Use of Topical Anesthetics in the Management of Patients With Simple Corneal Abrasions: Consensus Guidelines From the American College of Emergency Physicians.

The management of corneal abrasions has largely excluded dispensing topical local anesthetics for home use due to concern for corneal toxicity. We have reviewed and critically appraised the available literature evidence regarding the use of topical anesthetics in patients with simple corneal abrasions. Using sequential Delphi review, we have developed these clinical guidelines. Herein are evidentiary summaries and consensus recommendations for 8 specific relevant questions. Our key observation is that for only simple corneal abrasions, as diagnosed and treated in accordance with the full protocol described herein, it appears safe to prescribe or otherwise provide a commercial topical anesthetic (ie, proparacaine, tetracaine, oxybuprocaine) for use up to every 30 minutes as needed during the first 24 hours after presentation, as long as no more than 1.5 to 2 mL total (an expected 24-hour supply) is dispensed and any remainder is discarded after 24 hours. Importantly, although published findings suggest absent harm for short courses, more rigorous studies with a greater cumulative sample size and ophthalmologic follow-up are needed.

Collateral Ligament Ruptures of the Thumb Metacarpophalangeal Joint A Review of 500 Surgical Cases.

A retrospective review was conducted of 500 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for complete collateral ligament ruptures of their thumb metacarpophalangeal (MP) joints comprising 362 ulnar collateral and 138 radial collateral ligaments. Complete rupture was confirmed in all cases at surgery. When surgery was carried out within 3 weeks of the injury, reinsertion of the ligament was pos- sible in 98% of cases. When surgery was performed after 3 weeks, reinsertion of the ligament was possible in 45% of ulnar and 68% of radial injuries. Reconstruction utilizing a free tendon graft was required for the other cases. All patients who had surgery within 3 weeks of their injuries regained stable, pain free thumbs. Surgery was less suc- cessful in patients who had surgery after 3 weeks and the failure rate was 5%. Surgery within 3 weeks of the injury permitted re-insertion of the ligament in almost all cases. We propose that avulsions treated within that period be referred to as "acute" injuries and those treated later as "chronic." Treatment of acute injuries is preferred because they rarely require reconstruction, and the results were better than when surgery was performed for chronic injuries. Repair of thumb MP collateral ligaments is predictably possible within 3 weeks of injury but less likely if surgery is delayed after that time period.

Late Repair of Flexor Tendon Lacerations Within the Digital Sheaths.

PURPOSE: This article presents the outcomes of repairs of flexor tendon lacerations within digital sheaths performed more than 2 weeks after injury. METHODS: A retrospective review of 46 patients; 37 with finger lacerations involving a total of 54 severed tendons in 42 fingers and nine with thumb lacerations of the flexor pollicis longus (FPL). In those patients with finger lacera- tions, 30 lacerations were isolated to the flexor digitorum profundus (FDP; 17 in Zone I and 13 in Zone II), and 12 involved both FDP and flexor digitorum superficialis (FDS) for a total of 24 tendon lacerations. RESULTS: The delay in surgery for finger lacerations ranged from 2 to 96 weeks (average: 8.5 weeks) and for thumb lacerations, 2 to 17 weeks (average: 5.5 weeks). In Zone I finger lacerations, postoperative flexion of the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint averaged 35° with 82% of patients regaining total active motion (TAM) in the good to excellent range. In Zone II injuries isolated to the FDP tendon, postoperative DIP joint flexion averaged 36.5° with 73% of patients regaining good to excellent TAM. In Zone II injuries involving both flexor tendons, final average DIP flexion was 37° with only 45% of patients regaining good to excellent TAM. All patients with FPL lacerations regained at least 30° (average: 46°) of active interphalangeal joint flexion. CONCLUSION: When certain conditions exist that are deter- mined at surgery, delayed repairs of isolated FDP lacera- tions in fingers and FPL lacerations in thumbs can restore satisfactory mobility. Results are less favorable when both flexor tendons in the finger are lacerated and only the FDP repaired.

Adjunctive Procedures for Median Nerve Decompression in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome An Intraoperative Somatosensory Evoked Potential Study.

The objective of this study was to determine the role of ad- junctive surgical procedures on the median nerve for carpal tunnel syndrome as measured by somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) on the nerve. Fifty-five median nerves in 47 patients were studied. In each patient, a base-line SEP was recorded in the operating room prior to incision and then intraoperatively following each of three sequential pro- cedures: division of the transverse carpal ligament, an epi- neurolysis of the nerve, and finally, either an epineurotomy or epineurectomy that we refer to as a "limited internal neu- rolysis" since it did not involve any intraneural dissection of fascicles. Comparison of the baseline mean SEP latency for the median nerve, referred to as N19 (negative polarity = 19 msec), showed a statistically significant improvement following each of the three procedures. The average reduc- tion of latency after ligament release alone was 1.52 msec, and the total improvement in latency from baseline through limited internal neurolysis was 4.72 msec. Our study showed that epineurolysis followed by a limited internal neurolysis using either an epineurotomy or epineurectomy produced a significant electrophysiologic improvement in the median nerve. There was no significant difference when comparing epineurotomy and epineurectomy.

