Sex- and age-related patterns in the use of analgesics in older patients in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute pain in older patients is a common challenge faced in emergency departments (EDs). Despite many studies that have investigated chronic analgesic use in the elderly, data on patterns of acute use, especially in EDs, of analgesics according to patient characteristics is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To investigate sex- and age-related patterns of analgesic use in the Spanish EDs and determine differences in age-related patterns according to patient sex. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of the Emergency Department and Elderly Needs (EDEN) multipurpose cohort. SETTING: Fifty-two Spanish EDs (17% of Spanish EDs covering 25% of Spanish population). PARTICIPANTS: All patients' ≥65 years attending ED during 1 week (April 1-7, 2019). Patient characteristics recorded included age, sex, chronic treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opiates, comorbidity, dependence, dementia, depression, ability to walk and previous falls. Analgesics used in the ED were categorized in three groups: non-NSAID non-opioids (mainly paracetamol and metamizole, PM), NSAIDs, and opiates. OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency of analgesic use was quantified, and the relationship between sex and age and analgesic use (in general and for each analgesic group) was assessed by unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression and restricted cubic spline models. Interaction between sex and age was explored. MAIN RESULTS: We included 24 573 patients, and 6678 (27.2%) received analgesics in the ED: 5551 (22.6%) PM, 1661 (6.8%) NSAIDs and 937 (3.8%) opiates (1312 received combinations). Analgesics were more frequently used in women (adjusted OR = 1.076, 95%CI = 1.014-1.142), as well as with NSAID (1.205, 1.083-1.341). Analgesic use increased with age, increasing PM and decreasing NSAIDs use. Opiate use remained quite constant across age and sex. Interaction of sex with age was present for the use of analgesics in general ( P  = 0.006), for PM ( P  < 0.001) and for opiates ( P  = 0.033), with higher use of all these analgesics in women. CONCLUSION: Use of analgesics in older individuals in EDs is mildly augmented in women and increases with age, with PM use increasing and NSAIDs decreasing with age. Conversely, opiate use is quite constant according to sex and age. Age-related patterns differ according to sex, with age-related curves of women showing higher probabilities than those of men to receive any analgesic, PM or opiates.

Impact of First Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic on Mortality at Emergency Department in Older Patients with COVID and Non-COVID Diagnoses.

