Combined use of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Symbol Digit Modalities Test improves neurocognitive screening accuracy after cardiac arrest: A validation sub-study of the TTM2 trial.

AIM: To assess the merit of clinical assessment tools in a neurocognitive screening following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). METHODS: The neurocognitive screening that was evaluated included the performance-based Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT), the patient-reported Two Simple Questions (TSQ) and the observer-reported Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly-Cardiac Arrest (IQCODE-CA). These instruments were administered at 6-months in the Targeted Hypothermia versus Targeted Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (TTM2) trial. We used a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery from a TTM2 trial sub-study as a gold standard to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the neurocognitive screening. RESULTS: In our cohort of 108 OHCA survivors (median age = 62, 88% male), the most favourable cut-off scores were: MoCA <26; SDMT z ≤-1; IQCODE-CA ≥3.04. The MoCA (sensitivity 0.64, specificity 0.85) and SDMT (sensitivity 0.59, specificity 0.83) had a higher classification accuracy than the TSQ (sensitivity 0.28, specificity 0.74) and IQCODE-CA (sensitivity 0.42, specificity 0.60). When using the cut-points for MoCA or SDMT in combination to identify neurocognitive impairment, sensitivity improved (0.74, specificity 0.81), area under the curve = 0.77, 95% CI [0.69, 0.85]. The most common unidentified impairments were within the episodic memory and executive functions domains, with fewer false negative cases on the MoCA or SDMT combined. CONCLUSION: The MoCA and SDMT have acceptable diagnostic accuracy for screening for neurocognitive impairment in an OHCA population, and when used in combination the sensitivity improves. Patient and observer-reports correspond poorly with neurocognitive performance. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT03543371.

Low-dose ketamine as an adjunct to morphine: A randomized controlled trial among patients with and without current opioid use.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common complaint among patients presenting to the emergency department (ED), yet pain treatment is frequently suboptimal. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of low-dose ketamine (LDK) as an adjunct to morphine versus morphine alone for treatment of acute pain among ED patients with and without current opioid use. METHODS: Adult patients presenting with acute pain of ≥5 on a numeric rating scale (0-10) who were deemed by their treating ED physician to require intravenous opioids were randomized to receive either 0.1 mg/kg ketamine (treatment group) or isotonic saline (placebo) as an adjunct to morphine. Patients with and without current opioid use were randomized separately. Pain was measured at baseline (T0) and 10, 20, 30, 45, 60, and 120 min after randomization. The primary outcome was pain reduction from T0 to T10. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity over 120 min, need of rescue opioids, side effects, and patient and provider satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 116 patients were included from May 2022 to August 2023. Median (IQR) age was 51 (36.5-67) years; 58% were male and 36% had current opioid use. Pain reduction from T0 to T10 was greater in the LDK group (4 [IQR 3-6]) compared to the placebo group (1 [IQR 0-2]; p = 0.001). Pain intensity was lower in the LDK group at T10, T20, and T30, compared to the placebo group. There was a higher risk of nausea, vomiting, and dissociation in the LDK group during the first 10 min. CONCLUSIONS: LDK may be effective as an adjunct analgesic to morphine for short-term pain relief in treatment of acute pain in the ED for both patients with and without current opioid use.

