Sepsis Core Measures - Are They Worth the Cost?

BACKGROUND: In 2015, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Joint Commission launched the sepsis core measures in an attempt to decrease sepsis morbidity and mortality. Recent studies call into question the multiple treatment measures in early goal-directed therapy on which these CMS measures are based. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to compare the utilization of resources due to the implementation of the sepsis core measures while examining whether complying with these treatment guidelines decreases patient mortality. METHODS: Data were collected on patients suspected of sepsis in a suburban academic emergency department. These data were collected over the course of 3 consecutive years. The data collected included lactates, blood cultures, and antibiotics (vancomycin, piperacillin/tazobactam) ordered. The mortality rate of patients with a final diagnosis of sepsis present on arrival was calculated for a 3-month period of each year and compared. RESULTS: There was no difference in the mortality rates of patients with sepsis across the 3 years. There was an increase in the amount of piperacillin/tazobactam and vancomycin administered. There was a significant increase in the number of lactates and blood cultures ordered per patient across all 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the mortality rate of patients with a final diagnosis of sepsis. However, there was a significant increase in the utilization of resources to care for these patients. As a result of the overutilization of these resources, the cost for both patients and hospitals has increased without improvement in mortality.

Diazepam and Meclizine Are Equally Effective in the Treatment of Vertigo: An Emergency Department Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Vertigo is a debilitating disease that is commonly encountered in the emergency department (ED). Diazepam and meclizine are oral medications that are commonly used to alleviate symptoms. OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether meclizine or diazepam is superior in the treatment of patients with peripheral vertigo in the ED. METHODS: We performed a double-blind clinical trial at a suburban, teaching ED. We randomized a convenience sample of adult patients with acute peripheral vertigo (APV) to diazepam 5 mg or meclizine 25 mg orally. Demographic and historical features were recorded on a standardized data form. Patients recorded their initial level (t0) of vertigo on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) and after 30 min (t30) and 60 min (t60). The primary outcome parameter was the mean change in VAS score from t0 to t60. Differences between groups and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Our a priori power calculation estimated that a sample size of 20 patients in each group was required to have an 80% power to detect a difference of 20 mm between treatment groups. RESULTS: There were 20 patients in the diazepam group and 20 in the meclizine group. The two groups were similar with respect to patient demographics and presenting signs and symptoms. At t60, the mean improvements in the diazepam and meclizine groups were 36 and 40, respectively (difference -4; 95% confidence interval -20 to 12; p = 0.60). CONCLUSION: We found no difference between oral diazepam and oral meclizine for the treatment of ED patients with acute peripheral vertigo.

Care plans reduce ED visits in those with drug-seeking behavior.

UNLABELLED: Patients with drug-seeking behavior can be both labor and resource intensive to the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of ED care plans for individuals at high risk for drug-seeking behavior on ED visits. METHODS: A retrospective, cohort observational study. LOCATION: A suburban teaching hospital with an annual census of 80,000 patients. The number of ED visits was determined 1 year before and 2 subsequent years following care plan initiation. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Unclaimed letter, incomplete data, and/or non-drug-seeking care plan. STATISTICS: Two-tailed Wilcoxon signed-rank test with significance of P < .05. RESULTS: Sixty patients were enrolled and 7 were excluded, leaving 53 patients for analysis. Mean annual visits before care plan initiation were 7.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.3-9.1). One year following implementation, mean visits decreased to 2.3 (95% CI, 1.5-3.1) (P ≤ .0001). Two years following implementation, mean visits continued to decline to 1.5 (95% CI, 0.9-2.1) (P ≤ .0001). A significant reduction in visits occurred 1 and 2 years following care plan implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency department care plans are an effective method to reduce ED visits in those with drug-seeking behavior.

