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].

Geriatric Emergency Medication Safety Recommendations (GEMS-Rx): Modified Delphi Development of a High-Risk Prescription List for Older Emergency Department Patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Half of emergency department (ED) patients aged 65 years and older are discharged with new prescriptions. Potentially inappropriate prescriptions contribute to adverse drug events. Our objective was to develop an evidence- and consensus-based list of high-risk prescriptions to avoid among older ED patients. METHODS: We performed a modified, 3-round Delphi process that included 10 ED physician experts in geriatrics or quality measurement and 1 pharmacist. Consensus members reviewed all 35 medication categories from the 2019 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria and ranked each on a 5-point Likert scale (5=highest) for overall priority for avoidance (Round 1), risk of short-term adverse events and avoidability (Round 2), and reasonable medical indications for high-risk medication use (Round 3). RESULTS: For each round, questionnaire response rates were 91%, 82%, and 64%, respectively. After Round 1, benzodiazepines (mean, 4.60 [SD, 0.70]), skeletal muscle relaxants (4.60 [0.70]), barbiturates (4.30 [1.06]), first-generation antipsychotics (4.20 [0.63]) and first-generation antihistamines (3.70 [1.49]) were prioritized for avoidance. In Rounds 2 and 3, hypnotic "Z" drugs (4.29 [1.11]), metoclopramide (3.89 [0.93]), and sulfonylureas (4.14 [1.07]) were prioritized for avoidability, despite lower concern for short-term adverse events. All 8 medication classes were included in the final list. Reasonable indications for prescribing high-risk medications included seizure disorders, benzodiazepine/ethanol withdrawal, end of life, severe generalized anxiety, allergic reactions, gastroparesis, and prescription refill. CONCLUSION: We present the first expert consensus-based list of high-risk prescriptions for older ED patients (GEMS-Rx) to improve safety among older ED patients.

Predicting posthospitalization falls in Brazilian older adults: External validation of the Carpenter instrument.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to explore and externally validate the Carpenter instrument's efficacy in predicting postdischarge fall risk among older adults admitted to the emergency department (ED) for reasons other than falls or related injuries. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted on 779 patients aged ≥ 65 years from a tertiary hospital in São Paulo, Brazil, who were monitored for up to 6 months post-ED hospitalization. The Carpenter instrument, which evaluates the four risk factors nonhealing foot sores, self-reported depression, inability to self-clip toenails, and prior falls, was utilized to assess fall risk. Follow-up by telephone occurred at 30, 90, and 180 days to identify falls and mortality. Fine-Gray models estimated the predictive power of Carpenter instrument for future falls, considering death as a competing event and sociodemographic factors, frail status, and clinical measures as confounders. RESULTS: Among 779 patients, 68 (9%) experienced a fall within 180 days post-ED admission, and 88 (11%) died. The majority were male (54%), with a mean age of 79 years. Upon utilizing the Carpenter score, those with a higher fall risk (≥2 points) displayed more comorbidities, greater frailty, and increased clinical severity at baseline. Regression analyses showed that every additional point on the Carpenter score increased the hazard of falls by 73%. Two primary contributors to its predictive potential were identified: a history of falls in the preceding year and an inability to self-clip toenails. However, the instrument's discriminative accuracy was suboptimal, with an area under the curve of 0.62. CONCLUSIONS: While the Carpenter instrument associated with a higher 6-month postadmission fall risk among older adults post-ED visit, its accuracy for individual patient decision making was limited. Given the significant impact of falls on health outcomes and health care costs, refining risk assessment tools remains essential. Future research should focus on enhancing these assessments and devising targeted proactive strategies.

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.

Patient-reported outcome measure use among older adults after emergency department care: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are gaining favor in clinical and research settings given their ability to capture a patient's symptom burden, functional status, and quality of life. Our objective in this systematic review was to summarize studies including PROMs assessed among older adults (age ≥ 65 years) after seeking emergency care. METHODS: With the assistance of a medical librarian, we searched Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science-Core Collection, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception through June 2023 for studies in which older adult ED patients had PROMs assessed in the post-emergency care time period. Independent reviewers performed title/abstract review, full-text screening, data extraction, study characteristic summarization, and risk-of-bias (RoB) assessments. RESULTS: Our search strategy yielded 5153 studies of which 56 met study inclusion criteria. Within included studies, 304 unique PROM assessments were performed at varying time points after the ED visit, including 61 unique PROMs. The most commonly measured domain was physical function, assessed within the majority of studies (47/56; 84%), with measures including PROMs such as Katz activities of daily living (ADLs), instrumental ADLs, and the Barthel Index. PROMs were most frequently assessed at 1-3 months after an ED visit (113/304; 37%), greater than 6 months (91/304; 30%), and 4-6 months (88/304; 29%), with very few PROMs assessed within 1 month of the ED visit (12/304; 4%). Of the 16 interventional studies, two were determined to have a low RoB, four had moderate RoB, nine had high RoB, and one had insufficient information. Of the 40 observational studies, 10 were determined to be of good quality, 20 of moderate quality, and 10 of poor quality. CONCLUSIONS: PROM assessments among older adults following an ED visit frequently measured physical function, with very few assessments occurring within the first 1 month after an ED visit.

