[Treatment of asthmatic crises at a hospital emergency service. Are the protocols followed?].

Improper assessment and treatment of asthma attacks have been identified as causes of increased morbidity and mortality: several pneumological societies have therefore created and published guidelines for facilitating decision making and for preventing unnecessary failures of therapy. The objective of this study was to examine emergency department compliance with such guidelines in our hospital, comparing the performance of pneumologists and other specialists. We reviewed the records of 117 patients treated for acute asthma attacks in 1994 (87 women and 30 men, mean age 46 years); 37 patients were treated by pneumologists and 80 by other specialists. The two physician groups differed significantly with respect to initial assessment of severity, particularly in the recording of vital signs (p < 0.05) and in the examination of some signs such as the use of accessory musculature (38% versus 10%, for pneumologists and other specialists, respectively) or the presence of cyanosis (81% versus 55%). Other factors associated with risk of death were noted only occasionally. Peak flow meters were used with only 5 patients, all examined by pneumologists; on the other hand, arterial blood samples for gasometric measurements were taken from 97%, although only 24% met the criteria stipulated in the guidelines. Treatment evaluated against the guidelines was incorrect in 24%, with no significant differences between pneumologists and other specialists. We conclude that: 1) the emergency clinical assessment and treatment of patients presenting with acute asthma attack is inadequate for a large proportion of patients, as the recommendations of consensual guidelines are habitually ignored, and 2) although there are differences in the management of these patients by pneumologists and other emergency room specialists, the former do not generally do a better job of following the guidelines.