Disparities in pain management among transgender patients presenting to the emergency department for abdominal pain.

OBJECTIVE: Transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) individuals have a gender identity or expression that differs from the sex assigned to them at birth. They are an underserved population who experience health care inequities. Our primary objective was to identify if there are treatment differences between TGD and cisgender lesbian/gay/bisexual/queer (LGBQ) or heterosexual individuals presenting with abdominal pain to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Retrospective observational cohort study of patients ≥12 years of age presenting to 21 EDs within a health care system with a chief complaint of abdominal pain between 2018 and 2022. TGD patients were matched 1:1:1:1 to cisgender LGBQ women and men and cisgender heterosexual women and men, respectively. Propensity score matching covariates included age, ED site, mental health history, and gastrointestinal history. The primary outcome was pain assessment within 60 min of arrival. The secondary outcome was analgesics administered in the ED. RESULTS: We identified 300 TGD patients, of whom 300 TGD patients were successfully matched for a total cohort of 1300 patients. The median (IQR) age was 25 (20-32) years and most patients were treated in a community ED (58.2%). There was no difference between groups in pain assessment within 60 min of arrival (59.0% TGD vs. 63.2% non TGD, p = 0.19). There were no differences in the number of times pain was assessed (median [IQR] 2 [1-3] vs. 2 [1-4], p = 0.31) or the severity of pain between groups (5.5 [4-7] vs. 6 [4-7], p = 0.11). TGD patients were more likely to receive nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (32.0% vs. 24.9%, p = 0.015) and less likely to receive opioids than non-TGD patients (24.7% vs. 36.9%, p = <0.001). TGD and nonbinary patients, along with LGBQ cisgender women (24.7%) and heterosexual cisgender women (34%), were less likely to receive opioids than LGBQ cisgender men (54%) and heterosexual cisgender men (42.3%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in frequency of pain assessment, regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation. More cisgender men, compared to TGD and cisgender women, received opioids for their pain.

Safety of Diltiazem for Acute Management of Atrial Fibrillation (AF) in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Diltiazem is an effective rate control agent for atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular rate (AF RVR). However, its negative inotropic effects may increase the risk for worsening heart failure in patients with a reduced ejection fraction (EF). OBJECTIVES: This observational study aims to describe the incidence of worsening heart failure in patients who receive intravenous diltiazem for acute atrial fibrillation management. METHODS: Adult patients that received diltiazem in the emergency department (ED) for AF RVR (heart rate ≥ 100 beats/min) from 2021 to 2022 and had a prior documented EF were included. The primary outcome is worsening heart failure within 24 h of diltiazem administration. Secondary outcomes include return ED visits and death within 7 days. EF percentage was compared across outcomes using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Outcomes were compared by reduced EF (< 50%) and preserved EF (≥ 50%). Continuous data were summarized with medians and interquartile ranges, and categorical features were summarized with frequency counts and percentages. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for numeric outcomes and chi-squared tests or Fisher's exact tests for categorical outcomes, with a p-value < 0.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS: There were 674 patients with AF RVR that received diltiazem, and 386 patients met the inclusion criteria for analysis. Baseline demographics included a median age of 72 (64-81) years, with 14.5% of patients having a prior diagnosis of congestive heart failure. EF < 50% was identified in 13.7% of patients (n = 53), of which approximately 30% of these patients safely discharged home after receiving i.v. diltiazem. The primary outcome of worsening heart failure occurred in 7/41 (17%) and 10/207 (4.8%) patients with reduced and preserved ejection fractions, respectively, who were admitted to the hospital (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: The development of worsening heart failure is multifactorial and may include the use of diltiazem in critically ill patients requiring hospital admission.

