Suppr超能文献

毒药与恐慌!

Poisons and panic!

作者信息

White N C

机构信息

Holton-Arms School, Bethesda, MD 20817, USA.

出版信息

Vet Hum Toxicol. 1997 Jun;39(3):170-2.

PMID:9167249
Abstract

Home management of the majority of poison center callers is safe and cost-effective; but in the absence of poison center consultation, could callers correctly assess the severity of a poisoning? This study was conducted to determine indirectly whether callers can correctly assess the toxicity of a substance involved in a poison exposure by determining whether caller panic levels correlated with the expected toxicity of the exposure. Using a digital call recorder, 100 calls to the National Capital Poison Center involving children < 10 y were reviewed. The panic level of each caller was assessed and scored on a 4-point rating scale and, compared to the toxicity of the substance implicated (also on a 4-point rating scale). Most callers were mothers (85%), most patients were < 4 y (86%), and most exposure routes were ingestions (89%). Although there were only 12 male callers, male callers were significantly more panicked than females. Overall, there was a correlation between the panic level of the poison center callers and the toxicity of the substance involved in the exposure, with the mean panic level increasing as the toxicity increased. However, only 36% of patients had a panic level that was exactly appropriate for the toxicity level. Most callers were more panicked than they needed to be (57%), including 14% of callers who were much more panicked than they needed to be. Seven percent of callers were too calm; they appeared not to understand how toxic the exposure really was. Based on these data, one could predict that the majority of callers were sufficiently panicked that, had the poison center not been available to provide immediate consultation, the callers may have over-reacted and called 911 or gone straight to a hospital. Yet only 1 of the 57 overly-panicked callers was calling about a patient who actually required medical intervention. Of great concern, the 7% of patients who were too calm may have required medical intervention that, due to underestimation of the severity of the exposure, may have been withheld or delayed. Three of these "too calm" cases actually required medical intervention. Although subject to a number of design limitations, this study suggests that callers frequently over-react to poison exposures. In the absence of a well-utilized poison control system, excessive panic may contribute to excessive use of emergency departments and ambulance services and create excessive health care costs for poisoning emergencies.

摘要

大多数拨打中毒控制中心电话的人进行家庭处理是安全且具有成本效益的;但在没有中毒控制中心咨询的情况下,打电话的人能正确评估中毒的严重程度吗?本研究旨在通过确定打电话者的恐慌程度是否与预期的中毒毒性相关,间接判断打电话者能否正确评估中毒事件中所涉及物质的毒性。使用数字通话记录器,对拨打国家首都中毒控制中心的100个涉及10岁以下儿童的电话进行了回顾。对每个打电话者的恐慌程度进行评估,并在4级评分量表上打分,然后与所涉及物质的毒性(也采用4级评分量表)进行比较。大多数打电话者是母亲(85%),大多数患者年龄小于4岁(86%),大多数接触途径是摄入(89%)。虽然只有12名男性打电话者,但男性打电话者比女性明显更恐慌。总体而言,中毒控制中心打电话者的恐慌程度与接触所涉及物质的毒性之间存在相关性,随着毒性增加,平均恐慌程度也增加。然而,只有36%的患者的恐慌程度与毒性水平完全相符。大多数打电话者比实际需要的更恐慌(57%),其中14%的打电话者比实际需要的恐慌得多。7%的打电话者过于冷静;他们似乎不明白接触的毒性究竟有多大。基于这些数据,可以预测,大多数打电话者恐慌过度,如果中毒控制中心无法提供即时咨询,打电话者可能会反应过度,拨打911或直接前往医院。然而,在57名过度恐慌的打电话者中,只有1人是为确实需要医疗干预的患者打电话。令人极为担忧的是,7%过于冷静的患者可能需要医疗干预,但由于对接触严重程度的低估,这种干预可能被推迟或未实施。这些“过于冷静”的案例中有3例实际上需要医疗干预。尽管本研究存在一些设计上的局限性,但它表明打电话者对中毒事件经常反应过度。在没有充分利用的中毒控制体系的情况下,过度恐慌可能导致急诊科和救护车服务的过度使用,并为中毒紧急情况产生过高的医疗费用。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验