The effectiveness of parenteral agents for pain reduction in patients with migraine presenting to emergency settings: A systematic review and network analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of parenteral agents for pain reduction in patients with acute migraine. BACKGROUND: Parenteral agents have been shown to be effective in treating acute migraine pain; however, the comparative effectiveness of different approaches is unclear. METHODS: Nine electronic databases and gray literature sources were searched to identify randomized clinical trials assessing parenteral agents to treat acute migraine pain in emergency settings. Two independent reviewers completed study screening, data extraction, and Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment, with differences being resolved by adjudication. The protocol of the review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42018100096). RESULTS: A total of 97 unique studies were included, with most studies reporting a high or unclear risk of bias. Monotherapy, as well as combination therapy, successfully reduced pain scores prior to discharge. They also increased the proportion of patients reporting pain relief and being pain free. Across the pain outcomes assessed, combination therapy was one of the higher ranked approaches and provided robust improvements in pain outcomes, including lowering pain scores (mean difference -3.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] -4.64 to -2.08) and increasing the proportion of patients reporting pain relief (risk ratio [RR] 2.83, 95% CI 1.74-4.61). Neuroleptics and metoclopramide also ranked high in terms of the proportion of patients reporting pain relief (neuroleptics RR 2.76, 95% CI 2.12-3.60; metoclopramide RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.90-3.49) and being pain free before emergency department discharge (neuroleptics RR 4.8, 95% CI 3.61-6.49; metoclopramide RR 4.1, 95% CI 3.02-5.44). Most parenteral agents were associated with increased adverse events, particularly combination therapy and neuroleptics. CONCLUSIONS: Various parenteral agents were found to provide effective pain relief. Considering the consistent improvements across various outcomes, combination therapy, as well as monotherapy of either metoclopramide or neuroleptics are recommended as first-line options for managing acute migraine pain. There are risks of adverse events, especially akathisia, following treatment with these agents. We recommend that a shared decision-making model be considered to effectively identify the best treatment option based on the patient's needs.

Correction to: Preventing emergency department visits among patients with cancer: a scoping review.

Table 2 is incorrect in the original manuscript. The correct table 2 is shown below.

Preventing emergency department visits among patients with cancer: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: The objective of this scoping review was to examine the effectiveness of supportive care interventions designed to reduce ED visits among patients receiving active cancer treatment. METHODS: Literature search involving nine electronic databases and grey literature. Inclusion criteria considered studies assessing the impact of any intervention to reduce ED utilization among patients with active cancer. Dichotomous and continuous outcomes were summarized as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model, wherever appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies were included. Interventions identified in these studies comprised the following: routine and symptom-based patient follow-up, oncology outpatient clinics, early symptom detection, comprehensive inpatient management, hospital at home, and patient navigators. Six out of eight studies assessing oncology outpatient clinics reported a decrease in the proportion of patients presenting to the ED. A meta-analysis of three of these studies did not demonstrate reduction in ED utilization (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.08; I2 = 77%) when comparing oncology outpatient clinics with standard care; however, sensitivity analysis supported a decrease in ED visits (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.99; I2 = 47%). Three studies assessing patient follow-up interventions showed no difference in ED utilization (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.38 to 1.25; I2 = 86%). CONCLUSION: A variety of supportive care interventions designed to mitigate ED presentations by patients receiving active cancer treatment have been developed and evaluated. Limited evidence suggests that an oncology outpatient clinic may be an effective strategy to reduce ED utilization; however, additional high-quality studies are needed.

Evaluating the effectiveness of systemic corticosteroids to mitigate relapse in children assessed and treated for acute asthma: A network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to explore the effectiveness of various systemic corticosteroid (SCS) regimens to mitigate relapse in children with asthma discharged from an acute care setting. DATA SOURCES: Medline, EMBASE, Global Health, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, EMB ALL, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Proquest Dissertations and Theses Global, and LILACS were searched using controlled vocabulary and key words. Additional citations were searched via clinical trial registries, Google Scholar, bibliographies, a SCOPUS forward search of a sentinel paper, and hand searching conference abstracts. STUDY SELECTION: No limitations based on language, publication status, or year of publication were applied. Two independent reviewers searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of SCS regimens to prevent relapse in children following treatment for acute asthma. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included. In 3 studies comparing SCS to placebo, asthma relapse was significantly reduced (RR = 0.10; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.77; I2 = 0%). A network analysis identified a significant reduction in relapse in children treated with intramuscular corticosteroids (OR = 0.038; 95% CrI: 0.001, 0.397), short-course oral prednisone (OR = 0.054; 95% CrI: 0.002, 0.451), and oral dexamethasone (OR = 0.071; 95% CrI: 0.002, 0.733) compared to placebo. CONCLUSION: This review found evidence that SCS reduces relapse in children following treatment for acute asthma, albeit based on a limited number of studies. Additional studies are required to assess the differential effect of SCS doses and treatment duration to prevent relapse in children following discharge for acute asthma.