High- versus low-dose ketamine for analgesia in older adults in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Ketamine is increasingly being utilized in the management of acute pain in the emergency department (ED), including for older adults, a population at increased risk of adverse effects from medications. We aimed to compare the safety and analgesic effects of high-dose (≥0.3mg/kg) to low-dose (<0.3mg/kg) intravenous (IV) ketamine among older ED patients. METHODS: Multi-center, retrospective cohort study of adults ≥60years who received IV ketamine for pain between 2018 and 2021. The primary outcome was pain improvement as measured by the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain score within 60min after administration. Secondary outcomes included adverse effects (early discontinuation, nausea, rescue benzodiazepines and intubation) and the need for rescue analgesia. Linear regression was used to assess the association between the change in NRS pain scores and dose after adjusting for baseline pain, requiring an additional dose of ketamine, and receiving an opioid. RESULTS: A total of 130 older adults received ketamine as an analgesic (37 high-dose, 93 low-dose). Median age was 69.2years, 52 % were women, 40 % had a history of substance use disorder. Prior to ketamine, 76 % received alternate analgesics and 23 % antiemetics. Baseline mean pain score was lower in the high-dose group (6.7 vs. 8.3, difference -1.7 [95 % CI -2.6 to -0.7], p = 0.013). Change in NRS pain scores were similar between the high-dose and low-dose groups (-2.4 [95 % CI -3.6 to -1.3] vs -1.6 [95 % CI -2.2 to -0.9], p = 0.27). After adjustment for baseline pain score, the high-dose group had a larger reduction in pain scores (-1.3 [95 % CI -2.6 to -0.1], p = 0.042) and percent change of pain (-23.8 % [95 % CI -42.1 % to -5.4 %], p = 0.012). There was no significant difference in rates of rescue analgesia (35.1 % vs. 44.1 %, p = 0.35) or early discontinuation (29.7 % vs. 32.3 %, p = 0.78). Rates of adverse effects were similar. CONCLUSION: High-dose and low-dose ketamine reduced pain scores in older adults. High-dose ketamine led to a greater reduction in pain scores, and there was no observed difference in adverse effects or the need for rescue analgesia. One-third needed discontinuation of ketamine in both groups.

Workplace Violence Against Emergency Medical Services (EMS): A Prospective 12-Month Cohort Study Evaluating Prevalence and Risk Factors Within a Large, Multistate EMS Agency.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and associated risk factors of workplace violence (WPV) experienced by emergency medical services (EMS) clinicians across a large, multistate ground/air EMS agency. METHODS: We used a prospective cohort study design from 1 December 2022 to 30 November 2023. A checkbox was added within the electronic medical record (EMR) asking staff to indicate whether WPV occurred. Patient characteristics, encounter (run), and crew factors were abstracted. Potential risk factors for WPV were assessed using logistic regression, with the occurrence of any form of violence as the primary outcome of interest. Models were both univariable, assessing each risk factor individually, and multivariable, assessing all risk factors together to identify independent factors associated with higher risk of WPV. Multivariable model results were reported using adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 102,632 runs were included, 95.7% (n = 98,234) included checkbox documentation. There were 843 runs (0.86 per 100 runs, 95% CI 0.80-0.92) identified by EMS clinicians as WPV having occurred, including verbal abuse (n = 482), physical assault (n = 142), and both abuse and assault (n = 219). Risk factors for violence included male patient gender (aOR 1.45, 95% CI 1.24-1.70, p < 0.001), Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) >1 (aOR 16.97, 95% CI 13.71-21.01, p < 0.001), and 9-1-1 runs to include emergent (P1; aOR 1.75, 95% CI: 1.17-2.63, p = 0.007) and urgent (P2; aOR 1.64, 95% CI 1.08-2.50, p = 0.021) priority, compared to P3/scheduled transfer or P4/trip requests. Factors associated with lower risk for violence included older patients (aOR per 10 years = 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.98, p = 0.007) and run time of day between 0601-1200 h compared to 0000-0600 h (aOR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51-0.88, p = 0.004). Only 2.7% of violent runs captured through the EMR were reported through official processes. CONCLUSIONS: Verbal and/or physical violence is recognized in nearly 1% of EMS runs. We recommend prioritizing WPV prevention and mitigation strategies around identified risk factors and simplifying the WPV reporting process in order to reduce staff administrative burden and encourage optimal capturing of violent events.

