RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Severe psychomotor agitation and aggression often require immediate pharmacological intervention, but clear evidence-based recommendations for choosing among the multiple options are lacking. To address this gap, we plan a systematic review and individual-participant-data network meta-analysis to investigate their comparative effectiveness in real-world emergency settings with increased precision. METHODS: We will include randomized controlled trials investigating intramuscular or intravenous pharmacological interventions, as monotherapy or in combination, in adults with severe psychomotor agitation irrespective of the underlying diagnosis and requiring rapid tranquilization in general or psychiatric emergency settings. We will exclude studies before 2002, those focusing on specific reasons for agitation and placebo-controlled trials to avoid concerns related to the transitivity assumption and potential selection biases. We will search for eligible studies in BIOSIS, CENTRAL, CINAHL Plus, Embase, LILACS, MEDLINE via Ovid, PubMed, ProQuest, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO-ICTRP. Individual-participant data will be requested from the study authors and harmonized into a uniform format, and aggregated data will also be extracted from the studies. At least two independent reviewers will conduct the study selection, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment using RoB 2, and applicability evaluation using the RITES tool. The primary outcome will be the number of patients achieving adequate sedation within 30 min after treatment, with secondary outcomes including the need for additional interventions and adverse events, using odds ratios as the effect size. If enough individual-participant data will be collected, we will synthesize them in a network meta-regression model within a Bayesian framework, incorporating study- and participant-level characteristics to explore potential sources of heterogeneity. In cases where individual-participant data are unavailable, potential data availability bias will be explored, and models allowing for the inclusion of studies reporting only aggregated data will be considered. We will assess the confidence in the evidence using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) approach. DISCUSSION: This individual-participant-data network meta-analysis aims to provide a fine-tuned synthesis of the evidence on the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for severe psychomotor agitation in real-world emergency settings. The findings from this study can greatly be provided clearer evidence-based guidance on the most effective treatments. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023402365.
Asunto(s)
Metaanálisis en Red , Agitación Psicomotora , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto , Humanos , Agitación Psicomotora/tratamiento farmacológico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Proyectos de Investigación , Antipsicóticos/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Acute severe behavioural disturbance (ASBD) is a condition seen with increasing frequency in emergency departments (EDs) in adults and young people. Despite the increasing number of presentations and significant associated risks to patients, families and caregivers, there is limited evidence to guide the most effective pharmacological management in children and adolescents. The aim of this study is to determine whether a single dose of intramuscular olanzapine is more effective than intramuscular droperidol at successfully sedating young people with ASBD requiring intramuscular sedation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a multicentre, open-label, superiority randomised controlled trial. Young people aged between 9 and 17 years and 364 days presenting to an ED with ASBD who are deemed to require medication for behavioural containment will be recruited to the study. Participants will be randomised in a 1:1 allocation between a single weight-based dose of intramuscular olanzapine and intramuscular droperidol. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants who achieve successful sedation at 1-hour post randomisation without the need for additional sedation. Secondary outcomes will include assessing for adverse events, additional medications provided in the ED, further episodes of ASBD, length of stay in the ED and hospital and satisfaction with management.Effectiveness will be determined using an intention-to-treat analysis, with medication efficacy determined as part of the secondary outcomes using a per-protocol analysis. The primary outcome of successful sedation at 1 hour will be presented as a percentage within each treatment group, with comparisons presented as a risk difference with its 95% CIs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was received from the Royal Children's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/69948/RCHM-2021). This incorporated a waiver of informed consent for the study. The findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and at academic conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621001238864.
Asunto(s)
Droperidol , Prunus persica , Adulto , Adolescente , Humanos , Niño , Recién Nacido , Droperidol/uso terapéutico , Olanzapina/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Multicéntricos como AsuntoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Acute severe behavioural disturbance (ASBD) is a condition seen with increasing frequency in emergency departments (EDs) in adults and young people. Despite the increasing number of presentations and significant associated risks to patients, families and caregivers, there is limited evidence to guide the most effective pharmacological management in children and adolescents. The aim of this study is to determine whether a single dose of oral olanzapine is more effective than a dose of oral diazepam at successfully sedating young people with ASBD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a multicentre, open-label, superiority randomised controlled trial. Young people aged between 9 years and 17 years and 364 days presenting to an ED with ASBD who are deemed to require medication for behavioural containment will be recruited to the study. Participants will be randomised in a 1:1 allocation between a single weight-based dose of oral olanzapine and oral diazepam. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants who achieve successful sedation at 1-hour post randomisation without the need for additional sedation. Secondary outcomes will include assessing for adverse events, additional medications provided in the ED, further episodes of ASBD, length of stay in the ED and hospital and satisfaction with management.Effectiveness will be determined using an intention-to-treat analysis, with medication efficacy determined as part of the secondary outcomes using a per-protocol analysis. The primary outcome of successful sedation at 1 hour will be presented as a percentage within each treatment group, with comparisons presented as a risk difference with its 95% CIs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was received from the Royal Children's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/66478/RCHM-2020). This incorporated a waiver of informed consent for the study. The findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and at academic conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621001236886.
