RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is not a preferred medication for treating refractory status epilepticus (RSE) and intravenous ketamine is increasingly used. Ketamine efficacy, safety, dosage, and influence of other variables on seizure cessation while on ketamine infusions are not well studied. We aimed to characterize ketamine effect on RSE, including interictal activity on electroencephalogram (EEG) and when done by Teleneurocritical care (TNCC). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study from August 2017 to October 2022. Patients 18 years or older who had RSE and received ketamine were included. The primary outcome was effect of ketamine on RSE including interictal activity; secondary outcomes were effect of other variables on RSE, care by TNCC, ketamine infusion dynamics, adverse events, and discharge outcomes. Logistic regression was used. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients from five hospitals met inclusion criteria; 30 patients had RSE and interictal activity on EEG. Median age was 56.8 years (IQR 18.2) and 26% had previously diagnosed epilepsy. Sixteen (31%) patients were treated virtually by TNCC. In those with RSE on EEG, ketamine was added as the fourth antiseizure medication (mean 4.4, SD 1.6). An initial bolus of ketamine was used in 24% of patients (95 mg, IQR 47.5), the median infusion rate was 30.8 mcg/kg/min (IQR 40.4), and median infusion duration was 40 h (IQR 37). Ketamine was associated with 50% cessation of RSE and interictal activity at 24 h in 84% of patients, and complete seizure cessation in 43% of patients. In linear regression, ASMs prior to ketamine were associated with seizure cessation (OR 2.6, 95% CI 0.9-6.9, p = 0.05), while the inverse was seen with propofol infusions (OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.001-0.43, p = 0.01). RSE management by in-person NCC versus virtual by TNCC did not affect rates of seizure cessation. CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine infusions for RSE were associated with reduced seizure burden at 24 h, with 84% of patients having 50% seizure reduction. Similar efficacy and safety was observed irrespective of underlying RSE etiology or when done via TNCC vs in-person NCC.
RESUMO
AIM: To investigate the cost-avoidance associated with implementation of an overnight emergency medicine pharmacist (EMP) through documented clinical interventions. DESIGN: Retrospective evaluation of prospectively tracked interventions in a single Level I Trauma, Comprehensive Stroke Center, from November 25, 2020 through March 12, 2021 during expanded emergency medicine service hours (2300-0700). INTERVENTIONS: One of 45 clinical patient-care recommendations associated with cost-avoidance were available to be selected and documented by the EMP; more than one intervention was allowed per patient, though one clinical intervention could not be counted as multiple items. Documented services were associated with monetary cost avoidance based upon available literature assessing pharmacy clinical interventions. Differences in time from imaging to systemic thrombolytics and percentage of patients meeting door-to-alteplase benchmarks were compared with and without the availability of EMPs. RESULTS: Overnight EMPs documented 820 interventions during 107 overnight shifts with a cost avoidance of $612,974. The most common interventions were bedside monitoring (n = 127; $50,694), drug information consultation (97; $11,269), and antimicrobial therapy initiation and streamlining (95; $60,101). When categorizing interventions, 378 (46%; $292,484) were input as hands-on care, 216 (26%; $94,899) as individualization of patient care, 135 (17%; $25,897) as administrative and supportive tasks, 84 (10%; $121,746) as adverse drug event prevention, and 7 (1%; $77,964) as resource utilization. All patients (n = 6) with an acute ischemic stroke during the evaluation period received systemic thrombolytics ≤45 min in the presence of EMPs compared with 50% receiving thrombolytics ≤45 min without EMPs. CONCLUSIONS: Expanded overnight coverage by EMPs provided clinical bedside pharmacotherapy expertise to critically ill patients otherwise not available prior to study implementation. Clinical interventions were associated with substantial cost-avoidance.
Assuntos
Farmacêuticos , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Feminino , Masculino , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/tratamento farmacológico , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Centros de Traumatologia/economia , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/economia , Serviço de Farmácia Hospitalar/economia , Idoso , Fibrinolíticos/uso terapêutico , Fibrinolíticos/economia , Redução de CustosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) visits associated with prescription opioids have increased in the last ten years. This study describes the opioid utilization of patients discharged from the ED with an opioid prescription for pain, 14 to 21â¯days post discharge. METHODS: This is a prospective, single-centered, survey-based observational descriptive study conducted from December 2017 to February 2018 in the ED at a tertiary level 1 trauma center. The primary outcomes were the percentage of patients with unused opioids and the quantity of opioids remaining 14 to 21â¯days post ED discharge. A sample of ED patients who received an oral opioid prescription were approached for informed consent and received a telephone survey 14 to 21â¯days post discharge. RESULTS: Of 178 patients approached for consent, 122 were enrolled. Among them, 98 were successfully surveyed (80.3%). The median number of pills prescribed was 8 (IQR:8-12). Nearly half (49%) of patients had unused opioids 14 to 21â¯days post ED discharge, not including 9.2% of patients who never filled their prescriptions. Of the total 980 pills prescribed, 327 pills remained unused (33.4%). Only 55.1% of patients reported receiving counseling on side effect of opioids and 21.4% of patients reported they received counseling on storage and disposal. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients in this study had unused or unfilled opioids 14 to 21â¯days post ED discharge, and approximately one third of the opioids prescribed remained unused. Most patients did not recall receiving opioid related education including proper disposal of medication.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Alta do Paciente , Administração Oral , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Armazenamento de Medicamentos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Prospectivos , Eliminação de ResíduosRESUMO
RATIONALE: Sepsis care delivery - including initiation of prompt, appropriate antimicrobials - remains suboptimal. OBJECTIVE: Determine direct and off-target effects of emergency department (ED) sepsis care reorganization. METHODS: This pragmatic pilot trial enrolled adult patients presenting November 2019 to February 2021 to an ED in Utah before and after implementation of a multimodal, team-based "Code Sepsis" protocol. Patients presenting to two other EDs where usual care was continued served as contemporaneous controls. The primary outcome was door-to-antimicrobial time among patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria before ED departure. Secondary and safety outcomes included all-cause 30-day mortality, antimicrobial utilization and overtreatment, and antimicrobial-associated adverse events. Multivariable regression analyses employed difference-in-differences methods to account for trends in outcomes unrelated to the studied intervention. RESULTS: Code Sepsis protocol activation (N=307) exhibited 8.5% sensitivity and 66% positive predictive value for patients meeting sepsis criteria before ED departure. Among 10,151 patients meeting sepsis criteria during the study, adjusted difference-in-differences analysis demonstrated a 13-minute (95% CI 7-19-minute) decrease in door-to-antimicrobial time associated with Code Sepsis implementation (p<0.001). Mortality and clinical safety outcomes were unchanged, but Code Sepsis implementation was associated with increased false-positive presumptive infection diagnosis among patients meeting sepsis criteria in the ED and increased antimicrobial utilization. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a team-based protocol for rapid sepsis evaluation and treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic's first year was associated with decreased ED door-to-antimicrobial time but also increased antimicrobial utilization. Measurement of both patient-centered and off-target effects of sepsis care improvement interventions is essential to comprehensive assessment of their value. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04148989) This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).