Etiology and characteristics of non-aneurysmal thunderclap headache presenting to an acute setting.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the characteristics and causes of non-aneurysmal thunderclap headache (TCH) and compare serious from benign underlying causes. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients with TCH presenting to a tertiary care academic medical center between 2010 and 2020. Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage cases were excluded. Cases were categorized into serious or benign; serious TCH was defined as any condition in which delayed diagnosis and treatment could result in neurological disability or death. Risk factors for serious TCH were analyzed. We adhere to standardized guidelines for reporting observational studies. RESULTS: A total of 932 patients presented with TCH. After exclusion of 393 patients with aneurysmal-type subarachnoid hemorrhage, 539 were included in the analysis. One-half (n = 275, 51.0 %) had a serious cause. Median age was 51 years, 69.0 % were female. Most frequent diagnoses were intracranial hemorrhage (n = 102, 18.9 %), reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome (n = 97, 18.0 %), and idiopathic TCH (n = 102, 38.6 %). A multivariable logistic regression model for prediction of serious TCH included age, hypertension, migraines, recurrent TCH, level of consciousness and other clinical exam findings, and achieved an AUROC of 0.732. This score had a sensitivity of 79.9 % (95 % CI 73.5-83.5 %) for the identification of serious TCH. A 0.5-point increase in the risk score was associated with a 73 % increase in the odds of serious TCH (odds ratio 1.73, 95 % CI 1.53-1.95, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our study describes the relative frequency of presentation and etiologies among patients with TCH This score can aide clinicians in recognising patients with potentially serious cause of TCH, for whom additional imaging and neurological consultation is necessary.

"Let's Chat!" Improving Emergency Department Staff Satisfaction with the Medication Reconciliation Process.

Introduction: Patients who stay in the emergency department (ED) for prolonged periods of time require verification of home medications, a process known as medication reconciliation. The complex nature of medication reconciliation can lead to adverse events and staff dissatisfaction. A multidisciplinary team was formed to improve accuracy, timing, and staff satisfaction with the medication reconciliation process. Methods: Between November 2021-January 2022, stakeholders were surveyed to identify gaps in the medication reconciliation process. This project implemented education on role-specific tasks, as well as a "Let's chat!" huddle, bringing together the entire care team to perform medication reconciliation. We used real-time evaluations by frontline staff to evaluate effectiveness during plan- do-study-act cycles and obtain feedback. Following the implementation period, stakeholders completed the post-intervention survey between June-July 2022, using a 4-point Likert scale (0 = very dissatisfied to 3 = very satisfied). We calculated the change in staff satisfaction from pre-intervention to post-intervention. Differences in proportions and 95% confidence intervals are reported. This study adhered to the Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE 2.0) and followed the Lean Six Sigma rapid cycle process improvement (define-measure-analyze-improve-control). Results: A total of 111 front-line ED staff (physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, pharmacists, nurses) completed the pre-intervention survey (of 350 ED staff, corresponding to a 31.7% response rate), and 89 stakeholders completed the post-intervention survey (a 25.4% response rate). Subjective feedback from staff identifying causes of low satisfaction with the initial process included the following: complexity of process; unclear delineation of staff roles; time burden to completion; high patient volume; and lack of standardized communication of task completion. Overall satisfaction improved after the intervention. The greatest improvement was seen in the correct medication (difference 20.7%, confidence interval [CI] 6.3-33.9%, P < 0.01), correct dose (25.6%, CI 11.4-38.6%, P < 0.001) and time last taken (24.5%, CI 11.4-37.0%, P < 0.001). Conclusion: There is a steep learning curve to educate multidisciplinary staff on a new process and implement the associated changes. With goals to impact the safety of our patients and reduce negative outcomes, engagement and awareness of the team involved in the medication reconciliation process is critical to improve staff satisfaction.

