Alcohol Prevention in Urgent and Emergency Care (APUEC): Development and Evaluation of Workforce Digital Training on Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral for Treatment.

Excessive alcohol consumption carries a significant health, social and economic burden. Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is one approach to identifying patients with excessive alcohol consumption and providing interventions to help them reduce their drinking. However, healthcare workers in urgent and emergency care settings do not routinely integrate SBIRT into clinical practice and raise a lack of training as a barrier to SBIRT delivery. Therefore, "Alcohol Prevention in Urgent and Emergency Care" (APUEC) training was developed, delivered, and evaluated. APUEC is a brief, stand-alone, multimedia, interactive digital training package for healthcare workers. The aim of APUEC is to increase positive attitudes, knowledge, confidence and skills related to SBIRT through the provision of (a) education on the impact of alcohol and the role of urgent and emergency care in alcohol prevention, and (b) practical guidance on patient assessment, delivery of brief advice and making referral decisions. Development involved collaborative-participatory design approaches and a rigorous six-step ASPIRE methodology (involving n = 28 contributors). APUEC was delivered to healthcare workers who completed an online survey (n = 18) and then participated in individual qualitative interviews (n = 15). Analysis of data was aligned with Levels 1-3 of the Kirkpatrick Model of Training Evaluation. Survey data showed that all participants (100%) found the training useful and would recommend it to others. Insights from the qualitative data showed that APUEC digital training increases healthcare workers' perceived knowledge, confidence and skills related to alcohol prevention in urgent and emergency care settings. Participants viewed APUEC to be engaging and relevant to urgent and emergency care workers. This digital training was perceived to be useful for workforce skills development and supporting the implementation of SBIRT in clinical practice. While the impact of APUEC on clinician behaviour and patient outcomes is yet to be tested, APUEC digital training could easily be embedded within education and continuing professional development programmes for healthcare workers and healthcare trainees of any discipline. Ultimately, this may facilitate the integration of SBIRT into routine care and contribute to population health improvement.

Effectiveness and implementation of interventions for health promotion in urgent and emergency care settings: an umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Urgent and emergency care (UEC) settings provide an opportunity to prevent ill-health and promote healthy lifestyles with potential to screen and deliver interventions to under-served, at-risk populations. The aim of this study was to synthesise and summarise the evidence on the effectiveness and implementation of interventions for health promotion in UEC settings. METHODS: PubMed and Embase (OVID) databases were used to search for studies published in English between January 2010 and January 2023. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that examined the effectiveness or implementation of face-to-face health promotion interventions for lifestyle behaviours delivered in UEC settings were eligible. Extracted data were synthesised and qualitatively summarised by lifestyle behaviour. Reviews were quality assessed using AMSTAR 2. RESULTS: Eighteen reviews met the inclusion criteria; all included studies were conducted in emergency departments or trauma units. We identified 15 reviews on alcohol interventions (13 on effectiveness; 2 on implementation) and 3 on smoking interventions (effectiveness). There were no reviews of intervention studies targeting physical activity or diet and nutrition. There was heterogeneity across studies for study design, target populations, intervention design and content, comparator/control groups and outcomes assessed. The effectiveness of alcohol and smoking interventions in UEC settings varied but some reviews provided evidence of a significant decrease in alcohol consumption, alcohol-related outcomes and smoking in intervention groups, particularly in the short-term and in specific population groups. Research has focused on 'brief' interventions as part of screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) approaches. Interventions are delivered by a wide range of staff with substantial variation in design. Alcohol brief interventions appear to be acceptable to UEC patients but clinicians face barriers in delivering them. CONCLUSIONS: UEC settings have been under-researched and appear to be under-utilised for delivering health promotion activities, except for alcohol prevention. Review level evidence suggests alcohol and smoking interventions are warranted in some population groups. However, further research is needed to determine the optimal intervention design, content and delivery mode for lifestyle behaviours which are suitable for implementation in UEC settings and promote long-term intervention effectiveness. Changes in clinical practice may be needed, including increased training, integration into service delivery and supportive policy, to facilitate the implementation of SBIRT for lifestyle behaviours. Interventions may need to be delivered in the wider UEC system such as urgent care centres, minor injury units and walk-in centres, in addition to emergency departments and trauma units, to support and increase health promotion activities in UEC settings.