Patients suffering traumatic brain injury: patient characteristics, prehospital triage, primary referral and mortality - A population-based follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a potential high-risk condition, but appropriate care pathways, including prehospital triage and primary referral to a specialised neurosurgical centre, can improve neurological outcome and survival. The care pathway starts with layman triage, wherein the patient or bystander decides whether to contact a general practitioner (GP) or emergency services (1-1-2 call) as an entryway into the health care system. The GP or 112-health care professional then decides on the level of urgency and dispatches emergency medical services (EMS) when needed. Finally, a decision is made regarding referral of the TBI patient to a specialised neurotrauma centre or a local hospital. Recent studies have shown that injuries are generally more severe in patients entering the health care system through EMS (112-calls) than through GPs; however, no information exists on whether mortality and morbidity outcomes differ depending on the referral choice. The aim of this study was to examine triage pathways, including the method of entry into the health care system, as well as patient characteristics and place of primary referral, to determine the associated 30-day and 1-year mortality rates in TBI patients with confirmed intracranial lesions. METHODS: This retrospective observational population-based follow-up study was conducted in the Central Denmark Region from 1 February 2017 to 31 January 2019. We included all adult patients who contacted hospitals and were ascribed a predefined TBI ICD-10 diagnosis code in the Danish National Patient Register. The obtained TBI cohort was merged with prehospital data from the Prehospital Emergency Medical Services, Central Denmark Region, and vital status from the Danish Civil Registration System. Binary logistic regression analysis of mortality was conducted. In all patients with TBI (including concussions), the primary outcome was primary referral to a specialised centre based on mode of entry ('GP/HCP', '112-call' or 'Unreferred') into the health care system. In the subgroup of patients with confirmed intracranial lesions, the secondary outcomes were the relative risk of death at day 30 and 1 year based on the place of primary referral. RESULTS: Of 5,257 first TBI hospital contacts of adult patients included in the cohort, 1,430 (27.2%) entered the health care system via 1-1-2 emergency medical calls. TBI patients triaged by 112-calls were more likely to receive the highest level of emergency response (15.6% vs. 50.3%; p < 0.001) and second-tier resources and were more frequently referred directly to a specialised centre than were patients entering through GPs or other health care personnel. In the subgroup of 1188/5257 (22.4%) patients with confirmed intracranial lesions, we found no difference in the risk ratio of 30 day (RR 1.04 (95%CI 0.65-1.63)) or 1 year (RR 0.96 (95%CI 0.72-1.25)) all-cause mortality between patients primarily referred to a regional hospital or to a specialised centre when adjusting for age, sex, comorbidities, antiplatelet/anticoagulant treatment and type of intracranial lesions. CONCLUSION: TBI patients mainly enter the health system by contact with GPs or other health care professionals. However, patients entering through 112-calls are more frequently triaged directly to specialised centres. We were unable to demonstrate any significant difference in the adjusted 30-day and 1-year mortality based on e primary referral to a specialised centre. The inability to demonstrate an effect on mortality based on primary referral to a specialised centre may reflect a lack of clinical data in the registries used. Considerable differences may exist in nondocumented baseline characteristics (i.e., GCS, blood pressure and injury severity) between the groups and may limit conclusions about differences in mortality. Further research providing high-quality evidence on the effect of primary referral is needed to secure early neurosurgical interventions in TBI patients.

Hospital at home for elderly acute patients: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The increasing elderly population has led to a growing demand for healthcare services. A hospital at home treatment model offers an alternative to standard hospital admission, with the potential to reduce readmission and healthcare consumption while improving patients' quality of life. However, there is little evidence regarding hospital at home treatment in a Danish setting. This article describes the protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing standard hospital admission to hospital at home treatment. The main aim of the intervention is to reduce 30-day acute readmission after discharge and improve the quality of life of elderly acute patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A total of 849 elderly acute patients will be randomised in a 1:2 ratio to either the control or intervention group in the trial. The control group will receive standard hospital treatment in a hospital emergency department while the intervention group will receive treatment at home. The primary outcomes of the trial are the rate of 30-day acute readmission and quality of life, assessed using the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5-Level instrument. Primary analyses are based on the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes are basic functional mobility, resource use in healthcare, primary and secondary healthcare cost, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and the mortality rate 3 months after discharge. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The RCT was approved by the Ethical Committee, Central Denmark Region (no. 1-10-72-67-20). Results will be presented at relevant national and international meetings and conferences and will be published in international peer-reviewed journals. Furthermore, we plan to communicate the results to relevant stakeholders in the Danish healthcare system. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05360914.