Recognizing Posterior Circulation Transient Ischemic Attacks Presenting as Episodic Isolated Dizziness.

Diagnosing patients presenting to the emergency department with self-limited episodes of isolated dizziness (the episodic vestibular syndrome) requires a broad differential diagnosis that includes posterior circulation transient ischemic attack. Because these patients are, by definition, asymptomatic without new neurologic findings on examination, the diagnosis, largely based on history and epidemiologic context, can be challenging. We review literature that addresses the frequency of posterior circulation transient ischemic attack in this group of patients compared with other potential causes of episodic vestibular syndrome. We present ways of distinguishing posterior circulation transient ischemic attack from vestibular migraine, the most common cause of episodic vestibular syndrome. We also present a diagnostic algorithm that may help clinicians to work their way through the differential diagnosis.

Guidelines for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE-4): Alcohol use disorder and cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome management in the emergency department.

The fourth Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Guidelines for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE-4) is on the topic of the emergency department (ED) management of nonopioid use disorders and focuses on alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS), alcohol use disorder (AUD), and cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS). The SAEM GRACE-4 Writing Team, composed of emergency physicians and experts in addiction medicine and patients with lived experience, applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations regarding six priority questions for adult ED patients with AWS, AUD, and CHS. The SAEM GRACE-4 Writing Team reached the following recommendations: (1) in adult ED patients (over the age of 18) with moderate to severe AWS who are being admitted to hospital, we suggest using phenobarbital in addition to benzodiazepines compared to using benzodiazepines alone [low to very low certainty of evidence]; (2) in adult ED patients (over the age of 18) with AUD who desire alcohol cessation, we suggest a prescription for one anticraving medication [very low certainty of evidence]; (2a) in adult ED patients (over the age of 18) with AUD, we suggest naltrexone (compared to no prescription) to prevent return to heavy drinking [low certainty of evidence]; (2b) in adult ED patients (over the age of 18) with AUD and contraindications to naltrexone, we suggest acamprosate (compared to no prescription) to prevent return to heavy drinking and/or to reduce heavy drinking [low certainty of evidence]; (2c) in adult ED patients (over the age of 18) with AUD, we suggest gabapentin (compared to no prescription) for the management of AUD to reduce heavy drinking days and improve alcohol withdrawal symptoms [very low certainty of evidence]; (3a) in adult ED patients (over the age of 18) presenting to the ED with CHS we suggest the use of haloperidol or droperidol (in addition to usual care/serotonin antagonists, e.g., ondansetron) to help with symptom management [very low certainty of evidence]; and (3b) in adult ED patients (over the age of 18) presenting to the ED with CHS, we also suggest offering the use of topical capsaicin (in addition to usual care/serotonin antagonists, e.g., ondansetron) to help with symptom management [very low certainty of evidence].

Frontline Providers' and Patients' Perspectives on Improving Diagnostic Safety in the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have described the insights of frontline health care providers and patients on how the diagnostic process can be improved in the emergency department (ED), a setting at high risk for diagnostic errors. The authors aimed to identify the perspectives of providers and patients on the diagnostic process and identify potential interventions to improve diagnostic safety. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 10 ED physicians, 15 ED nurses, and 9 patients/caregivers at two separate health systems. Interview questions were guided by the ED-Adapted National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Diagnostic Process Framework and explored participant perspectives on the ED diagnostic process, identified vulnerabilities, and solicited interventions to improve diagnostic safety. The authors performed qualitative thematic analysis on transcribed interviews. RESULTS: The research team categorized vulnerabilities in the diagnostic process and intervention opportunities based on the ED-Adapted Framework into five domains: (1) team dynamics and communication (for example, suboptimal communication between referring physicians and the ED team); (2) information gathering related to patient presentation (for example, obtaining the history from the patients or their caregivers; (3) ED organization, system, and processes (for example, staff schedules and handoffs); (4) patient education and self-management (for example, patient education at discharge from the ED); and (5) electronic health record and patient portal use (for example, automatic release of test results into the patient portal). The authors identified 33 potential interventions, of which 17 were provider focused and 16 were patient focused. CONCLUSION: Frontline providers and patients identified several vulnerabilities and potential interventions to improve ED diagnostic safety. Refining, implementing, and evaluating the efficacy of these interventions are required.