Asunto(s)
Prunus persica , Adulto , Adolescente , Humanos , Niño , Recién Nacido , Olanzapina , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Multicéntricos como AsuntoRESUMEN
Unexpected donor-derived infections of hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and HIV are rare but important potential complications of deceased organ transplantation. The prevalence of recently acquired (yield) infections has not been previously described in a national cohort of Australian deceased organ donors. Donor yield infections are of particularly significance, as they can be used to gain insights in the incidence of disease in the donor pool and in turn, estimate the risk of unexpected disease transmission to recipients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who commenced workup for donation in Australia between 2014 and 2020. Yield cases were defined by having both unreactive serological screening for current or previous infection and reactive nucleic acid testing screening on initial and repeat testing. Incidence was calculated using a yield window estimate and residual risk using the incidence/window period model. Results: The review identified only a single yield infection of HBV in 3724 persons who commenced donation workup. There were no yield cases of HIV or HCV. There were no yield infections in donors with increased viral risk behaviors. The prevalence of HBV, HCV, and HIV was 0.06% (0.01-0.22), 0.00% (0-0.11), and 0.00% (0-0.11), respectively. The residual risk of HBV was estimated to be 0.021% (0.001-0.119). Conclusions: The prevalence of recently acquired HBV, HCV, and HIV in Australians who commence workup for deceased donation is low. This novel application of yield-case-methodology has produced estimates of unexpected disease transmission which are modest, particularly when contrasted with local average waitlist mortality. Supplemental Visual Abstract; http://links.lww.com/TXD/A503.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Acute severe behavioural disturbance (ASBD) is a condition seen with increasing frequency in EDs. It poses a significant risk to the patient and those around them. Little is known about the epidemiology or most effective management in the paediatric population. The aim of the present study is to clarify the practice of senior emergency doctors in Australia when managing paediatric ASBD. METHODS: The present study was a voluntary electronic questionnaire distributed to and undertaken by senior medical staff in EDs affiliated with the Paediatric Research in Emergency Departments International Collaborative (PREDICT) network. Respondents reported on exposure to and confidence in managing paediatric ASBD and their current practices. RESULTS: A total of 227 (33%) clinicians completed the survey between February and May 2020. Most clinicians were caring for at least two young people with ASBD each week (72%), felt confident regarding the majority of components of management and referred to local clinical practice guidelines (69%). Agitation/sedation rating scales were seldom used (19%). There was a significant variation in self-reported management practices. The choice of whether to use medication at all, the medication chosen and route of administration all varied greatly. Respondents were more willing to provide parenteral medication to young people reported as having recreational drug intoxication (84%) than those with neurodevelopment disorders (65%) when the same degree of agitation was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Within Australia, there is considerable variation in paediatric ASBD practice, in particular regarding medication provision. Further prospective research is required to inform best clinical practice.
Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Cuerpo Médico , Humanos , Niño , Adolescente , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Australia , AutoinformeRESUMEN
Internationally, the designation of a patient as an increased viral risk organ donor has been associated with lower utilisation rates. The actual prevalence of blood borne viruses in Australian potential organ donors, and the predictive performance of questionnaires administered to stratify this risk, remains unknown. We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who commenced workup for donation on the national database between 2014-2020. The prevalence of HIV, Active HBV and Active HCV in 3650 potential organ donors was 0.16%, 0.9%, and 2.2%, respectively. The behavioural risk profile was assessed in a subset of 3633 patients. Next-of-kin reported increased risk behaviours were associated with an increased prevalence of HCV but not of HIV or HBV (OR 13.8, p < 0.01, OR 0.3. p = 0.42, OR 1.5, p = 0.14). Furthermore, the majority of HIV and HBV infections occurred in potential donors without a disclosed history of increased risk behaviours. In this series, donors had a higher prevalence of HCV, and similar rates of HBV and HIV to the broader community. Behavioural transmission risks were poorly predictive of HIV and HBV. Rather than pre-transplantation behavioural risk screening, routine post-transplant recipient screening may provide a more powerful tool in mitigating the consequences of unexpected viral transmission.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por VIH , Hepatitis C , Virus , Australia/epidemiología , Infecciones por VIH/prevención & control , Hepatitis C/epidemiología , Humanos , Prevalencia , Donantes de TejidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Many COVID-19 patients are discharged home from hospital with instructions to self-isolate. This reduces the burden on potentially overwhelmed hospitals. The Royal Melbourne Hospital (RMH) Home Monitoring Programme (HMP) is a model of care for COVID-19 patients which chiefly tracks pulse oximetry and body temperature readings. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the HMP from a patient perspective. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: Of 46 COVID-19 patients who used the HMP through RMH during April to August 2020, 16 were invited to participate in this qualitative evaluation study; all accepted, including 6 healthcare workers. Attempts were made to recruit a gender-balanced sample across a range of COVID-19 severities and comorbidities. Participants completed a brief semistructured phone interview discussing their experience of using the HMP. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: A thematic analysis of interview data was conducted. Feasibility was defined as the HMP's reported ease of use. Acceptability was considered holistically by reviewing themes in the interview data. RESULTS: The HMP allowed clinical deterioration to be recognised as it occurred enabling prompt intervention. All participants reported a positive opinion of the HMP, stating it was highly acceptable and easy to use. Almost all participants said they found using it reassuring. Patients frequently mentioned the importance of the monitoring clinicians as an information conduit. The most suggested improvement was to monitor a broader set of symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The HMP is highly feasible and acceptable to patients. This model of care could potentially be implemented on a mass-scale to reduce the burden of COVID-19 on hospitals. A key benefit of the HMP is the ability to reassure patients they will receive suitable intervention should they deteriorate while isolating outside of hospital settings.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , Hospitales , Humanos , Monitoreo Fisiológico , Investigación CualitativaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The impact of substance use disorders (SUD) in an Asian population has not been fully explored. We aimed to assess the risk of mortality, accident and emergency (A&E) department attendances, and hospital admissions associated with SUD in a population-based cohort study. METHOD: Patients diagnosed with SUD in public A&E departments from 2004 to 2016 (N = 8,423) were identified in the Clinical Database Analysis and Reporting System of the Hong Kong Hospital Authority and 1:1 matched to patients without SUD by propensity score (N = 6,074 in each group). Relative risks of mortality, A&E attendances and hospital admissions were assessed using Cox regression and Hurdle negative binomial regression. RESULTS: Patients with SUD had higher mortality (hazard ratio=1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.26-1.62) and more often died from poisoning or toxicity and injuries. The odds ratio (OR) for A&E attendances and all-cause hospital admissions associated with SUD were 2.80 (95% CI=2.58-3.04) and 3.54 (95% CI=3.26-3.83), respectively. The impact of SUD on the above outcomes was greatest among school-aged individuals (≤â¯21 years) and decreased with age. The relative risk of mental disorder-related hospital admissions was much higher than that for infections, respiratory diseases, and cardiovascular diseases. In patients with SUD, ketamine and amphetamine use were associated with increased A&E attendances than opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: SUD was associated with increased mortality, A&E attendances and hospital admissions, especially in school-aged individuals. Our findings suggest prioritising early treatment and preventive interventions for school-aged individuals and focusing on the management of comorbid mental disorders and the use of ketamine and amphetamine.
Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides , Niño , Estudios de Cohortes , Hong Kong/epidemiología , Hospitales , HumanosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The threat of a pandemic, over and above the disease itself, may have significant and broad effects on a healthcare system. We aimed to describe the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (during a relatively low transmission period) and associated societal restrictions on presentations, admissions and outpatient visits. DESIGN: We compared hospital activity in 2020 with the preceding 5 years, 2015-2019, using a retrospective cohort study design. SETTING: Quaternary hospital in Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Emergency department presentations, hospital admissions and outpatient visits from 1 January 2015 to 30 June 2020, n=896 934 episodes of care. INTERVENTION: In Australia, the initial peak COVID-19 phase was March-April. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Separate linear regression models were fitted to estimate the impact of the pandemic on the number, type and severity of emergency presentations, hospital admissions and outpatient visits. RESULTS: During the peak COVID-19 phase (March and April 2020), there were marked reductions in emergency presentations (10 389 observed vs 14 678 expected; 29% reduction; p<0.05) and hospital admissions (5972 observed vs 8368 expected; 28% reduction; p<0.05). Stroke (114 observed vs 177 expected; 35% reduction; p<0.05) and trauma (1336 observed vs 1764 expected; 24% reduction; p<0.05) presentations decreased; acute myocardial infarctions were unchanged. There was an increase in the proportion of hospital admissions requiring intensive care (7.0% observed vs 6.0% expected; p<0.05) or resulting in death (2.2% observed vs 1.5% expected; p<0.05). Outpatient attendances remained similar (30 267 observed vs 31 980 expected; 5% reduction; not significant) but telephone/telehealth consultations increased from 2.5% to 45% (p<0.05) of total consultations. CONCLUSIONS: Although case numbers of COVID-19 were relatively low in Australia during the first 6 months of 2020, the impact on hospital activity was profound.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Telemedicina , Australia/epidemiología , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Servicio Ambulatorio en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Telemedicina/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The safety and effectiveness of intramuscular olanzapine or haloperidol compared to midazolam as the initial pharmacological treatment for acute agitation in emergency departments (EDs) has not been evaluated. METHODS: A pragmatic, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial was conducted from December 2014 to September 2019, in six Hong Kong EDs. Patients (aged 18-75 years) with undifferentiated acute agitation requiring parenteral sedation were randomised to 5 mg intramuscular midazolam (n = 56), olanzapine (n = 54), or haloperidol (n = 57). Primary outcomes were time to adequate sedation and proportion of patients who achieved adequate sedation at each follow-up interval. Sedation levels were measured on a 6-level validated scale (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02380118). FINDINGS: Of 206 patients randomised, 167 (mean age, 42 years; 98 [58·7%] male) were analysed. Median time to sedation for IM midazolam, olanzapine, and haloperidol was 8·5 (IQR 8·0), 11·5 (IQR 30·0), and 23·0 (IQR 21·0) min, respectively. At 60 min, similar proportions of patients were adequately sedated (98%, 87%, and 97%). There were statistically significant differences for time to sedation with midazolam compared to olanzapine (p = 0·03) and haloperidol (p = 0·002). Adverse event rates were similar across the three arms. Dystonia (n = 1) and cardiac arrest (n = 1) were reported in the haloperidol group. INTERPRETATION: Midazolam resulted in faster sedation in patients with undifferentiated agitation in the emergency setting compared to olanzapine and haloperidol. Midazolam and olanzapine are preferred over haloperidol's slower time to sedation and potential for cardiovascular and extrapyramidal side effects. FUNDING: Research Grants Council, Hong Kong.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To assess patient satisfaction with laceration management, post-ED care, cosmesis and complication rates. METHODS: We undertook a prospective observational study of adult patients with lacerations sutured in two EDs over a 4-month period. ED data included participant demographics, laceration characteristics and management. A telephone survey was undertaken approximately 14 days post-ED discharge. Patient satisfaction with post-ED pain management, advice on wound care and follow up, overall management and wound cosmesis were evaluated using a six-item satisfaction scale (very dissatisfied to very satisfied). Details of wound infection, dehiscence and suture failure were recorded. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients participated. The number (% [95% confidence interval]) of patients very satisfied with their laceration management were: post-ED pain management 55 (62.5% [51.5-72.4]), wound care advice 51 (57.3% [46.4-67.6]), follow-up advice 39 (43.8% [33.5-54.7]), overall management 61 (68.5% [57.7-77.7]) and cosmetic appearance 46 (51.7% [40.9-62.3]). Infection, dehiscence and suture failure occurred in 5 (5.6%), 8 (9.0%) and 8 (9.0%) cases, respectively. These complications were not associated with being very satisfied overall (P = 0.96). Patients very satisfied with post-ED pain management, wound care advice, follow-up advice or wound cosmesis were much more likely to be very satisfied overall (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients are very satisfied with their laceration management. However, there is scope for improvement, especially for follow-up and wound care advice. Complications are infrequent and not associated with overall satisfaction.
