BACKGROUND: Abdominal pain is a common complaint seen at emergency centers. Various diseases can cause abdomin al pain making it difficult to make a correct diagnosis. In the elderly, however, the consequences of an incorrect or delayed diagnosis can be more critical. We investigated the accuracy of initial diagnoses in the emergency center and analyzed the associations among medical factors including age. METHODS: We compared the ICD 10 codes of initial diagnoses to the codes of final diagnoses, defined the 'degree of agreement' using a 5 point scale, and classified patients into 'high degree of agreement' or 'low degree of agreement' groups. According to the severity of illness, we classified patients as 'admission' or 'out patient follow up'. According to their illness, we classified them as 'surgical' or 'medical'. According to age, we classified them as 'elderly' or 'adult'. Finally, we analyzed the statistical significance of each association. RESULTS: Overall, admitted patients and surgical diagnoses had higher degrees of agreement. 'Elderly' patients had no significant difference in 'degree of agreement' from 'adult' patients. CONCLUSION: Among patients presenting with acute abdominal pain to the emergency center, the degree of agreement between initial diagnosis and final diagnosis is dependent on the diagnostic characteristics of the disease, and not on the age of the patients. Further studies on the diagnostic accuracy of individual diseases are needed. Additional diagnosis associated variables, for example comorbidity and prognosis, needs to be studied regarding relationship to diagnostic accuracy.
Abdominal Pain ; Aged ; Comorbidity ; Delayed Diagnosis ; Emergencies ; Humans ; Prognosis

BACKGROUND: Accurate volume measurement is important in the management of patients with congestive heart failure or renal insufficiency. A bioimpedance analyser can estimate total body water in litres and has been widely used in clinical practice due to its non-invasiveness and ease of results interpretation. To change impedance data to volumetric data, bioimpedance analysers use equations derived from data from healthy subjects, which may not apply to patients with other conditions. Bioelectrical impedance vector analysis (BIVA) was developed to overcome the dependence on those equations by constructing vector plots using raw impedance data. BIVA requires normal reference plots for the proper interpretation of individual vectors. The aim of this study was to construct normal reference vector plots of bioelectrical impedance for Koreans. METHODS: Bioelectrical impedance measurements were collected from apparently healthy subjects screened according to a comprehensive physical examination and medical history performed by trained physicians. Reference vector contours were plotted on the RXc graph using the probability density function of the bivariate normal distribution. We further compared them with those of other ethnic groups. RESULTS: A total of 242 healthy subjects aged 22 to 83 were recruited (137 men and 105 women) between December 2015 and November 2016. The centers of the tolerance ellipses were 306.3 Ω/m and 34.9 Ω/m for men and 425.6 Ω/m and 39.7 Ω/m for women. The ellipses were wider for women than for men. The confidence ellipses for Koreans were located between those for Americans and Spaniards without overlap for both genders. CONCLUSION: This study presented gender-specific normal reference BIVA plots and corresponding tolerance and confidence ellipses on the RXc graph, which is important for the interpretation of BIA-reported volume status in patients with congestive heart failure or renal insufficiency. There were noticeable differences in reference ellipses with regard to gender and ethnic groups.
Adult ; Blood Volume ; Body Fluid Compartments ; Body Water ; Electric Impedance ; Ethnic Groups ; Female ; Healthy Volunteers ; Heart Failure ; Humans ; Male ; Physical Examination ; Renal Insufficiency

The present erratum notice corrects one figure of the article.

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with 120 compressions per minute (CPM) to CPR with 100 CPM in patients with non-traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. We randomly assigned patients with non-traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest into two groups upon arrival to the emergency department (ED). The patients received manual CPR either with 100 CPM (CPR-100 group) or 120 CPM (CPR-120 group). The primary outcome measure was sustained restoration of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). The secondary outcome measures were survival discharge from the hospital, one-month survival, and one-month survival with good functional status. Of 470 patients with cardiac arrest, 136 patients in the CPR-100 group and 156 patients in the CPR-120 group were included in the final analysis. A total of 69 patients (50.7%) in the CPR-100 group and 67 patients (42.9%) in the CPR-120 group had ROSC (absolute difference, 7.8% points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.7 to 19.2%; P = 0.183). The rates of survival discharge from the hospital, one-month survival, and one-month survival with good functional status were not different between the two groups (16.9% vs. 12.8%, P = 0.325; 12.5% vs. 6.4%, P = 0.073; 5.9% vs. 2.6%, P = 0.154, respectively). We did not find differences in the resuscitation outcomes between those who received CPR with 100 CPM and those with 120 CPM. However, a large trial is warranted, with adequate power to confirm a statistically non-significant trend toward superiority of CPR with 100 CPM. (Clinical Trial Registration Information: www.cris.nih.go.kr, cris.nih.go.kr number, KCT0000231)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation* ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Heart Arrest ; Humans ; Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest ; Outcome Assessment (Health Care) ; Resuscitation