Risk of falls is associated with 30-day mortality among older adults in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: Falls in older adults correlate with heightened morbidity and mortality. Assessing fall risk in the emergency department (ED) not only aids in identifying candidates for prevention interventions but may also offer insights into overall mortality risk. We sought to examine the link between fall risk and 30-day mortality in older ED adults. METHODS: Observational cohort study of adults aged ≥ 75years who presented to an academic ED and who were assessed for fall risk using the Memorial Emergency Department Fall Risk Assessment Tool (MEDFRAT), a validated, ED-specific screening tool. The fall risk was classified as low (0-2 points), moderate (3-4 points), or high (≥5) risk. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 941 patients whose fall risk was assessed in the ED were included in the study. Median age was 83.7 years; 45.6% were male, 75.6% lived in private residences, and 62.7% were admitted. Mortality at 30 days among the high fall risk group was four times that of the low fall risk group (11.8% vs 3.1%; HR 4.00, 95% CI 2.18 to 7.34, p < 0.001). Moderate fall risk individuals had nearly double the mortality rate of the low-risk group (6.0% vs 3.1%), but the difference was not statistically significant (HR 1.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 4.32, p = 0.087). CONCLUSION: ED fall risk assessments are linked to 30-day mortality. Screening may facilitate the stratification of older adults at risk for health deterioration.

Effect of Bougie Use on First-Attempt Success in Tracheal Intubations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The use of a bougie, a flexible endotracheal tube introducer, has been proposed to optimize first-attempt success in emergency department intubations. We aimed to evaluate the available evidence on the association of bougie use in the first attempt and success in tracheal intubations. This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that evaluated first-attempt success between adults intubated with a bougie versus without a bougie (usually with a stylet) in all settings. Manikin and cadaver studies were excluded. A medical librarian searched Ovid Cochrane Central, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies from inception to June 2023. Study selection and data extraction were done in duplicate by 2 independent reviewers. We conducted a meta-analysis with random-effects models, and we used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence at the outcome level. We screened a total of 2,699 studies, and 133 were selected for full-text review. A total of 18 studies, including 12 randomized controlled trials, underwent quantitative analysis. In the meta-analysis of 18 studies (9,151 patients), bougie use was associated with increased first-attempt intubation success (pooled risk ratio [RR] 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06 to 1.17, low certainty evidence). Bougie use was associated with increased first-attempt success across all analyzed subgroups with similar effect estimates, including in emergency intubations (9 studies; 8,070 patients; RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.16, low certainty). The highest point estimate favoring the use of a bougie was in the subgroup of patients with Cormack-Lehane III or IV (5 studies, 585 patients, RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.40 to 1.84, moderate certainty). In this meta-analysis, the bougie as an aid in the first intubation attempt was associated with increased success. Despite the certainty of evidence being low, these data suggest that a bougie should probably be used first and not as a rescue device in emergency intubations.