Core requirements of frailty screening in the emergency department: an international Delphi consensus study.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is associated with adverse outcomes among patients attending emergency departments (EDs). While multiple frailty screens are available, little is known about which variables are important to incorporate and how best to facilitate accurate, yet prompt ED screening. To understand the core requirements of frailty screening in ED, we conducted an international, modified, electronic two-round Delphi consensus study. METHODS: A two-round electronic Delphi involving 37 participants from 10 countries was undertaken. Statements were generated from a prior systematic review examining frailty screening instruments in ED (logistic, psychometric and clinimetric properties). Reflexive thematic analysis generated a list of 56 statements for Round 1 (August-September 2021). Four main themes identified were: (i) principles of frailty screening, (ii) practicalities and logistics, (iii) frailty domains and (iv) frailty risk factors. RESULTS: In Round 1, 13/56 statements (23%) were accepted. Following feedback, 22 new statements were created and 35 were re-circulated in Round 2 (October 2021). Of these, 19 (54%) were finally accepted. It was agreed that ideal frailty screens should be short (<5 min), multidimensional and well-calibrated across the spectrum of frailty, reflecting baseline status 2-4 weeks before presentation. Screening should ideally be routine, prompt (<4 h after arrival) and completed at first contact in ED. Functional ability, mobility, cognition, medication use and social factors were identified as the most important variables to include. CONCLUSIONS: Although a clear consensus was reached on important requirements of frailty screening in ED, and variables to include in an ideal screen, more research is required to operationalise screening in clinical practice.

Cost-Effectiveness of Recombinant Zoster Vaccine for the Prevention of Herpes Zoster in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients and Other Immunocompromised Adults in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Immunocompromised (IC) adults are at increased risk of developing herpes zoster (HZ) and HZ-related complications due to therapy or underlying disease. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) versus no vaccine for the prevention of HZ in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients and other IC adults aged ≥ 18 years in the United States (US). METHODS: A static Markov model simulated cohorts of IC individuals using a 1-year cycle length and 30-year time horizon to estimate the cost effectiveness of RZV. Inputs were sourced from clinical trial results and publicly available sources/literature. Modeled populations included US adult HSCT recipients (base case), patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), patients with breast cancer, patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma, and renal transplant recipients. The model reported societal costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity and threshold analyses were conducted. RESULTS: In the base case of 19,671 US adult HSCT recipients, RZV resulted in total societal cost savings of US$0.1 million and 109 incremental QALYs versus no vaccine. RZV was a 'dominant strategy' versus no vaccine because vaccination resulted in cost savings with QALY gains. RZV was also cost saving in renal transplant recipients, and cost effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$100,000 per QALY gained in patients with HIV, breast cancer, and Hodgkin's lymphoma, with ICERs of US$33,268, US$67,682, and US$95,972 per QALY gained, respectively, versus no vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Model results show RZV is potentially cost saving for the prevention of HZ in US adult HSCT recipients and US adults with selected immunocompromising conditions, and cost effective for others, supporting the use of RZV to prevent HZ and HZ-related complications in IC adults.

Clin-STAR corner: Practice changing advances in prescribing for geriatric emergency department patients.

Reducing adverse drug events among older adults in heterogeneous and often chaotic emergency department (ED) settings requires a multidisciplinary approach. Recent research evaluates the impact of multicomponent protocols designed to reduce ED physician prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), including transdisciplinary training and leveraging electronic health records to provide real-time alternative safer pharmaceuticals while providing personalized feedback to prescribers. Most new research is not randomized trial data. Although this current research does not consistently demonstrate a reduction in the prescribing of PIMs, these studies provide a foundation for emergency medicine healthcare teams, geriatricians, and pharmacists to collaborate with health informatics to continue advancing the frontiers of safer medication prescribing during episodes of acute care.