Interventions to Improve Emergency Department-Related Transitions in Care for Adult Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter.

BACKGROUND: Patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs) with acute atrial fibrillation or flutter undergo numerous transitions in care (TiC), including changes in their provider, level of care, and location. During transitions, gaps in communications and care may lead to poor outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the effectiveness of ED-based interventions to improve length of stay, return to normal sinus rhythm, and hospitalization, among other critical patient TiC outcomes. METHODS: Comprehensive searches of electronic databases and the gray literature were conducted. Two independent reviewers completed study selection, quality, and data extraction. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model, where appropriate. RESULTS: From 823 citations, 11 studies were included. Interventions consisted of within-ED clinical pathways (n = 6) and specialized observation units (n = 2) and post-ED structured patient education and referrals (n = 3). Three of five studies assessing hospital length of stay reported a significant decrease associated with TiC interventions. Patients undergoing within-ED interventions were also more likely to receive electrical cardioversion. Two of 3 clinical pathways reporting hospitalization proportions showed significant decreases associated with TiC interventions (RR = 0.63 [95% CI 0.42-0.92] and RR = 0.20 [95% CI 0.12-0.32]), as did 1 observation unit (RR = 0.54 [95% CI 0.36-0.80]). No significant differences in mortality, complications, or relapse were found between groupings among the studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is low to moderate quality evidence suggesting that within-ED TiC interventions may reduce hospital length of stay and decrease hospitalizations. Additional high-quality comparative effectiveness studies, however, are warranted.

Intramuscular versus oral corticosteroids to reduce relapses following discharge from the emergency department for acute asthma.

