Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2007;335:527 (15 September), doi:10.1136/bmj.39332.422801.3A
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Performing snapshot assessments in emergency settings, where time is precious, is notoriously risky. Serial assessment of the child is best but not always possible. A scientific approach of measuring heart rate, capillary refill, respiratory rate, and behaviour takes less than 3 minutes1 and is achievable in these settings. Harnden is wrong in saying that this is not achievable in primary care.2 To state that there is no evidence that measurement of these parameters helps identify serious bacterial illness may be true for primary care but is not true in hospital (emergency department or paediatric wards). Lack of evidence of association is not evidence of lack of association, so logic dictates that a similar assessment should take place in primary care.
The Intercollegiate Advisory Group for Services for Children in Emergency Departments has concerns about the abilities of telephone triage systems and inadequately trained frontline staff to differentiate seriously ill children
Ffion C Davies, consultant in emergency medicine
Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester LE1 5WW
Ffion.davies@uhl-tr.nhs.uk
Israeli students are refusing to perform intimate examinations on anaesthetised women without their informed consent.