Prednisone for emergency department low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although oral corticosteroids are commonly given to emergency department (ED) patients with musculoskeletal low back pain (LBP), there is little evidence of benefit. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a short course of oral corticosteroids benefits LBP ED patients. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Suburban New Jersey ED with 80,000 annual visits. PARTICIPANTS: 18-55-year-olds with moderately severe musculoskeletal LBP from a bending or twisting injury ≤ 2 days prior to presentation. Exclusion criteria were suspected nonmusculoskeletal etiology, direct trauma, motor deficits, and local occupational medicine program visits. PROTOCOL: At ED discharge, patients were randomized to either 50 mg prednisone daily for 5 days or identical-appearing placebo. Patients were contacted after 5 days to assess pain on a 0-3 scale (none, mild, moderate, severe) as well as functional status. RESULTS: The prednisone and placebo groups had similar demographics and initial and discharge ED pain scales. Of the 79 patients enrolled, 12 (15%) were lost to follow-up, leaving 32 and 35 patients in the prednisone and placebo arms, respectively. At follow-up, the two arms had similar pain on the 0-3 scale (absolute difference 0.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.2, 0.6) and no statistically significant differences in resuming normal activities, returning to work, or days lost from work. More patients in the prednisone than in the placebo group sought additional medical treatment (40% vs. 18%, respectively, difference 22%, 95% CI 0, 43%). CONCLUSION: We detected no benefit from oral corticosteroids in our ED patients with musculoskeletal LBP.

Steroids for migraine headaches: a randomized double-blind, two-armed, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence of migraine headache after treatment in the emergency department (ED) is common. Conflicting evidence exists regarding the utility of steroids in preventing migraine headache recurrence at 24-48 h. OBJECTIVE: To determine if steroids decrease the headache recurrence in patients treated for migraine headaches in the ED. METHODS: Double-blind placebo-controlled, two-tailed randomized trial. Patients aged >17 years with a moderately severe migraine headache diagnosed by treating Emergency Physician were approached for participation. Enrollees received either dexamethasone (10 mg i.v.) if intravenous access was utilized or prednisone (40 mg by mouth × 2 days) if no intravenous access was obtained. Each medication was matched with an identical-appearing placebo. Patients were contacted 24-72 h after the ED visit to assess headache recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 181 patients were enrolled. Eight were lost to follow-up, 6 in the dexamethasone group and 2 in the prednisone arm. Participants had a mean age of 37 years (±10 years), with 86% female. Eighty-six percent met the International Headache Society Criteria for migraine headache. Of the 173 patients with completed follow-up, 20/91 (22%) (95% confidence interval [CI] 13.5-30.5) in the steroid arm and 26/82 (32%) (95% CI 21.9-42.1) in the placebo arm had recurrent headaches (p = 0.21). CONCLUSION: We did not find a statistically significant decrease in headache recurrence in patients treated with steroids for migraine headaches.

Cocaine-associated seizures and incidence of status epilepticus.

OBJECTIVES: Acute complications from cocaine abuse are commonly treated in the emergency department (ED); one of the most consequential is status epilepticus. The incidence of this complication is not clearly defined in the prior literature on cocaine-associated sequelae. We evaluated the incidence of status epilepticus in patients with seizures secondary to suspected cocaine use. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multi-center study of patients with seizures resulting from cocaine use. We identified study subjects at 15 hospitals by record review and conducted a computer-assisted records search to identify patients with seizures for each institution over a four-year period. We selected subjects from this group on the basis of cocaine use and determined the occurrence of status epilepticus among them. Data were collected on each subject using a standardized data collection form. RESULTS: We evaluated 43 patients in the ED for cocaine-associated seizures. Their age range was 17 to 54, with a mean age was 31 years; 53% were male. Of 43 patients, 42 experienced a single tonic-clonic seizure and one developed status epilepticus. All patients had either a history of cocaine use or positive urine drug screen for cocaine. CONCLUSION: Despite reported cases of status epilepticus with cocaine-induced seizures, the incidence of this complication was unclear based on prior literature. This study shows that most cocaine-associated seizures are self-limited.

Presentation, evaluation, and treatment of clavicle fractures in preschool children presenting to an emergency department.

UNLABELLED: Clavicle fractures are a common injury among pediatric patients. Few data exist regarding specific etiologies and their management in the preadolescent patient. Our objective was to determine the specific source of injury and treatment techniques used in the youngest patient population. METHODS: Study Design. A multicenter retrospective chart review study. Setting. Twenty New Jersey and New York emergency departments from January, 2000 to February, 2007. Subjects. Consecutive patients younger than 2 years with the primary or secondary diagnosis of "clavicle fracture" according to the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision. A manual chart review was performed for specific data points. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria. Complete charts were available for 189 patients: 0 to 6 months (n = 14), 6 to 12 months (n = 41), 12 to 18 months (n = 53), and 18 to 24 months (n = 81). Males comprised 56% of the patients. The 3 most common etiologies of clavicle fractures were as follows: fall from bed/crib, 34%; playful activity, 17%; and fall not otherwise specified (NOS), 16%. Analgesic medications were reported in 32% of children while in the emergency department, and 51% were given a prescription on discharge. The most common immobilization technique was sling in 43% of patients. No immobilization was performed 37% of the time. Two patients (1%) were reported to the Division of Youth and Family Services. CONCLUSIONS: In the youngest patient population, falling from a crib or bed is the most common etiology of clavicle fractures. Treatment for these injuries was found to be highly variable.