Methoxyflurane Analgesia in Adult Patients in the Emergency Department: A Subgroup Analysis of a Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study (STOP!).

INTRODUCTION: Acute pain remains highly prevalent in the Emergency Department (ED) setting. This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled UK study investigated the efficacy and safety of low-dose methoxyflurane analgesia for the treatment of acute pain in the ED in the adult population of the STOP! trial. METHODS: Patients presenting to the ED requiring analgesia for acute pain (pain score of 4-7 on the Numerical Rating Scale) due to minor trauma were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive methoxyflurane (up to 6 mL) or placebo (normal saline), both via a Penthrox® (Medical Developments International Limited, Scoresby, Australia) inhaler. Rescue medication (paracetamol/opioids) was available immediately upon request. Change from baseline in visual analog scale (VAS) pain intensity was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: 300 adult and adolescent patients were randomized; data are presented for the adult subgroup (N = 204). Mean baseline VAS pain score was ~66 mm in both groups. The mean change from baseline to 5, 10, 15 and 20 min was greater for methoxyflurane (-20.7, -27.4, -33.3 and -34.8 mm, respectively) than placebo (-8.0, -11.1, -12.3 and -15.2 mm, respectively). The primary analysis showed a highly significant treatment effect overall across all four time points (-17.4 mm; 95% confidence interval: -22.3 to -12.5 mm; p < 0.0001). Median time to first pain relief was 5 min with methoxyflurane [versus 20 min with placebo; (hazard ratio: 2.32; 95% CI: 1.63, 3.30; p < 0.0001)]; 79.4% of methoxyflurane-treated patients experienced pain relief within 1-10 inhalations. 22.8% of placebo-treated patients requested rescue medication within 20 min compared with 2.0% of methoxyflurane-treated patients (p = 0.0003). Methoxyflurane treatment was rated 'Excellent', 'Very Good' or 'Good' by 77.6% of patients, 74.5% of physicians and 72.5% of nurses. Treatment-related adverse events (mostly dizziness/headache) were reported by 42.2% of patients receiving methoxyflurane and 14.9% of patients receiving placebo; none caused withdrawal and the majority were mild and transient. CONCLUSION: The results of this study support the evidence from previous trials that low-dose methoxyflurane administered via the Penthrox inhaler is a well-tolerated, efficacious and rapid-acting analgesic. FUNDING: Medical Developments International (MDI) Limited and Mundipharma Research GmbH & Co.KG. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01420159, EudraCT number: 2011-000338-12.

Can emergency nurses use the Canadian cervical spine rule to reduce unnecessary patient immobilisation?

The Canadian c-spine rule (CCR) allows safe, reproducible use of radiography in alert, stable patients with potential c-spine injury in the emergency setting [Stiell, I., Clement, C., McKnight, R., Brison, R., Schull, M., Lowe, B., Worthington, J., Eisenhauer, M., Cass, D., Greenberg, G., MacPhail, I., Dreyer, J., Lee, J., Bandiera, G., Reardon, M., Holroyd, B., Lesiuk, H., G. Wells, 2003. The Canadian c-spine rule versus the nexus low-risk criteria in patients with trauma. The New England journal of medicine 349 (26), 2510-2518; Stiell, I., Wells, G., Vandemheen, K., Clement, C., 2001. The Canadian c-spine rule for radiography in alert and stable trauma patients. JAMA 286 (15), 1841]. This paper reports on a study of emergency nurses' ability to identify patients requiring immobilisation using the CCR. Emergency department triage nurses (N = 112) were trained in the use of the CCR and then asked to use the tool over the following 14 months in the assessment of 460 patients who presented with potential c-spine injury. Trained medical staff repeated 55% of the clinical assessments independently using the rule. The level of agreement between nurse and medical judgement was calculated. The inter-rater reliability using the kappa statistic was 0.6 (95% CI 0.50-0.62 N = 254) indicating a 'good' level of agreement. The majority of nurses indicated they were comfortable using the rule. The results suggest that UK emergency department nurses were able to use the Canadian c-spine rule to successfully guide selective immobilisation. A 25% reduction in immobilisation rates would have been achieved if the rule had been followed. Further studies are needed to test the reduction in levels of immobilisation that could be achieved in clinical practice.