BACKGROUND: Acute asthma is a common cause of presentations to acute care centres, such as the emergency department (ED), and while the majority of patients can be discharged, relapse requiring additional medical care is common. Systemic corticosteroids are a major part in the treatment of moderate to severe acute asthma; however, there is no clear evidence regarding the most effective route of administration for improving outcomes in patients discharged from acute care. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness and safety of a single dose of intramuscular (IM) corticosteroids provided prior to discharge compared to a short course of oral corticosteroids in the treatment of acute asthma patients discharged from an ED or equivalent acute care setting. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Airways Group conducted searches of the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials, most recently on 14 March 2018. In addition in April 2017 we completed an extensive search of nine electronic databases including Medline, Embase, EBM ALL, Global Health, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Proquest Dissertations and Theses Global, and LILACS. Furthermore, we searched the grey literature to identify any additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials or controlled clinical trials if they compared the effectiveness of intramuscular (IM) versus oral corticosteroids to treat paediatric or adult patients presenting with acute asthma to an ED or equivalent acute care setting. Two independent reviewers assessed study eligibility and study quality. We resolved disagreements via a third party and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated individual and pooled statistics as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. We reported continuous outcomes using mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs using a random-effects model. We reported heterogeneity using I² and Cochran Q statistics. We used standard procedures recommended by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: Nine studies involving 804 participants (IM = 402 participants; oral = 402 participants) met our review inclusion criteria. Four studies enrolled children (n = 245 participants), while five studies enrolled adults (n = 559 participants). All of the studies recruited participants presenting to an ED, except one study which recruited participants attending a primary care clinic. All of the paediatric studies compared intramuscular (IM) dexamethasone to oral prednisone/prednisolone. In the adult studies, the IM corticosteroid provided ranged from methylprednisolone, betamethasone, dexamethasone, or triamcinolone, while the regimen of oral corticosteroids provided consisted of prednisone, methylprednisolone, or dexamethasone. Only five studies were placebo controlled. For the purposes of this review, we did not take corticosteroid dose equivalency into account in the analysis. The most common co-intervention provided to participants during the acute care visit included short-acting beta2-agonists (SABA), methylxanthines, and ipratropium bromide. In some instances, some studies reported providing some participants with supplemental oral or IV corticosteroids during their stay in the ED. Co-interventions provided to participants at discharge consisted primarily of SABA, methylxanthine, long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA), and ipratropium bromide. The risk of bias of the included studies ranged from unclear to high across various domains. The primary outcome of interest was relapse to additional care defined as an unscheduled visit to a health practitioner for worsening asthma symptoms, or requiring subsequent treatment with corticosteroids which may have occurred at any time point after discharge from the ED.We found intramuscular and oral corticosteroids to be similarly effective in reducing the risk for relapse (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.24; 9 studies, 804 participants; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). We found no subgroup differences in relapse rates between paediatric and adult participants (P = 0.71), relapse occurring within or after 10 days post-discharge (P = 0.22), or participants with mild/moderate or severe exacerbations (P = 0.35). While we found no statistical difference between participants receiving IM versus oral corticosteroids regarding the risk for adverse events (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.07; 5 studies, 404 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), an estimated 50 fewer patients per 1000 receiving IM corticosteroids reported experiencing adverse events (95% from 106 fewer to 21 more). We found inconsistent reporting of specific adverse events across the studies. There were no differences in the frequency of specific adverse events including nausea and vomiting, pain, swelling, redness, insomnia, or personality changes. We did not seek additional adverse events data.Participants receiving IM corticosteroids or oral corticosteroids both reported decreases in peak expiratory flow (MD -7.78 L/min, 95% CI -38.83 L/min to 23.28 L/min; 4 studies, 272 participants; I² = 33%; moderate-quality evidence), similar symptom persistence (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.20; 3 studies, 80 participants; I² = 44%; low-quality evidence), and 24-hour beta-agonist use (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.37; 2 studies, 48 participants; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to identify whether IM corticosteroids are more effective in reducing relapse compared to oral corticosteroids among children or adults discharged from an ED or equivalent acute care setting for acute asthma. While we found no statistical differences, patients receiving IM corticosteroids reported fewer adverse events. Additional studies comparing the effectiveness of IM versus oral corticosteroids could provide further evidence clarity. Furthermore, there is a need for studies comparing different IM corticosteroids (e.g. IM dexamethasone versus IM methylprednisone) and different oral corticosteroids (e.g. oral dexamethasone versus oral prednisone), with consideration for dosing and pharmacokinetic properties, to better identify the optimal IM or oral corticosteroid regimens to improve patient outcomes. Other factors, such as patient preference and potential issues with adherence, may dictate practitioner prescribing.

Review: The impact of pediatric mental health care provided outpatient, primary care, community and school settings on emergency department use - a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Increases in emergency department (ED) visits for pediatric mental health care point to a need to understand the impact of mental health services in relation to emergency-based care. This systematic review examined the impact of mental health services delivered in outpatient, primary care, community and/or school settings on ED use and costs for ED-based mental health care. METHOD: Two electronic databases and gray literature were searched. Eligible studies consisted of randomized/controlled clinical trials or cohort studies examining the effects of mental health services on ED use and costs for this care. Two reviewers independently screened the studies for relevance and study quality. Relative risks (RR), risk differences (RD), or mean differences (MD) were calculated for each study's primary outcome with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Meta-analysis was deferred due to substantial heterogeneity. RESULTS: Six studies were included. Overall risk of bias in the studies ranged from low, unclear, to high. The majority of programs had no effect on ED visits for mental health care. A school-based program was found to reduce the risk of ED visits for any reason during use (RD, -8.0%; 95% CI: -15.2%, -0.9%); however, these visits were not specific to mental health. Three studies examined costs. A wrap-around clinical management program was associated with higher average ED costs per patient per month ($20.07 US dollars) compared to usual outpatient care; other studies reported no cost differences. CONCLUSIONS: At this time, there is limited evidence to suggest outpatient, primary care, community and/or school-based mental health services impact ED use and costs for mental health care. Additional studies are needed.

