Intradermal injection for hiccup therapy in the Emergency Department.

Hiccup is a condition caused by involuntary contraction of inspiratory muscles, especially the diaphragm. Although it is generally considered as a physiological. response, if hiccup persists for a long time, it can lead to many undesirable conditions such as depression, weight loss, insomnia, and fatigue. A 35-year-old male patient was admitted to our emergency department with hiccup lasting for 15 h. He had a history of several hiccup attacks. Classical non-pharmacological and pharmacological therapies were used to treat the condition without any response. As an alternative method, an intradermal injection was applied. A mixture of thiocolchicoside and lidocaine was administered intradermally to a depth of 1-3 mm at the epigastric region and adjacent to the sternocleidomastoid muscle. The patient's hiccup ended after the intradermal injection procedure. During 48 h of follow-up the hiccup attack did not develop again. No complications related to the process were detected. This is the first case in the literature demonstrating the use of intradermal injection to terminate hiccups. The intradermal injection approach can be administered in cases of hiccups that do not respond to medical treatment.

Effectiveness of Modified HEART Score in Predicting Major Adverse Cardiac Events.

OBJECTIVE: The most important problem for emergency physicians in patients presenting with chest pain is deciding whether to discharge the patient or not. Therefore, many scoring systems have been developed to help with this decision making process. We aim to achieve a modified HEART value by combining the VAS value with the HEART score. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected on age, sex, duration of the symptoms, pain severity using a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS), and the presence of a major adverse cardiac event (MACE). The HEART score was calculated and modified (mHEART) by adding 1 point to the total HEART score for a VAS score of ≥7. RESULTS: During the study period, 4781 patients were admitted, and 293 participants were analyzed. Of the patients, 34(11.6%) experienced MACE within a month after the encounter. The mean VAS scores were 5.65±1.44. However, 77(26.3%) patients had VAS scores ≥7. Taking 3 as the threshold, 42(14.3%) patients had HEART scores of 4 and above, where 47(16.0%) had mHEART scores ≥4. The mHEART scoring demonstrated better test indicators than the HEART score. According to the HEART score, 6(2.3%) of the 251 patients predicted as negative would develop MACE, but this number decreased to 1(0.4%) in 246 using the mHEART score. CONCLUSION: Although the HEART score performs reasonably well in discriminating patients who are MACE negative, it is possible to further improve the score by adding the VAS item. After validation by other studies, we would suggest modifying the HEART score by including the VAS item.