Referral pathways for chronic pain patients from Canadian emergency departments: emergency physicians' practices, perspectives, and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic pain account for 12-20% of total emergency department (ED) and was the primary presenting concern among 37% of patients who visited the ED > 12 times per year. Despite this, emergency physicians receive little focused training managing these patients, and there is a paucity of effective referral pathways from EDs, despite strong evidence that chronic pain is best treated longitudinally in multidisciplinary clinics. This study sought to explore the practices, perspectives, and recommendations of current Canadians emergency physicians in better serving the chronic pain patient (CPP) population in the ED. METHODS: An electronic cross-sectional survey was administered to members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP), consisting of 16 multiple choice and numerical response questions. Responses were summarized descriptively as percentages and as the median and inter-quartile range (IQR) for quantitative variables. RESULTS: The study was completed by 169/1635 respondents for a response rate of 10%. The most common presentations respondents saw were neuropathic pain and centrally mediated disorders (23% each) and low back pain (19%). 86% of respondents felt that chronic pain patients did not get appropriate referrals from the ED, and 70% of respondents were unaware of where they could even refer chronic pain patients from the ED. 96% of respondents felt that their ED did not have an effective referral pathway for chronic pain patients. Rapid access clinics for common conditions, reduced pain clinic wait times, and clear ED referral pathways were the commonest recommendations by respondents. CONCLUSION: There is a clear need to increase the accessibility to outpatient pain medicine clinics for chronic pain patients presenting to the ED. ED and pain medicine providers must collaborate to establish mutually beneficial referral pathways from EDs, and to advocate for increased funding for rapid access outpatient pain clinics.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: Les patients souffrant de douleur chronique représentent de 12 à 20% de l'ensemble du service d'urgence (SU) et constituaient la principale préoccupation chez 37% des patients qui ont visité le SU > 12 fois par année. Malgré cela, les urgentologues reçoivent peu de formation ciblée sur la gestion de ces patients, et il y a peu de voies d'aiguillage efficaces de la part des urgences, malgré de solides preuves que la douleur chronique est mieux traitée longitudinalement dans les cliniques multidisciplinaires. Cette étude visait à explorer les pratiques, les perspectives et les recommandations des médecins d'urgence canadiens actuels pour mieux servir la population de patients souffrant de douleur chronique (RPC) à l'urgence. MéTHODES: Un sondage transversal électronique a été administré aux membres de l'Association canadienne des médecins d'urgence (ACMU), comprenant seize questions à choix multiples et réponses numériques. Les réponses ont été résumées de façon descriptive sous forme de pourcentages et de fourchette médiane et inter quartile (IQR) pour les variables quantitatives. RéSULTATS: : L'étude a été complétée par 169/1635 répondants pour un taux de réponse de 10%. Les présentations les plus courantes que les répondants ont vues étaient des douleurs neuropathiques et des troubles médiés centraux (23% chacun) et des douleurs lombaires (19%). 86% des répondants estimaient que les patients souffrant de douleur chronique n'obtenaient pas de références appropriées de la part de l'urgence, et 70% des répondants ne savaient même pas où ils pouvaient référer les patients souffrant de douleur chronique de l'urgence. 96% des répondants estimaient que leur DE n'avait pas de voie d'aiguillage efficace pour les patients souffrant de douleur chronique. Les cliniques d'accès rapide pour les affections courantes, la réduction des temps d'attente dans les cliniques de traitement de la douleur et des voies d'aiguillage claires vers le service d'urgence étaient les recommandations les plus courantes des répondants. CONCLUSION: Il est clairement nécessaire d'accroître l'accessibilité aux cliniques de traitement de la douleur ambulatoire pour les patients souffrant de douleur chronique qui se présentent à l'urgence. Les fournisseurs de soins de l'urgence et de médicaments contre la douleur doivent collaborer pour établir des voies d'aiguillage mutuellement avantageuses à partir des urgences. et plaider en faveur d'un financement accru pour des cliniques de traitement de la douleur en consultation externe à accès rapide.

Incidence and Natural Progression of Neurogenic Shock after Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury.

Neurogenic shock, a distributive type of circulatory shock after spinal cord injury (SCI), results in profound hypotension. The consequent hemodynamic instability complicates clinical management, delays surgical intervention, and impacts neurological outcome. Moreover, the reported incidence of this condition varies significantly. We establish the true incidence of neurogenic shock by comparing the most common clinical definitions used to diagnose the condition. Further, we characterize the acute progression and recovery of neurogenic shock. Daily blood pressure, heart rate, and fluid management as well as vasopressor therapy and neurologic status were collected over 30 days from 84 adults admitted to our tertiary trauma center after cervical (n = 56) and thoracic (n = 28) SCI. We found that the reported incidence of neurogenic shock varied greatly depending on which clinical definition was applied. By using a novel combination of hemodynamic and laboratory criteria to define neurogenic shock, the calculated incidence (29% cervical SCI) in our sample most appropriately reflects the true incidence, finding that hypovolemia was the primary factor responsible for the inconsistency in incidence reports between studies. In addition, we found a characteristic decline in blood pressure after the first week post-injury and that fluid management is not currently an integral aspect of clinical management (all persons were treated at a net fluid intake ≤ zero). The results demonstrate the need for accurate identification of neurogenic shock through consistent and appropriate criteria, which is not only important from a clinical point of view, but also in establishing accurate epidemiology to responsibly allocate resources to its management.