Combined inhaled beta-agonist and anticholinergic agents for emergency management in adults with asthma.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled short-acting anticholinergics (SAAC) and short-acting beta2-agonists (SABA) are effective therapies for adult patients with acute asthma who present to the emergency department (ED). It is unclear, however, whether the combination of SAAC and SABA treatment is more effective in reducing hospitalisations compared to treatment with SABA alone. OBJECTIVES: To conduct an up-to-date systematic search and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of combined inhaled therapy (SAAC + SABA agents) vs. SABA alone to reduce hospitalisations in adult patients presenting to the ED with an exacerbation of asthma. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, SCOPUS, LILACS, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global and evidence-based medicine (EBM) databases using controlled vocabulary, natural language terms, and a variety of specific and general terms for inhaled SAAC and SABA drugs. The search spanned from 1946 to July 2015. The Cochrane Airways Group provided search results from the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials which was most recently conducted in July 2016. An extensive search of the grey literature was completed to identify any other potentially relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Included studies were randomised or controlled clinical trials comparing the effectiveness of combined inhaled therapy (SAAC and SABA) to SABA treatment alone to prevent hospitalisations in adults with acute asthma in the emergency department. Two independent review authors assessed studies for inclusion using pre-determined criteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated individual and pooled statistics as risk ratios (RR) or odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model and reporting heterogeneity (I²). For continuous outcomes, we reported individual trial results using mean differences (MD) and pooled results as weighted mean differences (WMD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs using a random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS: We included 23 studies that involved a total of 2724 enrolled participants. Most studies were rated at unclear or high risk of bias.Overall, participants receiving combination inhaled therapy were less likely to be hospitalised (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.87; participants = 2120; studies = 16; I² = 12%; moderate quality of evidence). An estimated 65 fewer patients per 1000 would require hospitalisation after receiving combination therapy (95% 30 to 95), compared to 231 per 1000 patients receiving SABA alone. Although combination inhaled therapy was more effective than SABA treatment alone in reducing hospitalisation in participants with severe asthma exacerbations, this was not found for participants with mild or moderate exacerbations (test for difference between subgroups P = 0.02).Participants receiving combination therapy were more likely to experience improved forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) (MD 0.25 L, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.48; participants = 687; studies = 6; I² = 70%; low quality of evidence), peak expiratory flow (PEF) (MD 36.58 L/min, 95% CI 23.07 to 50.09; participants = 1056; studies = 12; I² = 25%; very low quality of evidence), increased percent change in PEF from baseline (MD 24.88, 95% CI 14.83 to 34.93; participants = 551; studies = 7; I² = 23%; moderate quality of evidence), and were less likely to return to the ED for additional care (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; participants = 1180; studies = 5; I² = 0%; moderate quality of evidence) than participants receiving SABA alone.Participants receiving combination inhaled therapy were more likely to experience adverse events than those treated with SABA agents alone (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.28 to 3.20; participants = 1392; studies = 11; I² = 14%; moderate quality of evidence). Among patients receiving combination therapy, 103 per 1000 were likely to report adverse events (95% 31 to 195 more) compared to 131 per 1000 patients receiving SABA alone. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, combination inhaled therapy with SAAC and SABA reduced hospitalisation and improved pulmonary function in adults presenting to the ED with acute asthma. In particular, combination inhaled therapy was more effective in preventing hospitalisation in adults with severe asthma exacerbations who are at increased risk of hospitalisation, compared to those with mild-moderate exacerbations, who were at a lower risk to be hospitalised. A single dose of combination therapy and multiple doses both showed reductions in the risk of hospitalisation among adults with acute asthma. However, adults receiving combination therapy were more likely to experience adverse events, such as tremor, agitation, and palpitations, compared to patients receiving SABA alone.

Low-acuity presentations to the emergency department in Canada: exploring the alternative attempts to avoid presentation.

OBJECTIVE: ED visits have been rising year on year worldwide. It has been suggested that some of these visits could be avoided if low-acuity patients had better primary care access. This study explored patients' efforts to avoid ED presentation and alternative care sought prior to presentation. METHODS: Consecutive adult patients presenting to three urban EDs in Edmonton, Canada, completed a questionnaire collecting demographics, actions attempted to avoid presentation and reasons for presentation. Survey data were cross-referenced to a minimal patient dataset containing ED and demographic information. RESULTS: A total of 1402 patients (66.5%) completed the survey. Although 89.3% of the patients felt that the ED was their best care option, the majority of patients (60.1%) sought alternative care or advice prior to presentation. Men, individuals who presented with injury only, and individuals with less than a high school education were all less likely to seek alternative care. Alternative care actions included visiting a physician (54.1%) or an alternative healthcare professional (eg, chiropractor, physiotherapist, etc; 21.2%), calling physician offices (47%) or the regional health information line (13%). Of those who called their physicians, the majority received advice to present to the ED (67.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Most low-acuity patients attempt to avoid ED presentation by seeking alternative care. This analysis identifies groups of individuals in the study region who are less likely to seek alternative care first and may benefit from targeted interventions/education. Other regions may wish to complete a similar profile to determine which patients are less likely to seek alternative care first.