The association of recent simulation training and clinical experience of team leaders with cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality during in-hospital cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the association of recent team leader simulation training (<6 months) and years of clinical experience (≥4 years) with chest compression quality during in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). METHODS: This cohort study of IHCA in four Danish hospitals included cases with data on chest compression quality and team leader characteristics. We assessed the impact of recent simulation training and experienced team leaders on longest chest compression pause duration (primary outcome), chest compression fraction (CCF), and chest compression rates within guideline recommendations using mixed effects models. RESULTS: Of 157 included resuscitation attempts, 45% had a team leader who recently participated in simulation training and 66% had an experienced team leader. The median team leader experience was 7 years [Q1; Q3: 4; 11]. The median duration of the longest chest compression pause was 16 s [10; 30]. Having a team leader with recent simulation training was associated with significantly shorter longest pause durations (difference: -7.11 s (95%-CI: -12.0; -2.2), p = 0.004), a higher CCF (difference: 3% (95%-CI: 2.0; 4.0%), p < 0.001) and with less guideline compliant chest compression rates (odds ratio: 0.4 (95%-CI: 0.19; 0.84), p = 0.02). Having an experienced team leader was not associated with longest pause duration (difference: -1.57 s (95%-CI: -5.34; 2.21), p = 0.42), CCF (difference: 0.7% (95%-CI: -0.3; 1.7), p = 0.17) or chest compression rates within guideline recommendations (odds ratio: 1.55 (95%-CI: 0.91; 2.66), p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: Recent simulation training of team leaders, but not years of team leader experience, was associated with shorter chest compression pauses during IHCA.

Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound in Emergency Medicine: A Scoping Review With an Interactive Database.

BACKGROUND: This scoping review was conducted to provide an overview of the evidence of point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) in emergency medicine. By emphasizing clinical topics, time trends, study designs, and the scope of the primary outcomes, a map is provided for physicians and researchers to guide their future initiatives. RESEARCH QUESTION: Which study designs and primary outcomes are reported in published studies of LUS in emergency medicine? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a systematic search in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases for LUS studies published prior to May 13, 2023. Study characteristics were synthesized quantitatively. The primary outcomes in all papers were categorized into the hierarchical Fryback and Thornbury levels. RESULTS: A total of 4,076 papers were screened and, following selection and handsearching, 406 papers were included. The number of publications doubled from January 2020 to May 2023 (204 to 406 papers). The study designs were primarily observational (n = 375 [92%]), followed by randomized (n = 18 [4%]) and case series (n = 13 [3%]). The primary outcome measure concerned diagnostic accuracy in 319 papers (79%), diagnostic thinking in 32 (8%), therapeutic changes in 4 (1%), and patient outcomes in 14 (3%). No increase in the proportions of randomized controlled trials or the scope of primary outcome measures was observed with time. A freely available interactive database was created to enable readers to search for any given interest (https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/blinded/viz/LUSinEM_240216/INFO). INTERPRETATION: Observational diagnostic studies have been produced in abundance, leaving a paucity of research exploring clinical utility. Notably, research exploring whether LUS causes changes to clinical decisions is imperative prior to any further research being made into patient benefits.

Hypothermic versus Normothermic Temperature Control after Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: The evidence for temperature control for comatose survivors of cardiac arrest is inconclusive. Controversy exists as to whether the effects of hypothermia differ per the circumstances of the cardiac arrest or patient characteristics. METHODS: An individual patient data meta-analysis of the Targeted Temperature Management at 33°C versus 36°C after Cardiac Arrest (TTM) and Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (TTM2) trials was conducted. The intervention was hypothermia at 33°C and the comparator was normothermia. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included poor functional outcome (modified Rankin scale score of 4 to 6) at 6 months. Predefined subgroups based on the design variables in the original trials were tested for interaction with the intervention as follows: age (older or younger than the median), sex (female or male), initial cardiac rhythm (shockable or nonshockable), time to return of spontaneous circulation (above or below the median), and circulatory shock on admission (presence or absence). RESULTS: The primary analyses included 2800 patients, with 1403 assigned to hypothermia and 1397 to normothermia. Death occurred for 691 of 1398 participants (49.4%) in the hypothermia group and 666 of 1391 participants (47.9%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.11; P=0.41). A poor functional outcome occurred for 733 of 1350 participants (54.3%) in the hypothermia group and 718 of 1330 participants (54.0%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.08; P=0.88). Outcomes were consistent in the predefined subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Hypothermia at 33°C did not decrease 6-month mortality compared with normothermia after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. (Funded by Vetenskapsrådet; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers NCT02908308 and NCT01020916.)