Risk of arrhythmia in post-resuscitative shock after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with epinephrine versus norepinephrine.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the rates of clinically significant tachyarrhythmias and mortality in the management of post-resuscitative shock after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) who receive a continuous epinephrine versus norepinephrine infusion. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A large multi-site health system with hospitals across the United States. PATIENTS: Adult patients admitted for OHCA with post-resuscitative shock managed with either epinephrine or norepinephrine infusions within 6 h of ROSC. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Between May 5th, 2018, to January 31st, 2022, there were 221 patients admitted for OHCA who received post-resuscitative epinephrine or norepinephrine infusions. There was no difference in the rate of tachyarrhythmias between epinephrine and norepinephrine infusion in univariate (47.1% vs 41.7%, OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.71-2.20) or multivariable analysis (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.68-2.62). Patients treated with epinephrine were more likely to die during hospitalization than those treated with norepinephrine (90.0% vs 54.3%, OR 6.21, 95% CI 2.37-16.25, p < 0.001). Epinephrine treated patients were more likely to have re-arrest during hospital admission (55.7% vs 14.6%, OR 5.77, 95% CI 2.74-12.18, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference in clinically significant cardiac tachyarrhythmias in post-OHCA patients treated with epinephrine versus norepinephrine infusions after ROSC. Re-arrest rates and in-hospital mortality were higher in patients who received epinephrine infusions in the first 6 h post-ROSC. Results of this study add to the literature suggesting norepinephrine may be the vasopressor of choice in post-OHCA patients with post-resuscitative shock after ROSC.

Teaching Palliative Care to Emergency Medicine Residents Using Gamified Deliberate Practice-Based Simulation: Palliative Gaming Simulation Study.

BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (EDs) care for many patients nearing the end of life with advanced serious illnesses. Simulation training offers an opportunity to teach physicians the interpersonal skills required to manage end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized a gaming simulation of an imminently dying patient using the LIVE. DIE. REPEAT (LDR) format, would be perceived as an effective method to teach end-of-life communication and palliative care management skills. METHODS: This was a gaming simulation replicating the experience of caring for a dying patient with advanced serious illness in the ED. The scenario involved a patient with pancreatic cancer presenting with sepsis and respiratory distress, with a previously established goal of comfort care. The gaming simulation game was divided into 4 stages, and at each level, learners were tasked with completing 1 critical action. The gaming simulation was designed using the LDR serious game scheme in which learners are allowed infinite opportunities to progress through defined stages depicting a single patient scenario. If learners successfully complete the predetermined critical actions of each stage, the game is paused, and there is a debriefing to reinforce knowledge or skills before progressing to the next stage of the gaming simulation. Conversely, if learners do not achieve the critical actions, the game is over, and learners undergo debriefing before repeating the failed stage with an immediate transition into the next. We used the Simulation Effectiveness Tool-Modified survey to evaluate perceived effectiveness in teaching end-of-life management. RESULTS: Eighty percent (16/20) of residents completed the Simulation Effectiveness Tool-Modified survey, and nearly 100% (20/20) either strongly or somewhat agreed that the gaming simulation improved their skills and confidence at the end of life in the following dimensions: (1) better prepared to respond to changes in condition, (2) more confident in assessment skills, (3) teaching patients, (4) reporting to the health care team, (5) empowered to make clinical decisions, and (6) able to prioritize care and interventions. All residents felt the debriefing contributed to learning and provided opportunities to self-reflect. All strongly or somewhat agree that they felt better prepared to respond to changes in the patient's condition, had a better understanding of pathophysiology, were more confident on their assessment skills, and had a better understanding of the medications and therapies after the gaming simulation. A total of 88% (14/16) of them feel more empowered to make clinical decisions. After completing the gaming simulation, 88% (14/16) of residents strongly agreed that they would feel more confident communicating with a patient and prioritizing care interventions in this context. CONCLUSIONS: This palliative gaming simulation using the LDR format was perceived by resident physicians to improve confidence in end-of-life communication and palliative care management.