Emergency Department Use: Influence of Connection to a Family Physician on ED Use and Attempts to Avoid Presentation.

Some low-acuity emergency department (ED) presentations are potentially avoidable with improved primary care access. The majority of ED patients (74.4%) in this study had a family physician, but the frequency of visits varied substantially. The variable frequency of patients' visits to these providers calls into question the validity of linkage assumptions. Several sociodemographic factors were associated with having a family physician, including female sex, being married/common law, race (Caucasian), being employed over the previous 12 months and having received a flu shot in the past year. These factors need to be explored further.

Adjuvant anticholinergic therapy for the prevention of akathisia in patients with primary headache in the emergency department: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Adjunct therapy with anticholinergic agents has been proposed to reduce the incidence of extrapyramidal side effects such as akathisia following treatment with neuroleptics or metoclopramide. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness of anticholinergic agents to prevent neuroleptic or metoclopramide-induced akathisia in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with benign headache. METHODS: Eight electronic databases and the gray literature were searched to identify randomized controlled trials involving adult patients presenting to the ED with primary headache treated with neuroleptic or metoclopramide. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were completed by two independent reviewers. Individual or pooled meta-analysis of dichotomous outcomes were calculated as relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: A total of 1032 studies were screened, of which two studies were included in the review. Both studies provided patients with diphenhydramine following treatment with neuroleptics or metoclopramide. Treatment with diphenhydramine did not reduce the incidence of akathisia compared to treatment with placebo (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.43-1.61, I2  = 0%). The impact of diphenhydramine on pain relief, need for rescue medications, and relief of other extrapyramidal side effects was reported in one of the two studies, with no significant differences noted in any outcomes compared to patients treated with placebo. CONCLUSION: This review found insufficient evidence to recommend the use of diphenhydramine as an adjunct therapy to prevent akathisia in ED patients treated with neuroleptics or metoclopramide for primary headache. This finding relies on the results of two small randomized controlled trials with incomplete outcome reporting. Additional high-quality studies are needed to better understand the clinical efficacy of agents with anticholinergic properties in the ED management of patients with primary headaches.

Task-specific compensation and recovery following focal motor cortex lesion in stressed rats.

One reason for the difficulty to develop effective therapies for stroke is that intrinsic factors, such as stress, may critically influence pathological mechanisms and recovery. In cognitive tasks, stress can both exaggerate and alleviate functional loss after focal ischemia in rodents. Using a comprehensive motor assessment in rats, this study examined if chronic stress and corticosterone treatment affect skill recovery and compensation in a task-specific manner. Groups of rats received daily restraint stress or oral corticosterone supplementation for two weeks prior to a focal motor cortex lesion. After lesion, stress and corticosterone treatments continued for three weeks. Motor performance was assessed in two skilled reaching tasks, skilled walking, forelimb inhibition, forelimb asymmetry and open field behavior. The results revealed that persistent stress and elevated corticosterone levels mainly limit motor recovery. Treated animals dropped larger amounts of food in successful reaches and showed exaggerated loss of forelimb inhibition early after lesion. Stress also caused a moderate, but non-significant increase in infarct size. By contrast, stress and corticosterone treatments promoted reaching success and other quantitative measures in the tray reaching task. Comparative analysis revealed that improvements are due to task-specific development of compensatory strategies. These findings suggest that stress and stress hormones may partially facilitate task-specific and adaptive compensatory movement strategies. The observations support the notion that hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis activation may be a key determinant of recovery and motor system plasticity after ischemic stroke.

A Qualitative Assessment of Studies Evaluating the Classification Accuracy of Personnel Using START in Disaster Triage: A Scoping Review.