Asunto(s)
Laceraciones , Adulto , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Humanos , Laceraciones/cirugía , Satisfacción del Paciente , Estudios Prospectivos , SuturasRESUMEN
Presenting research at a conference is an opportunity to disseminate the findings, network with other researchers, and to develop your academic track record. Although every conference will have some local differences, there are common approaches to presenting your research in the best manner. This will differ depending on whether it is an oral or a poster presentation. This research primer aims to support researchers in the early stages of their careers to undertake the best possible presentation.
RESUMEN
The prevention of suicide and suicide-related behaviour are key policy priorities in Australia and internationally. The World Health Organization has recommended that member states develop self-harm surveillance systems as part of their suicide prevention efforts. This is also a priority under Australia's Fifth National Mental Health and Suicide Prevention Plan. The aim of this paper is to describe the development of a state-based self-harm monitoring system in Victoria, Australia. In this system, data on all self-harm presentations are collected from eight hospital emergency departments in Victoria. A natural language processing classifier that uses machine learning to identify episodes of self-harm is currently being developed. This uses the free-text triage case notes, together with certain structured data fields, contained within the metadata of the incoming records. Post-processing is undertaken to identify primary mechanism of injury, substances consumed (including alcohol, illicit drugs and pharmaceutical preparations) and presence of psychiatric disorders. This system will ultimately leverage routinely collected data in combination with advanced artificial intelligence methods to support robust community-wide monitoring of self-harm. Once fully operational, this system will provide accurate and timely information on all presentations to participating emergency departments for self-harm, thereby providing a useful indicator for Australia's suicide prevention efforts.
Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Conducta Autodestructiva , Adolescente , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Humanos , Conducta Autodestructiva/epidemiología , Intento de Suicidio , Victoria/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Amphetamine-type stimulant use, including methamphetamine, amphetamine, and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, is associated with a range of behavioural symptoms. Screening for amphetamine-type stimulant use among people presenting to the emergency department with behavioural disturbance and referral to treatment has not been evaluated. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of amphetamine-type stimulant use among patients admitted to a behavioural assessment unit and report referral outcomes. A prospective observational design was used. Individuals who tested positive or self-reported amphetamine-type stimulant use were referred to the alcohol and other drug clinician. We measured the prevalence of amphetamine-type stimulant use in saliva and by self-report along with rates of referral. The setting was a behavioural assessment unit located within an Australian emergency department. Admitted adults were enrolled from July to December 2017. Those who tested positive or self-reported amphetamine-type stimulant use were provided with harm reduction advice and offered referral. Four hundred and seventy-two tests were performed. Fifteen were excluded due to invalid results or redundant enrolment. Of the 457 individuals, 59% were male, with a mean age of 35 years (SD 13). Fifty-three (11.6%, 95% CI: 8.9-15.0) tested positive for amphetamine-type stimulants. Of those with a negative test, 44 (9.6%, 95% CI: 7.3-12.7) self-reported amphetamine-type stimulant use in the previous 24 hours. The prevalence of amphetamine-type stimulant use was 21.2% (95% CI: 17.7-25.2). Most accepted referral to the alcohol and other drug clinician (85.6%, 95% CI 77.2-91.2). The emergency visit represents a window of opportunity for screening for amphetamine-type stimulant use and initiating referrals.
Asunto(s)
Trastornos Relacionados con Anfetaminas , Adulto , Anfetamina , Trastornos Relacionados con Anfetaminas/diagnóstico , Trastornos Relacionados con Anfetaminas/epidemiología , Australia , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Masculino , Derivación y ConsultaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of illicit substance use among patients presenting to one ED with acute behavioural disturbance using point-of-care saliva testing. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted. Acute behavioural disturbance was defined as any episode requiring a security response for unarmed threat (Code Grey). The setting was a single ED and tertiary referral centre located in metropolitan Australia. Participants were adults presenting to the ED requiring a Code Grey. Saliva was analysed for meth/amphetamine, cannabis, cocaine and opiates using a rapid point-of-care test. Self-reported drug use was recorded at the time of saliva testing. Data collection occurred between August 2016 and March 2017. RESULTS: There were 229 valid saliva samples. Participants were, on average, 35 years (range 18-72) and male (168/229; 73%). Forty percent (95% confidence interval 34-47) of samples tested positive, with 20% positive for two or more substances. Meth/amphetamines was detected in 92% of positive samples, 17% of samples tested positive for opiates, 8% for cannabis and 7% for cocaine. Among participants, 19% self-reported current substance use and 20% reported using illicit substances within the past 24 h. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of illicit substance use among this cohort was 40%. Self-reporting was unreliable. Point-of-care saliva testing is feasible. Early identification of harmful drug use may assist clinical decision making in selected or undifferentiated cases and provide an opportunity to implement harm minimisation strategies and make referrals.