Implementation of geriatric screening in the emergency department using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

OBJECTIVE: Implementation of evidence-based care processes (EBP) into the emergency department (ED) is challenging and there are only a few studies of real-world use of theory-based implementation frameworks. We report final implementation results and sustainability of an EBP geriatric screening program in the ED using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). METHODS: The EBP involved nurses screening older patients for delirium (Delirium Triage Screen), fall risk (4-Stage Balance Test), and vulnerability (Identification of Seniors at Risk score) with subsequent appropriate referrals to physicians, therapy specialists, or social workers. The proportions of screened adults ≥65 years old were tracked monthly. Outcomes are reported January 2021-December 2022. Barriers encountered were classified according to CFIR. Implementation strategies were classified according to the CFIR-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC). RESULTS: Implementation strategies increased geriatric screening from 5% to 68%. This did not meet our prespecified goal of 80%. Change was sustained through several COVID-19 waves. Inner setting barriers included culture and implementation climate. Initially, the ED was treated as a single inner setting, but we found different cultures and uptake between ED units, including night versus day shifts. Characteristics of individuals barriers included high levels of staff turnover in both clinical and administrative roles and very low self-efficacy from stress and staff turnover. Initial attempts with individualized audit and feedback were not successful in improving self-efficacy and may have caused moral injury. Adjusting feedback to a team/unit level approach with unitwide stretch goals worked better. Identifying early adopters and conducting on-shift education increased uptake. Lessons learned regarding ED culture, implementation in interconnected health systems, and rapid cycle process improvement are reported. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic exacerbated barriers to implementation in the ED. Cognizance of a large ED as a sum of smaller units and using the CFIR model resulted in improvements.

Guidelines for reasonable and appropriate care in the emergency department 3 (GRACE-3): Acute dizziness and vertigo in the emergency department.

This third Guideline for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE-3) from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine is on the topic adult patients with acute dizziness and vertigo in the emergency department (ED). A multidisciplinary guideline panel applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations regarding five questions for adult ED patients with acute dizziness of less than 2 weeks' duration. The intended population is adults presenting to the ED with acute dizziness or vertigo. The panel derived 15 evidence-based recommendations based on the timing and triggers of the dizziness but recognizes that alternative diagnostic approaches exist, such as the STANDING protocol and nystagmus examination in combination with gait unsteadiness or the presence of vascular risk factors. As an overarching recommendation, (1) emergency clinicians should receive training in bedside physical examination techniques for patients with the acute vestibular syndrome (AVS; HINTS) and the diagnostic and therapeutic maneuvers for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV; Dix-Hallpike test and Epley maneuver). To help distinguish central from peripheral causes in patients with the AVS, we recommend: (2) use HINTS (for clinicians trained in its use) in patients with nystagmus, (3) use finger rub to further aid in excluding stroke in patients with nystagmus, (4) use severity of gait unsteadiness in patients without nystagmus, (5) do not use brain computed tomography (CT), (6) do not use routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a first-line test if a clinician trained in HINTS is available, and (7) use MRI as a confirmatory test in patients with central or equivocal HINTS examinations. In patients with the spontaneous episodic vestibular syndrome: (8) search for symptoms or signs of cerebral ischemia, (9) do not use CT, and (10) use CT angiography or MRI angiography if there is concern for transient ischemic attack. In patients with the triggered (positional) episodic vestibular syndrome, (11) use the Dix-Hallpike test to diagnose posterior canal BPPV (pc-BPPV), (12) do not use CT, and (13) do not use MRI routinely, unless atypical clinical features are present. In patients diagnosed with vestibular neuritis, (14) consider short-term steroids as a treatment option. In patients diagnosed with pc-BPPV, (15) treat with the Epley maneuver. It is clear that as of 2023, when applied in routine practice by emergency clinicians without special training, HINTS testing is inaccurate, partly due to use in the wrong patients and partly due to issues with its interpretation. Most emergency physicians have not received training in use of HINTS. As such, it is not standard of care, either in the legal sense of that term ("what the average physician would do in similar circumstances") or in the common parlance sense ("the standard action typically used by physicians in routine practice").

Epley maneuver for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo: Evidence synthesis for guidelines for reasonable and appropriate care in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Canalith repositioning maneuvers (such as the Epley maneuver) are recommended by specialty guidelines for management of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) yet are frequently underutilized in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of systematic reviews to summarize the evidence of Epley maneuver for the treatment of posterior canal (pc) BPPV in any setting. We included systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared Epley to control in adult patients with pc-BPPV. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened in duplicate. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment was used to rate certainty of evidence. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported. Meta-analysis of individual studies was conducted with random and fixed effects. RESULTS: From 2,228 titles, 7 systematic reviews were selected for quality assessment. One review was of higher methodological quality, included only RCTs, and was the most current and comprehensive. Five of the 11 RCTs of the review, including 312 patients with pc-BPPV diagnosed by Dix-Hallpike, were relevant to our question. Meta-analysis of 4 RCTs (251 patients) showed the use of Epley (as compared to control) was associated with higher complete resolution of vertigo at 1 week (OR 7.19, CI 1.52 to 33.98, moderate certainty). Meta-analysis of 3 RCTs (195 patients) showed the use of Epley was associated with higher conversion to negative Dix-Hallpike at 1 week (OR 6.67, CI 1.52 to 33.98, moderate certainty). The number-needed-to-treat was 3. Meta-analysis of the outcomes at 1 month, and when observational studies were included, showed similar results. No serious adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms of pc-BPPV improve with the Epley maneuver. Emergency clinicians should become familiar with performing the Epley for BPPV. Further studies on ED implementation and clinician education of Epley are needed.

