METHODS: A 5-year retrospective chart review was carried out at 2 university hospitals. All patients with acute blunt traumatic spinal or spinal cord injuries transported directly from the injury site to the hospital were entered. None of the 120 patients seen at the University of Malaya had spinal immobilization during transport, whereas all 334 patients seen at the University of New Mexico did. The 2 hospitals were comparable in physician training and clinical resources. Neurologic injuries were assigned to 2 categories, disabling or not disabling, by 2 physicians acting independently and blinded to the hospital of origin. Data were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression, with hospital location, patient age, gender, anatomic level of injury, and injury mechanism serving as explanatory variables.

RESULTS: There was less neurologic disability in the unimmobilized Malaysian patients (OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.03-3.99; p = 0.04). This corresponds to a <2% chance that immobilization has any beneficial effect. Results were similar when the analysis was limited to patients with cervical injuries (OR 1.52; 95% CI 0.64-3.62; p = 0.34).

METHODS: Prospective interrupted time series cohort study conducted at three time points in EDs in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia of adult patients presenting to the ED with dyspnea as a main symptom. Data were collected over three 72-hour periods and included demographics, comorbidities, mode of arrival, usual medications, prehospital treatment, initial assessment, ED investigations, treatment in the ED, ED diagnosis, disposition from ED, in-hospital outcome, and final hospital diagnosis. The primary outcomes of interest are the epidemiology, investigation, treatment, and outcome of patients presenting to ED with dyspnea.

RESULTS: A total of 3,044 patients were studied. Patients with dyspnea made up 5.2% (3,105/60,059, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.0% to 5.4%) of ED presentations, 11.4% of ward admissions (1,956/17,184, 95% CI = 10.9% to 11.9%), and 19.9% of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (104/523, 95% CI = 16.7% to 23.5%). The most common diagnoses were lower respiratory tract infection (20.2%), heart failure (14.9%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (13.6%), and asthma (12.7%). Hospital ward admission was required for 64% of patients (95% CI = 62% to 66%) with 3.3% (95% CI = 2.8% to 4.1%) requiring ICU admission. In-hospital mortality was 6% (95% CI = 5.0% to 7.2%).

METHODS: We searched databases Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline and Google Scholar up to January 2021 and identified randomised controlled trials comparing ketorolac to any other medications in treating patients presenting with migraine headache.

RESULTS: Thirteen trials were included in our review, comprising of 944 participants. We derived seven comparisons; ketorolac versus phenothiazines, metoclopramide, sumatriptan, dexamethasone, sodium valproate, caffeine, and diclofenac. There were no significant differences in the reduction of pain intensity at 1-hour under the comparisons between ketorolac and phenothiazines (standard mean difference (SMD) 0.09, P 0.74), or metoclopramide (SMD 0.02, P 0.95). We also found no difference in the outcome recurrence of headache [ketorolac vs phenothiazines (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, P 0.97)], ability to return to work or usual activity [ketorolac vs metoclopramide (RR 0.64, P 0.13)], need for rescue medication [ketorolac vs phenothiazines (RR 1.72, P 0.27), ketorolac vs metoclopramide (RR 2.20, P 0.18)], and frequency of adverse effects [ketorolac vs metoclopramide (RR 1.07, P 0.82)]. Limited trials suggested that ketorolac offered better pain relief at 1-hour compared to sumatriptan and dexamethasone, had lesser frequency of adverse effects than phenothiazines, and was superior to sodium valproate in terms of reduction of pain intensity at 1-hour, need for rescue medication and sustained headache freedom within 24-hour.