Asunto(s)
Saliva , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Adulto , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Humanos , Masculino , Sistemas de Atención de Punto , Prevalencia , Detección de Abuso de Sustancias , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/diagnóstico , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to describe the incidence, nature, and risk factors for adverse events (AEs) among patients who received parenteral sedation for acute agitation in an emergency department (ED) setting. METHODS: We undertook a prospective observational study and a clinical trial of parenteral sedation for the management of acute agitation. We included agitated adult patients who required parenteral sedation from 2014 to 2017 in 12 Australian EDs, excluding those with incomplete information or aged under 18 years. The primary outcome was the number of patients who experienced at least one AE. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with AEs. RESULTS: A total of 904 patients were included in the analyses (62.3% male; median age = 34 years, range = 18 to 95 years). Of these, 144 (15.9%) patients experienced at least one AE. The most common AEs were oxygen desaturation (7.4%), airway obstruction (3.6%), bradycardia (1.9%), hypotension (1.7%), and prolonged QTc interval (1.3%). No deaths or serious AEs were reported. The following factors had an increased adjusted odds ratio (OR) for experiencing an AE: age 65 years and older (OR = 2.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2 to 7.2), more than one type of parenteral sedation administered within 60 minutes (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.4 to 3.1), and alcohol intoxication (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.2 to 2.6). CONCLUSIONS: Sedation-related AEs are common, especially respiratory events. Elderly patients, sedation with multiple sedatives within 60 minutes, and alcohol intoxication increased the risk.
Asunto(s)
Anestesia/efectos adversos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Agitación Psicomotora/tratamiento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Australia , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Estudios Prospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Evidence-based guidelines for management of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in the emergency department (ED) are now widely available; however, clinical practice remains inconsistent with these guidelines. A targeted, theory-informed implementation intervention (Neurotrauma Evidence Translation (NET) intervention) was designed to increase the uptake of three clinical practice recommendations regarding the management of patients who present to Australian EDs with mild head injuries. The intervention involved local stakeholder meetings, identification and training of nursing and medical local opinion leaders, train-the-trainer workshops and standardised education materials and interactive workshops delivered by the opinion leaders to others within their EDs during a 3 month period. This paper reports on the effects of this intervention. METHODS: EDs (clusters) were allocated to receive either access to a clinical practice guideline (control) or the implementation intervention, using minimisation, a method that allocates clusters to groups using an algorithm to minimise differences in predefined factors between the groups. We measured clinical practice outcomes at the patient level using chart audit. The primary outcome was appropriate screening for post-traumatic amnesia (PTA) using a validated tool until a perfect score was achieved (indicating absence of acute cognitive impairment) before the patient was discharged home. Secondary outcomes included appropriate CT scanning and the provision of written patient information upon discharge. Patient health outcomes (anxiety, primary outcome: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) were also assessed using follow-up telephone interviews. Outcomes were assessed by independent auditors and interviewers, blinded to group allocation. RESULTS: Fourteen EDs were allocated to the intervention and 17 to the control condition; 1943 patients were included in the chart audit. At 2 months follow-up, patients attending intervention EDs (n = 893) compared with control EDs (n = 1050) were more likely to have been appropriately assessed for PTA (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 20.1, 95%CI 6.8 to 59.3; adjusted absolute risk difference (ARD) 14%, 95%CI 8 to 19). The odds of compliance with recommendations for CT scanning and provision of written patient discharge information were small (OR 1.2, 95%CI 0.8 to 1.6; ARD 3.2, 95%CI - 3.7 to 10 and OR 1.2, 95%CI 0.8 to 1.8; ARD 3.1, 95%CI - 3.0 to 9.3 respectively). A total of 343 patients at ten interventions and 14 control sites participated in follow-up interviews at 4.3 to 10.7 months post-ED presentation. The intervention had a small effect on anxiety levels (adjusted mean difference - 0.52, 95%CI - 1.34 to 0.30; scale 0-21, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety). CONCLUSIONS: Our intervention was effective in improving the uptake of the PTA recommendation; however, it did not appreciably increase the uptake of the other two practice recommendations. Improved screening for PTA may be clinically important as it leads to appropriate periods of observation prior to safe discharge. The estimated intervention effect on anxiety was of limited clinical significance. We were not able to compare characteristics of EDs who declined trial participation with those of participating sites, which may limit the generalizability of the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12612001286831), date registered 12 December 2012.