Toward rational use of repeat imaging in children with mild traumatic brain injuries and intracranial injuries.

OBJECTIVE: Limited evidence exists on the utility of repeat neuroimaging in children with mild traumatic brain injuries (mTBIs) and intracranial injuries (ICIs). Here, the authors identified factors associated with repeat neuroimaging and predictors of hemorrhage progression and/or neurosurgical intervention. METHODS: The authors performed a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of children at four centers of the Pediatric TBI Research Consortium. All patients were ≤ 18 years and presented within 24 hours of injury with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 13-15 and evidence of ICI on neuroimaging. The outcomes of interest were 1) whether patients underwent repeat neuroimaging during index admission, and 2) a composite outcome of progression of previously identified hemorrhage ≥ 25% and/or repeat imaging as an indication for subsequent neurosurgical intervention. The authors performed multivariable logistic regression and report odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 1324 patients met inclusion criteria; 41.3% of patients underwent repeat imaging. Repeat imaging was associated with clinical change in 4.8% of patients; the remainder of the imaging tests were for routine surveillance (90.9%) or of unclear prompting (4.4%). In 2.6% of patients, repeat imaging findings were reported as an indication for neurosurgical intervention. While many factors were associated with repeat neuroimaging, only epidural hematoma (OR 3.99, 95% CI 2.22-7.15), posttraumatic seizures (OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.22-7.41), and age ≥ 2 years (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.16-4.36) were significant predictors of hemorrhage progression and/or neurosurgery. Of patients without any of these risk factors, none underwent neurosurgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Repeat neuroimaging was commonly used but uncommonly associated with clinical deterioration. Although several factors were associated with repeat neuroimaging, only posttraumatic seizures, age ≥ 2 years, and epidural hematoma were significant predictors of hemorrhage progression and/or neurosurgery. These results provide the foundation for evidence-based repeat neuroimaging practices in children with mTBI and ICI.

A Critical Appraisal of AHRQ's "Diagnostic Errors" Report.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) report "Diagnostic Errors in the Emergency Department" generated significant mass media interest with negative implications for the safety of contemporary emergency care. The assumptions and methodology underlying this report are problematic, while multiple ongoing efforts to improve the quality and quantity of diagnostic research are missed, neglected, or ignored. The AHRQ report identifies reasonable target diseases for targeting diagnostic quality improvement efforts, as well as viable methods by which to measure any initiatives impact on diagnostic error. We note additional opportunities to improve the status quo by funding emergency department-based diagnostic research and healthcare system-level patient safety research and highlighting innovative approaches to diagnostic science within emergency medicine.

Leveraging the Electronic Health Record to Implement Emergency Department Delirium Screening.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to understand how emergency departments (EDs) use health information technology (HIT), and specifically the electronic health record (EHR), to support implementation of delirium screening. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 23 ED clinician-administrators, representing 20 EDs, about how they used HIT resources to implement delirium screening. Interviews focused on challenges participants experienced when implementing ED delirium screening and EHR-based strategies they used to overcome them. We coded interview transcripts using dimensions from the Singh and Sittig sociotechnical model, which addresses use of HIT in complex adaptive health care systems. Subsequently, we analyzed data for common themes across dimensions of the sociotechnical model. RESULTS: Three themes emerged about how the EHR could be used to address challenges in implementation of delirium screening: (1) staff adherence to screening, (2) communication among ED team members about a positive screen, and (3) linking positive screening to delirium management. Participants described several HIT-based strategies including visual nudges, icons, hard stop alerts, order sets, and automated communications that facilitated implementation of delirium screening. An additional theme emerged about challenges related to the availability of HIT resources. CONCLUSION: Our findings provide practical HIT-based strategies for health care institutions planning to adopt geriatric screenings. Building delirium screening tools and reminders to perform screening into the EHR may prompt adherence to screening. Automating related workflows, team communication, and management of patients who screen positive for delirium may help save staff members' time. Staff education, engagement, and access to HIT resources may support successful screening implementation.