Point-of-care ultrasound-guided versus standard reduction of displaced distal radius fractures in the emergency department: a randomised controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: During closed reduction of displaced distal radius fractures, physical examination is used to determine the need for further manipulation before radiographic confirmation and cast application. Manipulation performed under ultrasound guidance has the potential to decrease the number of reduction attempts. METHODS: This multicentre randomised controlled trial was undertaken between December 2018 and July 2020 in the ED of four hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients aged ≥16 years presenting to the ED with a distal radius fracture requiring closed reduction were randomised to either point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS)-guided or standard reduction. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients requiring more than one reduction attempt. The secondary outcomes were time to complete reduction and treatment plan at ED discharge (conservative or operative repair). RESULTS: A total of 214 patients were screened, of which 211 patients were included for primary endpoint analysis (87% female, median age 68 years, 94% dorsal angulation, 59% intra-articular and 73% multifragmentary). In total, 105 patients were randomised to standard treatment and 106 patients to PoCUS-guided fracture reduction. In the standard treatment group, 13 patients (12%) required more than one reduction attempt, compared with 6 patients (6%) in the PoCUS group (OR 2.35, 95% CI 0.86 to 6.45). The median reduction time was 5 min in the PoCUS group (IQR 3-6) vs 3 min (IQR 2-4) in the standard reduction group (p<0.001). At ED discharge, operative repair was indicated for 17 (16%) patients in the standard group and 21 (20%) patients in the PoCUS group (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.58). CONCLUSION: This study could not demonstrate that PoCUS-guided reduction of distal radius fractures was associated with a statistically significant decrease in the number of reduction attempts. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The Netherlands Trial Register (NTR7934).

Fixed Versus Variable Dosing of Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Bleeding Complications of Vitamin K Antagonists-The PROPER3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine if a fixed dose of 1000 IU of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) is as effective as traditional variable dosing based on body weight and international normalized ratio (INR) for reversal of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) anticoagulation. METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial, patients with nonintracranial bleeds requiring VKA reversal with 4F-PCC were allocated to either a 1,000-IU fixed dose of 4F-PCC or the variable dose. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with effective hemostasis according to the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis definition. The design was noninferiority with a lower 95% confidence interval of no more than -6%. When estimating sample size, we assumed that fixed dosing would be 4% superior. RESULTS: From October 2015 until January 2020, 199 of 310 intended patients were included before study termination due to decreasing enrollment rates. Of the 199 patients, 159 were allowed in the per-protocol analysis. Effective hemostasis was achieved in 87.3% (n=69 of 79) in fixed compared to 89.9% (n=71 of 79) in the variable dosing cohort (risk difference 2.5%, 95% confidence interval -13.3 to 7.9%, P=.27). Median door-to-needle times were 109 minutes (range 16 to 796) in fixed and 142 (17 to 1076) for the variable dose (P=.027). INR less than 2.0 at 60 minutes after 4F-PCC infusion was reached in 91.2% versus 91.7% (P=1.0). CONCLUSION: The large majority of patients had good clinical outcome after 4F-PCC use; however, noninferiority of the fixed dose could not be demonstrated because the design assumed the fixed dose would be 4% superior. Door-to-needle time was shortened with the fixed dose, and INR reduction was similar in both dosing regimens.

The effect of treatment and clinical course during Emergency Department stay on severity scoring and predicted mortality risk in Intensive Care patients.

BACKGROUND: Treatment and the clinical course during Emergency Department (ED) stay before Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission may affect predicted mortality risk calculated by the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE)-IV, causing lead-time bias. As a result, comparing standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) among hospitals may be difficult if they differ in the location where initial stabilization takes place. The aim of this study was to assess to what extent predicted mortality risk would be affected if the APACHE-IV score was recalculated with the initial physiological variables from the ED. Secondly, to evaluate whether ED Length of Stay (LOS) was associated with a change (delta) in these APACHE-IV scores. METHODS: An observational multicenter cohort study including ICU patients admitted from the ED. Data from two Dutch quality registries were linked: the Netherlands Emergency department Evaluation Database (NEED) and the National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) registry. The ICU APACHE-IV, predicted mortality, and SMR based on data of the first 24 h of ICU admission were compared with an ED APACHE-IV model, using the most deviating physiological variables from the ED or ICU. RESULTS: A total of 1398 patients were included. The predicted mortality from the ICU APACHE-IV (median 0.10; IQR 0.03-0.30) was significantly lower compared to the ED APACHE-IV model (median 0.13; 0.04-0.36; p < 0.01). The SMR changed from 0.63 (95%CI 0.54-0.72) to 0.55 (95%CI 0.47-0.63) based on ED APACHE-IV. Predicted mortality risk changed more than 5% in 321 (23.2%) patients by using the ED APACHE-IV. ED LOS > 3.9 h was associated with a slight increase in delta APACHE-IV of 1.6 (95% CI 0.4-2.8) compared to ED LOS < 1.7 h. CONCLUSION: Predicted mortality risks and SMRs calculated by the APACHE IV scores are not directly comparable in patients admitted from the ED if hospitals differ in their policy to stabilize patients in the ED before ICU admission. Future research should focus on developing models to adjust for these differences.