Real world utilization of Andexanet alfa in the management of oral factor Xa inhibitor-associated gastrointestinal bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Andexanet alfa (AA) is approved for reversal of factor Xa inhibitor (FXaI) bleeds; however, there are limited reports of its use for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in real-world populations. The objective of this study was to report real-world utilization and evaluation of the effectiveness of AA for FXaI-associated GIB. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients receiving AA for FXaI-associated GIB (7/2018-2/2021). Demographics, blood product administration, hemostatic efficacy, rebleeding, thrombosis, and mortality rates were collected. Hemostatic efficacy (HE), based on corrected hemoglobin at 12 h compared to baseline, was categorized as excellent (<10% decrease), good (≤ 20% decrease), or poor (>20% decrease, > 2 units of additional coagulation intervention or death prior to repeat hemoglobin). Comparative transfusion requirements between efficacy groups was assessed by Wilcoxon-Rank test. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included (64% male, median (IQR) age 76 years (67, 80). Most patients (59%, n = 13) were on apixaban, and the primary anticoagulation indication was atrial fibrillation (64%, n = 14). Median initial hemoglobin was 7.5 g/dL (IQR 6.4, 8.8) and 50% (n = 11) were upper GIB. Hemostatic efficacy was excellent in 46% (n = 10), good in 23% (n = 5), and poor in 32% (n = 7). There was no statistically significant difference in red blood cells (RBCs) received between those with excellent/good hemostasis (median 2, IQR 1 to 2) and those with poor hemostasis (median 4, IQR 1.5 to 4.5). Two patients (9%) had arterial thrombotic events within 30 days of reversal. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter, single arm, real-world observational analysis of patients with factor Xa inhibitor associated GIB most patients achieved good hemostasis following administration of AA. There was a 9% 30-day thrombotic event rate. The lack of a control group limits the strength of the conclusions that can be drawn from this study.

Efficacy of analgesic and sub-dissociative dose ketamine for acute pain in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Acute pain accounts for over 70% of Emergency Department (ED) visits. Sub-dissociative dose ketamine (0.1-0.6 mg/kg) is safe and effective for the management of acute pain in the ED. However, the optimal dose of intravenous ketamine that provides effective analgesia and minimizes the risk of adverse effects has yet to be identified. The objective of this study was to describe an effective analgesia dose range of IV ketamine for acute pain in the ED. METHODS: This multi-center, retrospective cohort study evaluated adult patients who received analgesic and sub-dissociative dose ketamine for the management of acute pain between May 5, 2018, and August 30, 2021, in 21 emergency departments at academic, community, and critical access hospitals across four states. Patients were excluded if they received ketamine for an indication other than pain, such as procedural sedation or intubation, or for whom there was incomplete documentation for the primary outcome. Patients who received a ketamine dose <0.3 mg/kg were stratified into the low-dose group, and those who received a dose of 0.3 mg/kg or higher to the high-dose group. The primary outcome was change in pain scores within 60 min using a standard 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS). Secondary outcomes included incidence of adverse effects and use of rescue analgesics. Continuous variables were compared between dose groups using student t-test or Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test. Linear regression was used to assess the association between the change in NRS pain scores within 60 min and dose after adjusting for baseline pain, requiring an additional dose of ketamine, and receiving an opioid. RESULTS: From 3796 patient encounters screened for receipt of ketamine, 384 patients met inclusion criteria including 258 in the low-dose group, and 126 in the high-dose group. The primary reason for exclusion was incomplete documentation of pain scores, or ketamine used for sedation. Median baseline pain scores were 8.2 in the low-dose group and 7.8 in the high-dose group (difference 0.5; 95% CI 0 to 1, p = 0.04). Both groups demonstrated significant reductions in their mean NRS pain scores within 60 min following the first administration of IV ketamine. There were no differences in the change in pain scores between both groups (-2.2 vs -2.6, mean difference 0.4, 95% CI -0.4 to 1.1, p = 0.34). Use of rescue analgesics (40.7% vs 36.5%, p = 0.43) and adverse effects were similar between groups, including early discontinuation of the ketamine infusion (37.2% vs. 37.3%, p = 0.99). Overall, the most common adverse effects were agitation (7.3%) and nausea (7.0%). CONCLUSION: The analgesic efficacy and safety of high-dose sub-dissociative ketamine (≥0.3 mg/kg) was not superior to low-dose (< 0.3 mg/kg) for the management of acute pain in the ED. Low-dose ketamine <0.3 mg/kg is an effective and safe pain management strategy in this population.