Asunto(s)
Lesiones Traumáticas del Encéfalo/terapia , Tratamiento de Urgencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Australia , Conmoción Encefálica/terapia , Análisis por Conglomerados , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Práctica Clínica Basada en la Evidencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Utilización de Instalaciones y Servicios , Femenino , Adhesión a Directriz , Humanos , Ciencia de la Implementación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Investigación Biomédica Traslacional , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Evidence-based guidelines for the management of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in the emergency department (ED) are now widely available, and yet, clinical practice remains inconsistent with the guidelines. The Neurotrauma Evidence Translation (NET) intervention was developed to increase the uptake of guideline recommendations and improve the management of minor head injury in Australian emergency departments (EDs). However, the adoption of this type of intervention typically entails an upfront investment that may or may not be fully offset by improvements in clinical practice, health outcomes and/or reductions in health service utilisation. The present study estimates the cost and cost-effectiveness of the NET intervention, as compared to the passive dissemination of the guideline, to evaluate whether any improvements in clinical practice or health outcomes due to the NET intervention can be obtained at an acceptable cost. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Study setting: The NET cluster randomised controlled trial [ACTRN12612001286831]. STUDY SAMPLE: Seventeen EDs were randomised to the control condition and 14 to the intervention. One thousand nine hundred forty-three patients were included in the analysis of clinical practice outcomes (NET sample). A total of 343 patients from 14 control and 10 intervention EDs participated in follow-up interviews and were included in the analysis of patient-reported health outcomes (NET-Plus sample). OUTCOME MEASURES: Appropriate post-traumatic amnesia (PTA) screening in the ED (primary outcome). Secondary clinical practice outcomes: provision of written information on discharge (INFO) and safe discharge (defined as CT scan appropriately provided plus PTA plus INFO). Secondary patient-reported, post-discharge health outcomes: anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), post-concussive symptoms (Rivermead), and preference-based health-related quality of life (SF6D). METHODS: Trial-based economic evaluations from a health sector perspective, with time horizons set to coincide with the final follow-up for the NET sample (2 months post-intervention) and to 1-month post-discharge for the NET-Plus sample. RESULTS: Intervention and control groups were not significantly different in health service utilisation received in the ED/inpatient ward following the initial mTBI presentation (adjusted mean difference $23.86 per patient; 95%CI - $106, $153; p = 0.719) or over the longer follow-up in the NET-plus sample (adjusted mean difference $341.78 per patient; 95%CI - $58, $742; p = 0.094). Savings from lower health service utilisation are therefore unlikely to offset the significantly higher upfront cost of the intervention (mean difference $138.20 per patient; 95%CI $135, $141; p < 0.000). Estimates of the net effect of the intervention on total cost (intervention cost net of health service utilisation) suggest that the intervention entails significantly higher costs than the control condition (adjusted mean difference $169.89 per patient; 95%CI $43, $297, p = 0.009). This effect is larger in absolute magnitude over the longer follow-up in the NET-plus sample (adjusted mean difference $505.06; 95%CI $96, $915; p = 0.016), mostly due to additional health service utilisation. For the primary outcome, the NET intervention is more costly and more effective than passive dissemination; entailing an additional cost of $1246 per additional patient appropriately screened for PTA ($169.89/0.1363; Fieller's 95%CI $525, $2055). For NET to be considered cost-effective with 95% confidence, decision-makers would need to be willing to trade one quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for 25 additional patients appropriately screened for PTA. While these results reflect our best estimate of cost-effectiveness given the data, it is possible that a NET intervention that has been scaled and streamlined ready for wider roll-out may be more or less cost-effective than the NET intervention as delivered in the trial. CONCLUSIONS: While the NET intervention does improve the management of mTBI in the ED, it also entails a significant increase in cost and-as delivered in the trial-is unlikely to be cost-effective at currently accepted funding thresholds. There may be a scope for a scaled-up and streamlined NET intervention to achieve a better balance between costs and outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12612001286831 , date registered 12 December 2012.