Background: Mass casualty incidents (MCIs) can occur as a consequence of a wide variety of events and often require overwhelming prehospital and emergency support and coordinated emergency response. A variety of disaster triage systems have been developed to assist health care providers in making difficult choices with regards to prioritization of victim treatment. The simple triage and rapid treatment (START) triage system is one of the most widely used triage algorithms; however, the research literature addressing real-world or simulation studies documenting the classification accuracy of personnel using START is lacking. Aims and Objectives: To explore the existing literature related to the current state of knowledge about studies assessing the classification accuracy of the START triage system. Design: Scoping review based on Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework and narrative synthesis based on methods described by Popay and colleagues were performed. Results: The literature search identified 1,820 citations, of which 32 studies met the inclusion criteria. Thirty were peer-reviewed articles and 28 published in the last 10 years (i.e., 2010 and onward). Primary research studies originated in 13 countries and included 3,706 participants conducting triaging assessments involving 2,950 victims. Included studies consisted of five randomized controlled trials, 17 non-randomized controlled studies, eight descriptive studies, and two mixed-method studies. Simulation techniques, mode of delivery, contextual features, and participants' required skills varied among studies. Overall, there was no consistent reporting of outcomes across studies and results were heterogeneous. Data were extracted from the included studies and categorized into two themes: (1) typology of simulations and (2) START system in MCIs simulations. Each theme contains sub-themes regarding the development of simulation employing START as a system for improving individuals' preparedness. These include types of simulation training, settings, and technologies. Other sub-themes include outcome measures and reference standards. Conclusion: This review demonstrates a variety of factors impacting the development and implementation of simulation to assess characteristics of the START system. To further improve simulation-based assessment of triage systems, we recommend the use of reporting guidelines specifically designed for health care simulation research. In particular, reporting of reference standards and test characteristics need to improve in future studies.

METASTART: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Diagnostic Accuracy of the Simple Triage and Rapid Treatment (START) Algorithm for Disaster Triage.

INTRODUCTION: The goal of disaster triage at both the prehospital and in-hospital level is to maximize resources and optimize patient outcomes. Of the disaster-specific triage methods developed to guide health care providers, the Simple Triage and Rapid Treatment (START) algorithm has become the most popular system world-wide. Despite its appeal and global application, the accuracy and effectiveness of the START protocol is not well-known. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this meta-analysis was two-fold: (1) to estimate overall accuracy, under-triage, and over-triage of the START method when used by providers across a variety of backgrounds; and (2) to obtain specific accuracy for each of the four START categories: red, yellow, green, and black. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted that searched Medline (OVID), Embase (OVID), Global Health (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO), Compendex (Engineering Village), SCOPUS, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, Cochrane Library, and PROSPERO. The results were expanded by hand searching of journals, reference lists, and the grey literature. The search was executed in March 2020. The review considered the participants, interventions, context, and outcome (PICO) framework and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Accuracy outcomes are presented as means with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as calculated using the binomial method. Pooled meta-analyses of accuracy outcomes using fixed and random effects models were calculated and the heterogeneity was assessed using the Q statistic. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were included in the review, most of which utilized a non-randomized study design (84%). Proportion of victims correctly triaged using START ranged from 0.27 to 0.99 with an overall triage accuracy of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.67 to 0.78). Proportion of over-triage was 0.14 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.17) while the proportion of under-triage was 0.10 (95% CI, 0.072 to 0.14). There was significant heterogeneity of the studies for all outcomes (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that START is not accurate enough to serve as a reliable disaster triage tool. Although the accuracy of START may be similar to other models of disaster triage, development of a more accurate triage method should be urgently pursued.

Interventions to improve consultations in the emergency department: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) consultations with specialists are necessary for safe and effective patient care. Delays in the ED consultation process, however, have been shown to increase ED length of stay (LOS) and contribute to ED crowding. This review aims to describe and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to improve the ED consultation process. METHODS: Eight primary literature databases and the gray literature were searched to identify comparative studies assessing ED-based interventions to improve the specialist consultation process. Two independent reviewers identified eligible studies, assessed study quality, and extracted data. Individual or pooled meta-analysis for continuous outcomes were calculated as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model was conducted. RESULTS: Thirty-five unique comparative intervention studies were included. While the interventions varied, four common components/themes were identified including interventions to improve consultant responsiveness (n = 11), improve access to consultants in the ED (n = 9), expedite ED consultations (n = 8), and bypass ED consultations (n = 7). Studies on interventions to improve consult responsiveness consistently reported a decrease in consult response times in the intervention group with percent changes between 10% and 71%. Studies implementing interventions to improve consult responsiveness (MD -2.55, 95% CI -4.88 to -0.22) and interventions to bypass ED consultations (MD -0.99, 95% CI -1.43 to -0.56) consistently reported a decrease in ED LOS; however, heterogeneity was high (I2  = 99%). Evidence on whether any of the interventions were effective at reducing the proportion of patients consulted or subsequently admitted varied. CONCLUSIONS: The various interventions impacting the consultation process were predominately successful in reducing ED LOS, with evidence suggesting that interventions improving consult responsiveness and improving access to consultants in the ED also improve consult response times. Health care providers looking to implement interventions to improve the ED consultation process should identify key areas in their setting that could be targeted.

