs had considerable experience as ED registered nurses before becoming an APN. They obtained their APN education at the master's degree or post-master's degree level. State recognition was required for 89.2% of the APNs. The majority of APNs (61.4%) obtained their certification through the American Nurses Credentialing Center. Nurse practitioners were predominantly family nurse practitioners (43%), and clinical nurse specialists were either critical care clinical nurse specialists (8.9%) or had other certifications (5.9%). APNs provided services in both the main emergency department and the fast track (45.7%) and were relatively new to their role as an APN. DISCUSSION: Consistent with current educational and certification requirements, the vast majority of APNs held a master's degree. Although relatively new to their role as APNs in emergency care, they were nonetheless very experienced as ED registered nurses. The majority of APNs were certified, even though that is not required for practice in all states. Continued research is needed to identify the most effective utilization of APNs, document their contributions to patient care outcomes, and develop strategies to meet their educational and practice needs.     

Liquid nitrogen injury: a case report

Despite the widespread use of liquid nitrogen, there are few reports of injuries caused by the use of this substance. We report a case in which a severe liquid nitrogen burn, requiring digital amputation, occurred despite the wearing of protective gloves. This case illustrates the potential dangers of working with liquid nitrogen, and raises questions as to whether adequate precautions are being taken to prevent such injuries.     

Serum ionic fluoride levels in haemodialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients

High serum fluoride (F-) in patients with chronic renal failure (CRF) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is associated with risk of renal osteodystrophy and other bone changes. This study was done to determine F- in normal healthy controls and patients with ESRD on haemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD). Seventeen healthy controls (12 males, 5 females) and 39 ESRD patients on dialysis (17 males, 22 females) were recruited in the study in a community with 47.4 +/- 3.28 microM/l (range 44-51 microM/l) of F- content in drinking water. Control subjects showed a mean serum F- concentration of 1.08 +/- 0.350 microM/l. Males in control group showed slightly higher F- levels (1.15 +/- 0.334, range 0.55-1.9 microM/l) than females (0.92 +/- 0.370, range 0.6-1.5 microM/l). Mean serum F- concentration did not correlate significantly with age and sex among control subjects, whereas such correlation was observed in patients with ESRD on dialysis. Mean serum F- concentration was significantly higher in patients on dialysis (2.67 +/- 1.09, range 0.8-5.2 microM/l) than normal controls. When grouped according to sex, the mean serum F- concentration in males (3.05 +/- 1.04, range 1.8-5.2 microM/l) was significantly higher than females (2.38 +/- 1.08, range 0.8-5.2 microM/l). When patients were grouped according to age, it was observed that F- concentration was significantly higher in patients with age groups 21-70 (2.86 +/- 1.05) than those with age group 13-20 years (1.42 +/- 0.531). Thus F- concentration correlated with age and sex, being higher in males and above 20 years. Despite appreciable clearance of F- (39-90%) across the peritoneum, patients on CAPD showed higher serum F- concentration than those on HD (3.1 +/- 1.97 vs 2.5 +/- 1.137 microM/l). Of the total 39 patients on dialysis 39% had their serum F- concentration above 3.0 microM/l, posing the risk of renal osteodystrophy.      

44Sacral extracorporeal magnetic stimulation is an effective treatment for pelvic floor dyssynergia; Comparative study with biofeedback therapy

Background: Recent development of extracorporeal magnetic stimulation (ECMS) which uses current‐changing magnetic fields allows the induction of electrical stimulation in the desired deep tissue. Recent study showed the sacral nerve stimulation reduces corticoanal excitability that may play a functional role in anal continence mechanisms. Preliminary study shows that ECMS of sacral nerve can modify pelvic floor function and expel rectal balloon in patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia (PFD). Aims: To evaluate the effect of ECMS compared with biofeedback therapy (BF) in patients with PFD. Methods and Materials: Thirty‐eight patients who fulfilled Rome II criteria for PFD by colon transit time and anorectal function tests, were randomly treated with 8 sessions of ECMS (2/weeks; n = 19) at prone position or BF (2/weeks; n = 19) at sitting position. Stimulation parameters were set at 50–80% of maximum intensity, 10 and 50 Hz frequency, 3 s burst length with 3 and 6 s off using arm‐typed stimulator (BioCom‐1000, Mcube Co., Korea). Symptom scores for constipation with/without anorectal function test were repeatedly measured after each treatment. Response was defined as 50% or more decreased symptom score after treatment (partial response: 30–50%, poor: <30%). Results: Fifteen patients (age 49.1 ± 13.4 years, mean ± SD; 4 men) completed 8 session of BF and 14 patients (54.5 ± 17.6 years, 3 men) completed 8 session of ECMS. Four patients of BF group discontinued treatment due to unsatisfactory therapeutic effect (n = 1) and withdrew consent (n = 3) and 5 patients of ECMS group discontinued treatment because of same reasons (n = 1, 4). Total symptom scores were significantly decreased after treatment of 8 session in both treatment groups (13.4 ± 6.6 vs. 4.3 ± 4.0 for BF, p = 0.009; 14.9 ± 5.6 vs. 3.4 ± 4.0 for ECMS, p < 0.001). Bowel movements per week were also significantly increased after treatment in both groups (median 2 vs. 7 for BF, p = 0.035; median 2 vs. 7 for ECMS, p = 0.008). Thirteen out of 15 patients showed response in BF group and 12 out of 14 showed good response in ECMS group. No adverse effects in both groups. Conclusions: ECMS is as effective as BF for the treatment of PFD. Long‐term effect of ECMS for the patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia need to be evaluated in the near future.