Literature DB >> 29205070

Trends in types of calls managed by U.S. poison centers 2000-2015.

Bruce D Anderson1, Hyunuk Seung1, Wendy Klein-Schwartz1.   

Abstract

AIM: The number of cases reported to poison centers has decreased since 2008 but there is evidence that the complexity of calls is increasing.
OBJECTIVES: The objectives are to evaluate national poison center data for trends in reason and how these changes effect management site, medical outcomes, and poison center workload.
METHODS: Data regarding reason, age, management site, and medical outcome were extracted from annual reports of the National Poison Data System from 2000 to 2015. The proportion of cases by year were determined for unintentional and intentional exposures. Analysis of data from a single poison center from 2005 to 2015 compared the number of interactions between poison center staff and callers for unintentional versus intentional reasons.
RESULTS: Trend analyses found that from 2000 to 2015 the percent of unintentional cases decreased (from 85.9 to 78.4%, p < .0001) and the percent of intentional cases increased (from 11.3 to 17.6%, p < .0001). Age distribution changed with a decrease in children <13 years of age and increase in adolescents and adults. In these latter two age groups, the proportion due to intentional exposure increased while unintentional declined. The distribution of management sites changed over the 16-year period, with a decrease in non-HCF cases and significant increase in percent of cases treated in a HCF. The frequencies of moderate effect, major effect, and death were significantly higher for intentional exposures than for unintentional exposures. Analysis of data entry notes from a single center showed that the mean number of notes per unintentional case (1.61 ± 0.08) was significantly different from the mean number of notes per intentional case (9.23 ± 0.68) (p < .0001). DISCUSSION: Poison centers are managing more intentional exposures and fewer unintentional exposures. Intentional exposures require more poison center staff expertise and time.
CONCLUSION: Looking only at poison center total call volume may not be an adequate method to gauge productivity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Poison control center; human; toxicity; workload

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29205070     DOI: 10.1080/15563650.2017.1410170

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Toxicol (Phila)        ISSN: 1556-3650            Impact factor:   4.467


  3 in total

1.  Management of Pediatric Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome: A Review.

Authors:  Justin P Reinert; O'Neill Niyamugabo; Kiersi S Harmon; Norman E Fenn
Journal:  J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2021-05-19

2.  Evaluation of types of poisoning exposure calls managed by the Malaysia National Poison Centre (2006-2015): A retrospective review.

Authors:  Balamurugan Tangiisuran; Maryam Jiva; Adilah Mohamed Ariff; Noor Afiza Abdul Rani; Asdariah Misnan; Sazaroni Md Rashid; Mohamed Isa Abdul Majid; Andrew H Dawson
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-12-31       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Epidemiology and risk factors of pesticide poisoning in Malaysia: a retrospective analysis by the National Poison Centre (NPC) from 2006 to 2015.

Authors:  Nur Azzalia Kamaruzaman; Yin-Hui Leong; Mohd Hafiidz Jaafar; Halilol Rahman Mohamed Khan; Noor Afiza Abdul Rani; Mohd Fadhli Razali; Mohamed Isa Abdul Majid
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 2.692

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.