Screening tools to identify patients with unmet palliative care needs in the emergency department: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review identified and assessed psychometric properties of the available screening tools to identify patients with unmet palliative care (PC) needs in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A comprehensive search of electronic databases and the gray literature was conducted. Two independent reviewers completed study screening and inclusion, data extraction, and quality assessment. A descriptive summary of the results was reported using median of medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs). RESULTS: A total of 35 studies were included, involving the assessment of 14 unique screening tools. The most commonly used screening tool was the surprise question (SQ; n = 12 studies), followed by the Palliative Care and Rapid Emergency Screening (P-CaRES) tool (n = 8), and the screening for palliative and end-of-life care needs in the emergency department (SPEED) instrument (n = 4). Twelve of the included studies reported on the psychometric properties of the screening tools, of which eight of these studies assessed the performance of the SQ to predict patient mortality. Overall, the median sensitivity (63%, IQR 38%-78%) and specificity (75%, IQR 57%-84%) of the SQ to predict mortality at 1 or 12 months was moderate. While the median positive predictive value of the SQ was low (32%, IQR 16%-40%), the median negative predictive value was high (91%, IQR 88%-95%). Across the studies, the proportion of patients identified as having unmet PC based on the criteria of the screening tools ranged from 5% to 83%. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified 14 unique screening tools used to identify adult patients with unmet PC needs in the ED. One screening tool, the SQ, was found to have moderate sensitivity and specificity to accurately predict future patient mortality. Additional research is needed to better understand the clinical value of this and the other available tools prior to their widespread implementation.

Comparison of the Management and Short-Term Outcomes between Patients with Advanced Cancer and Other End-of-Life Conditions Presenting to Two Canadian Emergency Departments.

Background: An increasing number of patients with end-of-life (EOL) conditions, particularly those with advanced cancer, are presenting to the emergency department (ED). Objectives: To assess the characteristics, management and short-term outcomes of ED patients with advanced cancer compared to patients with other EOL conditions. Methodology/Design: A secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study. Setting/Participants: Volunteer emergency physicians in two Canadian EDs identified presentations for advanced cancer and other EOL conditions with the aid of a modified screening tool March-August 2018. Results: Among the 663 presentations by patients with EOL conditions, 272 (41%) presented with advanced cancer. The majority of presentations for advanced cancer (81%) or other EOL conditions (77%) were by patients with unmet palliative care (PC) needs. Patients with advanced cancer were significantly less likely to have active goals of care (GOC) documented on their charts (53% vs. 75%; p < 0.001). While no significant differences were found between the groups, the majority of presentations involved imaging, investigations, consultations, and hospitalization. Presentations for advanced cancer were more likely to receive a postdischarge referral (38% vs. 23%; p < 0.001). Referrals to PC consultations or postdischarge referrals were infrequent. Regression analysis found that patients with advanced cancer were associated with shorter length of stay (LOS). Conclusions: The majority of presentations for advanced cancer or other EOL conditions involved significant resource use. Patients with cancer experienced shorter LOS; however, had less documentation of GOC and gaps in referrals to PC services were identified. Interventions should be explored to promote early GOC discussions and PC referrals in this patient group.

An Assessment of Emergency Department-Based Interventions for Patients with Advanced or End-Stage Illness: A Systematic Review.

