Significant decrease in the rate of fatal alcohol poisonings in Finland validated by blood alcohol concentration statistics

Concentration units used to report blood- and breath-alcohol concentration for legal purposes differ between countries which is important to consider when blood/breath ratios of alcohol are compared and contrasted

This technical note reviews the plethora of concentration units used to report blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) and breath-alcohol concentrations (BrAC) for legal purposes in different countries. The choice of units sometimes causes confusion when scientific papers originating from a certain country might be introduced into evidence via expert testimony, such as when alcohol-related crimes are prosecuted. The concentration units are also important to consider when blood/breath ratios (BBRs) of alcohol are calculated and compared between countries. Statutory BAC limits for driving in most nations are reported in mass/volume (m/v) units, such as g/100 mL (g%) in the United States, mg/100 mL (mg%) in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland, or g/L (mg/mL) in many EU nations. By contrast, Germany and the Nordic countries report BAC as mass/mass (m/m) units, hence g/kg or mg/g, which are ~5.5% lower than m/v units, because whole blood has an average density of 1.055 g/mL. There are historical reasons for reporting BAC in mass/mass units because the aliquots of blood analyzed were measured by weight rather than volume. The difference between m/m and m/v is also important in postmortem toxicology, such as when distribution ratios of ethanol between blood and other biological specimens, such as urine, vitreous humor, and cerebrospinal fluid, are reported.

Association of anabolic androgenic steroid use with perimortem polypharmacy, antemortem prescription drug use, and utilization of health care services - A Finnish triple register study of forensic autopsy cases

Anabolic androgenic steroid (AAS) use has previously been associated with complex polysubstance use that may increase morbidity and mortality among these individuals. In this study we aimed to further describe the features of perimortem polysubstance use, antemortem central nervous system (CNS) drug use and health care service utilization of AAS using males that suffer premature death. The main sample included all cases that were screened for AAS in connection with forensic autopsy between 2016-2019 and tested positive (n = 16). The control samples included autopsy cases that were screened for AAS but tested negative (n = 30) and randomly selected, age and sex matched autopsy cases not suspected of having used AAS but were otherwise fully toxicologically investigated (n = 43). Postmortem toxicological results were used for perimortem polysubstance use prevalence and severity estimation. Antemortem CNS drug use was calculated from a national register of reimbursed prescription medicines, and health care utilization from public health care registers, covering the last five years of life. Perimortem polysubstance use was prevalent in all groups, but the AAS positive had a tendency for greater CNS drug polypharmacy and the highest number of antemortem CNS drug purchases during the last five years of life, with a median of 14.5 purchases/person, vs. 1/person in the AAS negative and 0/person in the random group (Kruskal-Wallis H test, p < .001). Yearly medical contacts increased in all groups as death approached. Our findings suggest that prescription CNS drug use may play a significant role in polysubstance use disorders of AAS using males that suffer premature death.

Accuracy of dispatch and prehospital triage performance in poisonings - A retrospective study from northern Finland

BACKGROUND

Increasing numbers of dispatches place a burden on EMS; this study sought to assess the prehospital evaluation of poisoned patients transported to hospital. The primary aim of this study was to measure dispatch centre and EMS provider performance as well as factors contributing to the recognition of poisoning among prehospital patients. The secondary aim was to compare triage performance between dispatch centres and EMS providers.

METHODS

A retrospective single-centre study in Northern Finland was conducted. Patients suspected as poisonings by dispatch centres as well as other EMS-transported patients who received a diagnosis of poisoning in hospital between June 1, 2015 and June 1, 2017, were included.

RESULTS

There were a total of 1668 poisoning-related EMS missions. Dispatch centres suspected poisonings with sensitivity of 79.9% (95% CI 76.7-82.9) and specificity of 98.9% (95% CI 98.9-99.0) when all EMS missions were taken into account. In a logistic regression model, decreased state of consciousness as dispatch code (OR 7.18, 95% CI 1.90-27.05) and intravenous fluid resuscitation (OR 6.58, 95% CI 1.34-32.37) were associated with EMS transport providers not recognizing poisoning. Overtriage rate appeared significantly higher (33.6%, 95% CI 28.6-39.2) for dispatch when compared with transport (17.8%, 95% CI 13.9-22.6).

CONCLUSION

Dispatch centres seem to suspect poisonings fairly accurately. Poisonings unrecognized by EMS providers may be linked with intravenous fluid resuscitation and decreased patient consciousness. Overtriage appears to resolve somewhat from dispatch to transport. There were no fatal poisonings in this study population.