Amnesia after Midazolam and Ketamine Sedation in Children: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

The incidence of peri-procedural amnesia following procedural sedation in children is unclear and difficult to determine. This study aimed to apply quantitative and qualitative approaches to better understand amnesia following dental sedation of children. After Institutional Review Board Approval, children scheduled for sedation for dental procedures with oral midazolam (OM), oral midazolam and ketamine (OMK), or intranasal midazolam and ketamine (IMK) were recruited for examination of peri-procedural amnesia. Amnesia during the dental session was assessed using a three-stage method, using identification of pictures and an animal toy. On the day following the sedation, primary caregivers answered two questions about their children's memory. One week later, the children received a semi-structured interview. Behavior and level of sedation during the dental session were recorded. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and comparison tests. Qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis. Triangulation was used. Thirty-five children (age: 36 to 76 months) participated in the quantitative analysis. Most children showed amnesia for the dental procedure (82.9%, n = 29/35) and remembered receiving the sedation (82.1%, n = 23/28 for oral administration; 59.3%, n = 16/27 for intranasal administration). The occurrence of amnesia for the dental procedure was slightly higher in the oral midazolam group compared with the other groups (44.8%, n = 13/29 for OM, 13.8%, n = 4/29 for OMK, and 41.4%, n = 12/29 for IMK). Twenty-eight children participated in the qualitative approach. The major theme identified was that some children could remember their procedures in detail. We conclude that peri-procedural amnesia of the dental procedure was common following sedation.

A Methodological Appraisal of the HEART Score and Its Variants.

We performed a methodological appraisal of the history, electrocardiogram, age, risk factors, and troponin (HEART) score and its variants in the context of Annals of Emergency Medicine's methodological standards for clinical decision rules. We note that this chest pain risk stratification tool was not formally derived, omits sex and other known predictors, has weak interrater reliability, and its 0, 1, and 2 score weightings do not align with their known predictivities. Its summary performance (pooled sensitivities of 96% to 97% with lower confidence interval bounds of 93% to 94%) is below that which emergency physicians state a willingness to accept, below the 98% sensitivity exhibited by baseline practice without the score, and below the 1% to 2% acceptable miss threshold specified by the American College of Emergency Physicians chest pain policy. Two variants (HEART Pathway, HEART-2) have the same inherent structural limitations and demonstrate slightly better but still suboptimal sensitivity. Although a simple prediction tool for chest pain outcomes is appealing, we believe that the widespread use of the HEART score and its variants should be reconsidered.

Regulatory Challenges to Emergency Medicine Procedural Sedation.

As currently written, national regulatory guidance on procedural sedation has elements that are contradictory, confusing, and out of date. As a result, hospital procedural sedation policies are often widely inconsistent between institutions despite similar settings and resources, putting emergency department (ED) patients at risk by denying them uniform access to safe, effective, and appropriate procedural sedation care. Many hospitals have chosen to take overly conservative stances with respect to regulatory compliance to minimize their perceived risk. Herein, we review and critique standards and policies from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, The Joint Commission, state nursing boards, the Food and Drug Administration, and others with respect to their effect on ED procedural sedation. Where appropriate, we recommend modifications of and enhancements to their guidance that would improve the access of ED patients to modern, safe, and effective procedural sedation care.

Results from the Adverse Event Sedation Reporting Tool: A Global Anthology of 7952 Records Derived from >160,000 Procedural Sedation Encounters.

Background: The incidence of sedation-related adverse events, inclusive of both adults and children, administered by multiple specialty providers from different countries and venues, using standardized definitions, has never been reported on an international level. We are reporting the outcome data of the adverse event sedation reporting tool as an important step toward a more complete risk assessment of sedation-related morbidity, mortality, and etiology. The analysis of the AE sedation reporting data include descriptive measures to evaluate the characteristics of the provider, the patient, sedations performed, adverse events, interventions, and outcomes. The primary outcome was the rate and nature of adverse events. Between 12/14/2010 and 12/11/2018 there were 7952 sedations, from an estimated total of 164,114 sedations administered, of which 622 were reported as adverse events. The mean age of the entire patient population is 33.0 years (0.02-98.7). The providers represented 39 countries across six continents. Oxygen desaturation (75%-90%) for <60 s is the most prevalent adverse event with a rate of 7.8 per 10,000, followed by airway obstruction at a rate of 5.42 per 10,000. Apnea occurred at a rate of 4.75 per 10,000. Significant predictors of adverse events are ≥ ASA score III (p = 0.0003), procedure time (6:00 pm-12:00 am: p < 0.0001, 12:00-6:00 am: p = 0.0003), and non-hospital location (p < 0.0001). The AE sedation reporting tool has demonstrated that the majority of adverse events in children and adults who receive procedural sedation from multi-specialists internationally required minor interventions and had outcomes of minor risk.

Unscheduled Procedural Sedation: A Multidisciplinary Consensus Practice Guideline.