INTRODUCTION: Mortality in emergency departments (EDs) is not well known. This study aimed to assess the impact of the first-wave pandemic on deaths accounted in the ED of older patients with COVID and non-COVID diseases. METHODS: We used data from the Emergency Department and Elderly Needs (EDEN) cohort (pre-COVID period) and from the EDEN-COVID cohort (COVID period) that included all patients ≥65 years seen in 52 Spanish EDs from April 1 to 7, 2019, and March 30 to April 5, 2020, respectively. We recorded patient characteristics and final destination at ED. We compared older patients in the pre-COVID period, with older patients with non-COVID and with COVID-19. ED-mortality (before discharge or hospitalization) is the prior outcome and is expressed as an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% interval confidence. RESULTS: We included 23,338 older patients from the pre-COVID period (aged 78.3 [8.1] years), 6,715 patients with non-COVID conditions (aged 78.9 [8.2] years) and 3,055 with COVID (aged 78.3 [8.3] years) from the COVID period. Compared to the older patients, pre-COVID period, patients with non-COVID and with COVID-19 were more often male, referred by a doctor and by ambulance, with more comorbidity and disability, dementia, nursing home, and more risk according to qSOFA, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared to the pre-COVID period, patients with non-COVID and with COVID-19 were more often to be hospitalized from ED (24.8% vs. 44.3% vs. 79.1%) and were more often to die in ED (0.6% vs. 1.2% vs. 2.2%), respectively (p < 0.001). Compared to the pre-COVID period, aOR for age, sex, comorbidity and disability, ED mortality in elderly patients cared in ED during the COVID period was 2.31 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.76-3.06), and 3.75 (95% CI: 2.77-5.07) for patients with COVID. By adding the variable qSOFA to the model, such OR were 1.59 (95% CI: 1.11-2.30) and 2.16 (95% CI: 1.47-3.17), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: During the early first pandemic wave of COVID-19, more complex and life-threatening older with COVID and non-COVID diseases were seen compared to the pre-COVID period. In addition, the need for hospitalization and the ED mortality doubled in non-COVID and tripled in COVID diagnosis. This increase in ED mortality is not only explained by the complexity or severity of the elderly patients but also because of the system's overload.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on demand for emergency department care for older patients: the EDEN-7 COVID cohort study. / Estudio EDEN-7: impacto de la pandemia COVID-19 sobre la demanda asistencial de personas mayores en los servicios de urgencias españoles.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Spanish emergency department (ED) care for patients aged 65 years or older during the first wave vs. a pre-pandemic period. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional study of a COVID-19 portion of the EDEN project (Emergency Department and Elder Needs). The EDEN-COVID cohort included all patients aged 65 years or more who were treated in 52 EDs on 7 consecutive days early in the pandemic. We analyzed care variables, discharge diagnoses, use of diagnostic and therapeutic resources, use of observation units, need for hospitalization, rehospitalization, and mortality. These data were compared with data for an EDEN cohort in the same age group recruited during a similar period the year before the pandemic. RESULTS: The 52 participating hospital EDs attended 33 711 emergencies during the pandemic vs. 96 173 emergencies in the pre-COVID period, representing a 61.7% reduction during the pandemic. Patients aged 65 years or older accounted for 28.8% of the caseload during the COVID-19 period and 26.4% of the earlier cohort (P .001). The COVID-19 caseload included more men (51.0%). Comorbidity and polypharmacy were more prevalent in the pandemic cohort than in the earlier one (comorbidity, 92.6% vs. 91.6%; polypharmacy, 65.2% vs. 63.6%). More esturesources (analgesics, antibiotics, heparins, bronchodilators, and corticosteroids) were applied in the pandemic period, and common diagnoses were made less often. Observation wards were used more often (for 37.8% vs. 26.2% in the earlier period), and hospital admissions were more frequent (in 56.0% vs. 25.3% before the pandemic). Mortality was higher during the pandemic than in the earlier cohort either in ED (1.8% vs 0.5%) and during hospitalization (11.5 vs 2.9%). CONCLUSION: The proportion of patients aged 65 years or older decreased in the participating Spanish EDs. However, more resources were required and the pattern of diagnoses changed. Observation ward stays were longer, and admissions and mortality increased over the numbers seen in the reference period.

OBJETIVO: Analizar el impacto de la pandemia COVID-19 sobre la asistencia a las personas mayores ($ 65 años) en los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) españoles durante la primera oleada pandémica, comparándola con un periodo previo. METODO: Estudio transversal retrospectivo de la cohorte EDEN-COVID (Emergency Department and Elder Needs during COVID), que incluyó a todos los pacientes $ 65 años atendidos en 52 SUH españoles durante 7 días consecutivos de un periodo pandémico. Se analizaron variables asistenciales, diagnósticos de alta, consumo de recursos diagnósticos y terapéuticos, utilización de las unidades de observación, necesidad de ingreso, rehospitalización y mortalidad. Estos datos se compararon con la cohorte EDEN (Emergency Department and Elder Needs), que reclutó a pacientes del mismogrupo de edad durante un periodo similar del año anterior. RESULTADOS: Durante el periodo COVID-19 se atendieron 33.711 episodios en los 52 SUH participantes, frente a 96.173 del periodo pre-COVID, lo que supone una disminución de la demanda de 61,7%. La proporción de asistencias a pacientes de 65 o más años fue de 28,8% en el periodo COVID-19 y 26,4% en el periodo previo (p 0,001). Durante el periodo COVID hubo mayor proporción de hombres (51,0% vs 44,9%), mayor comorbilidad (92,6% vs 91,6%) y polifarmacia (65,2% vs 63,6%), mayor uso de recursos, de analgésicos, antibióticos, heparinas, broncodilatadores y corticoides, menor proporción de los diagnósticos más habituales, mayor utilización de las unidades de observación (37,8% vs 26,2%) y un incremento de la proporción de ingresos (56,0% vs 25,3%), y de mortalidad en urgencias (1,8% vs 0,5%) y durante la hospitalización (11,5% vs 2,9%). CONCLUSIONES: La primera ola de la pandemia COVID-19 ha provocado una disminución global de las asistencias a personas mayores ($ 65 años) en los SUH españoles analizados, mayor consumo de recursos, un mapa diferente de procesos diagnósticos asistidos y un aumento proporcional de estancias en observación, de ingresos y de mortalidad, respecto al periodo de referencia.