Background and Objective: With the increase of visits among patients with end-of-life needs, palliative care (PC) interventions delivered in the emergency department (ED) have become increasingly important. The objective of this systematic review was to examine the effectiveness of ED-based PC interventions. Methods: A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted to identify any comparative studies assessing the effectiveness of ED-based PC interventions. Two independent reviewers completed study selection, quality assessment, and data extraction. Relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random effects model and heterogeneity (I2) was reported. Results: A total of 18 unique studies were included. Two studies reported no difference in return visits to the ED (RR = 1.31; 95% CI: 0.73-2.35; I2 = 47%). Two randomized trials reported no difference in mortality (RR = 0.89; 95% CI: 0.71-1.13; I2 = 0%), while one cohort study reported an increased mortality among patients referred to PC in the ED (RR = 1.89; 95% CI: 1.58-2.27). Overall, six out of eight studies reported a decrease in hospital length of stay (LOS) among patients undergoing an ED-based PC intervention compared with usual care. Conclusions: While there is compelling evidence to suggest that ED-based PC interventions can reduce hospital LOS, the evidence for the impact of these interventions on other outcomes is less robust. More high-quality comparative studies are needed to better understand the overall impact of ED-based PC interventions on improving patient outcomes as well as improving throughput and other quality of service-related outcomes.

Comparison of characteristics and management of emergency department presentations between patients with met and unmet palliative care needs.

INTRODUCTION: This study examined emergency department (ED) presentations of patients with end of life (EOL) conditions and patients having met and unmet palliative care needs were compared. METHODS: Presentations for EOL conditions were prospectively identified and screened for palliative care needs. Descriptive data were reported as proportions, means or medians. Bi-variable analysis for dichotomous and continuous variables were performed by chi-squared and T-tests (p≤0.01), respectively. A multivariable logistic regression model identified factors associated with having unmet palliative needs and reported adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Overall, 663 presentations for EOL conditions were identified; 518 (78%) involved patients with unmet palliative care needs. Presentations by patients with unmet palliative needs were more likely to involve consultations (80% vs. 67%, p = 0.001) and result in hospitalization (69% vs. 51%, p<0.001) compared to patients whose palliative needs were met. Patients with unmet palliative care needs were more likely to have previous ED visits (73% unmet vs. 48% met; p<0.001). While medication, procedures, investigations and imaging ordering were high across all patients with EOL conditions, there were no significant differences between the groups. Consultations with palliative specialists in the ED (6% unmet vs. 1% met) and following discharge (29% unmet vs. 18% met) were similarly uncommon. Patients having two or more EOL conditions (aOR = 2.41; 95% CI: 1.16, 5.00), requiring hospitalization (aOR = 1.93; 95% CI: 1.30, 2.87), and dying during the ED visit (aOR = 2.15; 95% CI: 1.02, 4.53) were strongly associated with having unmet palliative care needs. CONCLUSIONS: Most ED presentations for EOL conditions were made by patients with unmet palliative care needs, who were significantly more likely to require consultation, hospitalization, and to die. Referrals to palliative care services during and after the ED visit were infrequent, indicating important opportunities to promote these services.

An Assessment of the Management of Patients with Advanced End-Stage Illness in the Emergency Department: An Observational Cohort Study.

Background: Presentations to the emergency department (ED) by patients with end-of-life (EOL) conditions for their acute care needs are common. Objectives: The objective of this study was to identify and describe the ED management across presentations to the ED for EOL conditions. Design: Prospective observational cohort study. Settings/Subjects: Emergency physicians in two Canadian ED's were asked to identify presentations by adult patients with EOL conditions using a modified screening tool. Measurements: Patient characteristics and ED management for each presentation were collected through chart review by trained research assistants. Descriptive analyses were conducted as appropriate and bivariate comparisons of dichotomous and continuous variables were completed using χ2 tests and using t test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test, respectively. Results: Physicians identified 663 ED presentations for EOL conditions, with advanced cancer (41%), dementia (23%), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (16%) being the most common EOL conditions. The majority of presentations involved consultations (77%), hospitalization (65%), and numerous investigations (97%), including blood work (97%) and imaging (92%). The majority of patients with EOL conditions had a history of ED visits (68%). Using a modified screening tool, 78% of presentations involved patients with unmet palliative care needs, but only 1% of presentations involved a palliative consultation or admission to a palliative care unit. Conclusion: Presentations to the ED for EOL conditions involve significant ED resources; however, only a handful of patients are referred to palliative services. Patients with EOL conditions are appropriate targets for palliative services and community support outside the ED.