Monthly variations in the diagnosis of carbon monoxide exposures in the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: Carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning is the leading cause of toxicological deaths worldwide. Symptoms may be subtle, contributing to its frequent delay in diagnosis. If a seasonal variation occurs, a heightened awareness during peak time may lead to improved recognition and diagnosis. STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine whether monthly variations in CO poisoning occur in emergency departments. DESIGN: A multicenter retrospective emergency department (ED) cohort. STUDY SETTING: 23 New Jersey and New York emergency departments. SUBJECTS: Consecutive patients with the ICD-9 primary diagnosis of"toxic effects CO" from January 1, 2000 to October 31, 2006. STATISTICS: We tested for significant differences using chi-square and Student's t-test with alpha set at 0.5. RESULTS: There were 1,006 patients who were diagnosed in the ED with CO toxicity (0.024% of all ED patients). Mean age was 30 years (SD +/- 20), 54% were female, and Caucasians compromised 54% of participants. Thirty-nine percent of documented patients arrived via ambulance and 90% were subsequently discharged. Incidence of CO visits peaked in December (0.036%) and were least likely in May (0.011%). Mean monthly CO visits were statistically increased during October (p = < 0.0001), November (p = 0.008), December (< 0.0001), January (p = 0.01), and March (p = 0.04). Statistically fewer case of CO exposure were diagnosed in May (p = 0.0003), June (p = 0.005), August (p = < 0.0001), and September (p = 0.002).

Do patients with recurrent headaches attempt abortive therapy before their emergency department visit?

Headache is one of the most frequent symptoms prompting an emergency department (ED) visit. For many patients this is an exacerbation of a recurrent or chronic headache pattern. Our objective in this study was to determine if ED patients with recurrent headaches attempt abortive analgesics before seeking ED care. Patients with five or greater similar headache episodes presenting to the ED with the chief complaint of headache were included. There were 150 patients enrolled into the study group. Fourteen percent (95% confidence interval 1-41) of patients did not attempt abortive medication before an ED visit. Males were significantly less likely to utilize pain medication than females before their ED visit (69% vs. 91%; p = 0.003). Of those patients previously seen by a neurologist, 5% did not attempt analgesia before ED arrival, compared to 22% of those who did see a neurologist (p = 0.004). A small, but significant percentage of patients with recurrent headaches do not attempt abortive analgesic therapy before ED encounter. In particular, males and those patients not previously evaluated by a neurologist were significantly less likely to utilize such medications. Further education and selective neurology referral by practitioners may reduce ED utilization in this subset of patients.

Canadian Headache Society criteria for the diagnosis of acute migraine headache in the ED--do our patients meet these criteria?

INTRODUCTION: We previously reported that many patients who present to the ED with "migraine" headache do not meet the International Headache Society criteria (IHSC) for the diagnosis of acute migraine. Objective The aim of the study was to compare the frequency for which ED patients with migraine headache meet the Canadian Headache Society criteria (CHSC) vs the IHSC. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study, performed at a community ED. Consecutive patients who presented to study authors with a chief complaint of headache were enrolled. Historical/clinical data were collected on a standardized form. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated and Fisher exact test was used as appropriate. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine patients were enrolled in this study. Mean age was 38 years. Females comprised 69% of patients. Thirty-seven percent of patients had prior ED visits for headaches. A positive family history of migraines was present in 35% of patients. Diagnostic imaging was previously performed in 44 of the enrollees to evaluate the cause of their headaches. A total of 43 (23%) patients had a prior diagnosis of migraine. Overall CHSC was met in 18% of patients, compared with 15% of patients who met IHSC. Discharge diagnosis of migraine was made in 41% of patients. Of these patients, 33% met CHSC and 28% met IHSC (P=.30). For patients with discharge diagnosis of migraine, 33% of females and 36% of males fit CHSC (P=.53), whereas 26% and 36% met IHSC (P=.34), respectively. For patients with a prior diagnosis of migraine, 32% met CHSC and 26% met IHSC (P=.24). Patients with a prior diagnosis of migraine and/or a discharge diagnosis of migraine met CHSC 31% (95% CI, 22%-40%) of the time vs 25% for the IHSC (95% CI, 16%-34%) (P=.26). Four patients without a discharge and/or previous diagnosis of migraine met CHSC; 3 met IHSC. CONCLUSIONS: In our study population, only a minority of patients with headache who have prior diagnosis and/or ED diagnosis of migraine headache met CHSC. The utility of CHSC and/or IHSC to standardize ED patients for headache research may be limited.