[Effectiveness and efficacy of self-measurement of capillary blood glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus]. / Efectividad y eficacia del autoanálisis de la glucemia capilar en pacientes con diabetes tipo 2.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of self-measurement of capillary blood glucose (SMBG) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is not fully established. The objectives of the study were: a) to verify the efficacy of the SMBG in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the primary care set; b) to investigate the possible causes that explain the lack of effectiveness of the method, in their case, and c) to deduce the predictive variables that permit to select good utilizador of the SMBG. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Clinical trial controlled and randomized carried out in the environment of the primary care, on type 2 diabetic patients. The patients were assigned, of random form and stratified, according to the type of treatment for diabetes that received, in 2 groups: SMBG group (SMBG-G) and control group (CG). The period of monitoring was of 12 months. The efficacy of the SMBG was analyzed, and also its effectiveness. RESULTS: 100 patients were included in the study. Out of them, 51 were assigned to SMBG-G and 49 to CG. The SMBG was efficient in the 21.6% of SMBG-G and in 14.3% patients of the CG (p = 0.44). The SMBG efficacy was greater in patients with combined treatment and in those who received only insulin (50% in both cases). No improvement was observed in patients on treatment with diet (p = 0.006). The effectiveness for the cut off from value the HbA1c was of 59.2% and of 29.58% for the totality of the European criteria of metabolic control. The independent predictor variables of the SMBG efficacy were: the evolution years number of the diabetes mellitus and a deficient control of the illness at the start of the study. The global precision of the mathematical model obtained was of 88.24% with sensibility of 54.5%, especificity of 97.5%, positive predictor value of 85.7% and negative predictive value of 11.4% (p < 0.001). The area under the ROC curve was of 89.9% (p < 0.001) (95% confidence interval, 81.2-98.5%). According to the ROC curve, the point of cut that better the SMBG efficacy discriminated was that of 74% (sensibility: 72.7%; especificity: 77.5%). CONCLUSIONS: SMBG is a tool that, although can improve the metabolic control of type 2 diabetes, requires a careful selection of patients and, therefore, cannot be utilized in an indiscriminate way. The time of evolution of the illness and fundamentally, the presence of a deficient metabolic control of the disease should be the factors that determine a good selection. Therefore, its extended use among the type 2 diabetic population, without a prior selection, does not seem to be justified.

[Clinical prediction of endoscopic signs in active or recent upper gastrointestinal bleeding]. / Predicción clínica de los signos endoscópicos de hemorragia digestiva alta activa o reciente.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to construct and validate a mathematical model, based on clinical and laboratory data, that could be useful in the emergency department (ED) to predict which patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) have an active or recent bleeding. PATIENTS AND METHOD: During a period of 12 months, we included all consecutive cases of UGB that came to the ED of an urban hospital. These patients made up the primary or model obtaining series. During the 12 following months, we selected a sample of UGB patients who made up the secondary series. The mathematical predictive model was built using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: 623 patients made up the primary series and 251 the secondary series. A score equal or higher than 4 indicated the best diagnosis accuracy (63.6%) with positive and negative predictive values of 65.1 and 40.0%, respectively. The discriminative power of the model was significant (p < 0.001) but it displayed little accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Shock, positive tilt test, increased uremia, previous hematemesis, to be an usual alcohol drinker, presence of sweating, and no previous treatment with antiulcer drugs were independent predictors for active or recent bleeding. The diagnostic accuracy of the model does not not allow its systematic use in clinical practice. However, it may be helpful for the triage of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the ED.