The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) organized a multidisciplinary effort to create a clinical practice guideline specific to unscheduled, time-sensitive procedural sedation, which differs in important ways from scheduled, elective procedural sedation. The purpose of this guideline is to serve as a resource for practitioners who perform unscheduled procedural sedation regardless of location or patient age. This document outlines the underlying background and rationale, and issues relating to staffing, practice, and quality improvement.

Basal Joint Arthritis A Review of Pathology, History, and Treatment.

The basal joint is a collection of articulations at the base of thumb that serve an important function in the overall dexterity of the hand. The unique anatomy of the basal joint provided many evolutionary advantages to the human hand, but also made this joint susceptible to arthrosis and degenerative changes. Surgical treatment of basal joint arthritis has continued to evolve since it was first described in 1949, including excisional arthroplasty, tendon interposition, ligament reconstruction, implant arthroplasty, and arthroscopy. A review of the pathoanatomy, history, and surgical treatments are assessed including a critical review of the literature.

Is the Mallampati Score Useful for Emergency Department Airway Management or Procedural Sedation?

We review the literature in regard to the accuracy, reliability, and feasibility of the Mallampati score as might be pertinent and applicable to emergency department (ED) airway management and procedural sedation. This 4-level pictorial tool was devised to predict difficult preoperative laryngoscopy and intubation, but is now also widely recommended as a routine screening element before procedural sedation. The literature evidence demonstrates that the Mallampati score is inadequately sensitive for the identification of difficult laryngoscopy, difficult intubation, and difficult bag-valve-mask ventilation, with likelihood ratios indicating a small and clinically insignificant effect on outcome prediction. Although it is important to anticipate that patients may have a difficult airway, there is no specific evidence that the Mallampati score augments or improves the baseline clinical judgment of a standard airway evaluation. It generates numerous false-positive warnings for each correct prediction of a difficult airway. The Mallampati score is not reliably assessed because independent observers commonly grade it differently. It cannot be evaluated in many young children and in patients who cannot cooperate because of their underlying medical condition. The Mallampati score lacks the accuracy, reliability, and feasibility required to supplement a standard airway evaluation before ED airway management or procedural sedation.

Emergency Department Procedural Sedation Practice Limitations: A Statewide California American College of Emergency Physicians Survey.

OBJECTIVES: We wanted to estimate the frequency and describe the nature of emergency department (ED) procedural sedation restrictions in the State of California. METHODS: We surveyed medical directors for all licensed EDs statewide regarding limitations on procedural sedation practice. Our primary outcome was the frequency of restrictions on procedural sedation, defined as an inability to administer moderate sedation, deep sedation, and typical ED sedative agents in accordance with American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) guidelines. Our secondary outcomes were the nature of these restrictions, who has imposed them, why they were imposed, and the perceived clinical impact. RESULTS: We obtained responses from 211 (64%) of the 328 EDs. Ninety-one (43%) reported conditional or total limitations on their ability to administer one or more of the following: moderate sedation, deep sedation, propofol, ketamine, or etomidate. Thirty-nine (18%) reported total restriction of at least one of these-most frequently a prohibition of deep sedation (18%). Local anesthesia directors were the most frequently cited creators and enforcers of these restrictions. Some respondents reported that, due to these restrictions, they used less effective sedatives, they performed procedures without sedation when sedation would have been preferred, and they observed inadequate sedation and pain control. CONCLUSIONS: In this statewide survey we found a substantial prevalence of practice limitations-mostly created by local anesthesia directors-that restrict the ability of emergency physicians to provide procedural sedation for their patients in accordance with ACEP guidelines. Deep sedation was prohibited in 18% of responding EDs. Our respondents describe adverse consequences to patient care.

A Two-Center Validation of "Patient Does Not Follow Commands" and Three Other Simplified Measures to Replace the Glasgow Coma Scale for Field Trauma Triage.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Out-of-hospital personnel worldwide calculate the 13-point Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score as a routine part of field trauma triage. We wish to independently validate a simpler binary assessment to replace the GCS for this task. METHODS: We analyzed trauma center registries from Loma Linda University Health (2003 to 2015) and Denver Health Medical Center (2009 to 2015) to compare the binary assessment "patient does not follow commands" (ie, GCS motor score <6) with GCS score less than or equal to 13 for the prediction of 5 trauma outcomes: emergency intubation, clinically significant brain injury, need for neurosurgical intervention, Injury Severity Score greater than 15, and mortality. As a secondary analysis, we similarly evaluated 3 other measures simpler than the GCS: GCS motor score less than 5, Simplified Motor Score, and the "alert, voice, pain, unresponsive" scale. RESULTS: In this analysis of 47,973 trauma patients, we found that the binary assessment "patient does not follow commands" was essentially identical to GCS score less than or equal to 13 for the prediction of all 5 trauma outcomes, with slightly superior positive likelihood ratios (eg, those for mortality 2.37 versus 2.13) offsetting slightly inferior negative ones (eg, those for mortality 0.25 versus 0.24) and its graphic depiction of sensitivity versus specificity superimposing the GCS prediction curve. We found similar results for the 3 other simplified measures. CONCLUSION: In this 2-center external validation, we confirmed that a simple binary assessment-"patient does not follow commands"-could effectively replace the more complicated GCS for field trauma triage.