ArticleInternational journal of emergency medicine2024
A potentially lifesaving error: unintentional high-dose adrenaline administration in anaphylaxis-induced cardiac arrest; a case report.
Article in International journal of emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiopulmonary resuscitation is a crucial skill for emergency medical services. As high-risk-low-frequency events pose an immense mental load to providers, concepts of crew resource management, non-technical skills and the science of human errors are intended to prepare healthcare providers for high-pressure situations. However, medical errors occur, and organizations and institutions face the challenge of providing a blame-free error culture to achieve continuous improvement by avoiding similar errors in the future. In this case, we report a critical medical error during an anaphylaxis-associated cardiac arrest, its handling and the unexpected yet favourable outcome for the patient. CASE PRESENTATION: During an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest due to chemotherapy-induced anaphylaxis, a patient received a 10-fold dose of epinephrine due to shortcomings in communication and standardization via a central venous port catheter. The patient converted from a non-shockable rhythm into a pulseless ventricular tachycardia and subsequently into ventricular fibrillation. The patient was cardioverted and defibrillated and had a return of spontaneous circulation with profound hypotension only 6 min after the administration of 10 mg epinephrine. The patient survived without any residues or neurological impairment.
conclusionsThis case demonstrates the potential deleterious effects of shortcomings in communication and deviation from standard protocols, especially in emergencies. Here, precise instructions, closed-loop communication and unambiguous labelling of syringes would probably have avoided the epinephrine overdose central to this case. Interestingly, this serious error may have saved the patient's life, as it led to the development of a shockable rhythm. Furthermore, as the patient was still in profound hypotension after administering 10 mg of epinephrine, this high dose might have counteracted the severe vasoplegic state in anaphylaxis-associated cardiac arrest. Lastly, as the patient was receiving care for advanced malignancy, the likelihood of termination of resuscitation in the initial non-shockable cardiac arrest was significant and possibly averted by the medication error.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.