Can nurses appropriately interpret the Ottawa Ankle Rule?

The objective of this study was to determine if ED triage nurses could appropriately interpret the Ottawa Ankle Rules (OAR). We conducted a prospective, observational trial of a clinical decision rule in a suburban ED on a convenience sample of ED patients, aged >17 years with acute ankle injuries. Nurses and EPs were trained in the appropriate use of the OAR. Nurses and physicians recorded their initial blinded patient assessments on standardized data collection instruments that included the OAR. X-rays were ordered without specific discretion to OAR by nurses or physicians. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value were calculated as appropriate; kappa (k) values were calculated to assess interobserver agreement (IOA). One hundred three patients enrolled: mean age 37 +/- 16 years; 67% female; 27 had fractures. IOA between nurses and physicians was moderate for overall interpretation of OAR (kappa = 0.44). IOA (kappa) for each criterion varied from (1) moderate for fifth metatarsal pain (0.56), posterior malleolar pain (0.44), medial malleolar pain (0.40), and weight bearing with foot pain (0.48); to (2) fair for weight bearing with ankle pain (0.32) and navicular pain (0.21). Sensitivity of the nurse's interpretation of OAR for fracture was 92%, specificity 36%, negative predictive value 90%, and positive predictive value 32%. Sensitivity of the EP's utilization of the OAR for fracture was 92%, specificity 47% with a negative predictive value 94%, and a positive predictive value 38%. Nurses showed only a moderate ability to interpret the overall OAR for ordering of x-rays. Nurses' understanding of the individual criterion were variable.

Do ED patients with migraine headaches meet internationally accepted criteria?

A recent editorial criticized emergency medicine researchers who study the treatment of acute migraine for failing to standardize patients according to definitions provided by the International Headache Society (IHS). In fact, most emergency medicine-based studies of migraine therapies have not used IHS Criteria (IHSC) for patient inclusion and are not uniform in the definition of acute migraine. The purpose of this study was to determine the percentage of patients with complaint of headache who present to the emergency department with a prior diagnosis of migraine and/or emergency department discharge diagnosis of acute migraine that meet IHSC. The study was a prospective observational study performed in a community-based and consisted of consecutive patients with a chief complaint of headache who presented to any 1 of 6 study investigators. Patients recorded historical data on a standard form; Clinical data were recorded by the investigators. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals and the Fisher exact test were calculated as appropriate. One hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled (study group): 70% were women, 43% had prior imaging studies to diagnose the etiology of the headache, and 26% had a diagnostic workup during the current emergency department visit; the probable headache etiology was found in 12 of these cases. Only 3 patients that had an ED workup that fit IHSC. Forty-nine percent of all patients had a prior diagnosis of migraines; 41 of these patients (45%) met IHSC. Forty-two percent of all patients had an emergency discharge diagnosis of acute migraine; of these, 43 (56%) met IHSC. Forty-four out of 96 (46%; 95% confidence interval = 35%-57%) patients with a prior diagnosis of migraine and/or discharge diagnosis of acute migraine met IHSC. Modification of the IHSC, by removing restrictions for headache duration and number of prior episodes, would have markedly increased the percentage of patients with a previous migraine and/or emergency discharge diagnosis of acute migraine that met other qualitative IHSC (94%). Of the patients with prior migraine diagnosis and/or emergency department diagnosis of acute migraine, men and women were equally as likely to meet IHSC (41% v 48%, P = 0.79). Less than half of patients with a prior diagnosis and/or final emergency discharge diagnosis of acute migraine met IHSC. Our findings raise concerns about the external validity of prior emergency department-based research of acute migraine therapy and the utility of the IHSC for future research. Modification of the IHSC for emergency medicine research should be considered.