Objective: Non-contrast computed tomography (CT) remains the gold standard for diagnosing ureteral stones, with excellent sensitivity and specificity. However, reliance on CT alone raises concerns regarding cumulative radiation exposure, particularly in recurrent stone formers. Clinical scoring systems such as CHOKAI, STONE, and modified STONE have been developed to provide practical bedside tools for diagnostic decision-making. This study prospectively compared these three clinical scores for their ability to predict urinary-stone disease in the emergency department. Study Design: Prospective study. Methods and Duration of the Study: Between 6 August 2024 and 15 February 2025, 130 consecutively enrolled adults with flank pain underwent bedside scoring and reference-standard non-contrast CT. Associations were analysed with Chi-Square Tests and multivariable logistic regression. Model calibration was assessed with the Hosmer–Lemeshow test; overall accuracy was calculated. Results: When the variables used in different stone scoring formulas were compared according to the computer tomography results, there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.01) between patients with and without a history of stone and hydronephrosis. Patients with nausea, history of stone, and hydronephrosis were 11, 4.2, and 5 times more highly to have a stone on computer tomography than those without, respectively. Conclusions: In this Turkish cohort, CHOKAI and modified STONE demonstrated superior predictive performance compared to the original STONE score. These findings suggest that clinical scoring systems, when incorporating predictors such as nausea, prior stone history, and hydronephrosis, may serve as practical alternatives to CT-first diagnostic approaches. Multicenter validation studies are required before routine clinical adoption.

Objective: Our aim was to assess the knowledge and skill levels of health workers in our hospital in relation to basic and advanced life support and to see if there was a difference before and after the training. Materials and Methods: The training was administered in the light of the updates in the Universal Basic and Advanced Life Support guidelines, and according to the AHA guidelines, with one day of theory and one day of practice. After the training, evaluation was done with the post-test. The demographic information of the participants, the distribution of tasks and the changes between the pre-test and the post-test according to their professional status were statistically evaluated. Results: We look at the training in both basic life support and advanced life support the level of knowledge of the participants increased. Conclusion: When we evaluate the changes in the knowledge levels of the participants after the course, we can say that the level of knowledge and awareness was limited before the training. We think that trainings should be repeated at certain intervals.

Göğüs Ağrılı Hastaya Yaklaşım – Kardiyak Aciller Tufan ALATLI Göğüs Ağrılı Hastaya Yaklaşım Pulmoner AcillerSalih KOCAOĞLU Arrest Hastaya YaklaşımMuhammet ÇAKAS Senkop-PresenkopMeliha FINDIKÖzge KAMA BAŞCI Bradikardi TaşikardiRahime Sema TAŞ Nefes DarlığıKübra Nur GÜNEYSelman GÜMÜŞ Karın AğrısıFerhat ÇAY Bulantı-KusmaYağmur Ecem NURAYDIN Hematemez, Melena, HematokezyaAhmet Buğra ÖNLER HemoptiziHilal PINAR AteşHayrullah YURDAKUL Baş AğrısıSemih TAŞKINLAR Bilinç Bozukluğuna YaklaşımYeltuğ Esra GELEN Baş Dönmesine Acilde Yaklaşımİlker ÇERMİKLİ Hemiparezi, Hemipleji, ParaplejiFeyza Nur USLURahime Sema TAŞ Anemiye YaklaşımYaşar ŞİŞMAN Hipertansif Hastaya YaklaşımHarun GÜNEŞTürkay AKBAŞ Zehirlenmeye Genel YaklaşımHarun GÜNEŞEmine AYHAN AKMAN Anüri - HematüriSeçil AYDIN Anormal Uterin KanamaMeliha Miray ÇANTAL Acil DoğumDuygu LAFCIMurat BAŞCI Skrotal AğrıSümeyye KARABACAK Anorektal HastalıklarFerhat ÇAY Dermatolojik Acillere Yaklaşımİlkay CAN Döküntülü Bulaşıcı HastalıklarZekiye KANAT Ajite Hastaya YaklaşımMerve ŞAHİN CAN Çocuklarda ResüsitasyonÖzlem ÖZCANLI ÇAY Ateşli Çocuğa YaklaşımÖzlem ÖZCANLI ÇAY

Background/Objectives: Digital self-triage tools may support patient-flow management in crowded emergency departments (EDs), but their agreement with established professional triage systems requires prospective validation. We evaluated the agreement and classification performance of a locally developed mobile self-triage application, structured according to Manchester Triage System (MTS)-related urgency logic, compared with professional MTS assessment in adult ED patients. Methods: This prospective, observational, single-center agreement study included 2274 consecutive, hemodynamically stable adult walk-in patients who used a tablet-based application covering 11 predefined presenting complaints and subsequently underwent a single, blinded professional MTS assessment, which served as the prespecified comparator. Of 3244 initial registrations, 970 (29.9%) were excluded because their complaints were not covered by the predefined pathways. MTS Categories 2–3 were classified as urgent. Results: Exact agreement occurred in 968 patients (42.6%); 1161 patients (51.1%) were overtriaged and 145 (6.3%) were undertriaged. The application showed 93.9% sensitivity, 28.7% specificity, 61.1% positive predictive value, and 79.8% negative predictive value for identifying professional MTS-defined urgent cases. Agreement was slight by unweighted kappa (κ = 0.198), fair by quadratically weighted kappa (κw = 0.278), and the prevalence- and bias-adjusted kappa for binary urgent/non-urgent classification was 0.28. Overtriage exceeded 70% for headache and low back pain, and these complaints were the strongest independent predictors of overtriage; higher self-reported pain intensity was strongly associated with overtriage. Conclusions: The application demonstrated a conservative classification profile with high sensitivity and a low undertriage rate but frequent overtriage that would inflate the apparent urgent caseload if the tool were used unsupervised; it should be considered an adjunct to, rather than a replacement for, professional triage. Findings apply to stable adult walk-in patients whose complaints matched the predefined categories and may not generalize to the broader ED population.