Prognostic value of the shock index and modified shock index in survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of rapid, non-invasive tools that aid early prognostication in patients with return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA). The shock index (SI) and modified shock index (MSI) have shown to be useful in several medical conditions, including myocardial infarction. In this study, we assessed the prognostic value of SI and MSI at Emergency Department (ED) triage on survival to discharge of OHCA patients. METHODS: A single-center retrospective observational cohort study. All OHCA patients with a period of ROSC between 2014 and 2019 were included. Data collection was based on the Utstein criteria. The SI and MSI at ED triage were calculated by dividing heart rate by systolic blood pressure or mean arterial pressure. Survival rates were compared between patients with a high and low SI and MSI. Subsequent Cox regression analysis was performed. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 403 patients were included, of which 46% survived until hospital discharge. An elevated SI and MSI was defined by SI ≥ 1.00 and MSI ≥ 1.30. Survival to discharge, 30-day- and one-year survival were significantly lower in patients with an elevated SI and MSI (p < 0.001). An elevated SI and MSI was also associated with a higher rate of recurrent loss of circulation in the ED (p < 0.001). The 30-day survival hazard ratio was 2.24 (1.56-3.22) for SI and 2.46 (1.71-3.53) for MSI; the one-year survival hazard ratio was 2.20 (1.54-3.15) for SI and 2.38 (1.66-3.40) for MSI. CONCLUSION: Survival to discharge and 30-day survival are lower in OHCA patients with an elevated SI and MSI at ED triage. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the causational mechanisms underlying the association between elevated SI or MSI and worse outcomes.

The association between vital signs and clinical outcomes in emergency department patients of different age categories.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate interpretation of vital signs is essential for risk stratification in the emergency department (ED) but may change with advancing age. In several guidelines, risk scores such as the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) scores, commonly used in emergency medicine practice (as well as critical care) specify a single cut-off or threshold for each of the commonly measured vital signs. Although a single cut-off may be convenient, it is unknown whether a single cut-off for vital signs truly exists and if the association between vital signs and in-hospital mortality differs per age-category. AIMS: To assess the association between initial vital signs and case-mix adjusted in-hospital mortality in different age categories. METHODS: Observational multicentre cohort study using the Netherlands Emergency Department Evaluation Database (NEED) in which consecutive ED patients ≥18 years were included between 1 January 2017 and 12 January 2020. The association between vital signs and case-mix adjusted mortality were assessed in three age categories (18-65; 66-80; >80 years) using multivariable logistic regression. Vital signs were each divided into five to six categories, for example, systolic blood pressure (SBP) categories (≤80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, >140 mm Hg). RESULTS: We included 101 416 patients of whom 2374 (2.3%) died. Adjusted ORs for mortality increased gradually with decreasing SBP and decreasing peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2). Diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) had quasi-U-shaped associations with mortality. Mortality did not increase for temperatures anywhere in the range between 35.5°C and 42.0°C, with a single cut-off around 35.5°C below which mortality increased. Single cut-offs were also found for MAP <70 mm Hg and respiratory rate >22/min. For all vital signs, older patients had larger increases in absolute mortality compared with younger patients. CONCLUSION: For SBP, DBP, SpO2 and HR, no single cut-off existed. The impact of changing vital sign categories on prognosis was larger in older patients. Our results have implications for the interpretation of vital signs in existing risk stratification tools and acute care guidelines.

Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care lung ultrasound in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: A promising modality for diagnosing pulmonary manifestations of COVID-19 in the emergency department (ED) is point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) of the lungs. The currently used PCR as well as chest X-ray and CT scanning have important disadvantages. The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS in patients with suspected pulmonary manifestations of COVID-19 in the ED. METHODS: This prospective diagnostic accuracy study was conducted at the ED of our non-academic level 1 trauma centre (Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands). Patients were enrolled between 14 April and 22 April 2020. Patients (aged ≥16 years) with suspected COVID-19 presenting to the ED underwent POCUS. All patients received current standard of care, including PCR (naso-oropharyngeal swab). Outcome of POCUS was compared with PCR or CT scan outcome to determine diagnostic accuracy. Diagnostic accuracy measures were calculated using 2×2 contingency tables. RESULTS: 100 patients were eligible to participate in this study, data of 93 patients were analysed. 27 (29%) patients were found positive for COVID-19 by PCR or CT. POCUS had a sensitivity of 89% (95% CI 70% to 97%), specificity of 59% (95% CI 46% to 71%), negative predictive value of 93% (95% CI 79% to 98%) and positive predictive value of 47% (95% CI 33% to 61%). In a subgroup of patients without previous cardiopulmonary disease (n=37), POCUS had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 70% to 100%), specificity of 76% (95% CI 54% to 90%), negative predictive value of 100% (95% CI 79% to 100%) and positive predictive value of 67% (95% CI 41% to 86%). CONCLUSION: POCUS of the lungs could serve as a valuable, radiation-free tool for excluding pulmonary manifestations of COVID-19 in patients in the ED at the point of assessment, especially in patients without previous cardiopulmonary disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register, No: NTR8544.

Is a hip flip the right trick?

Clinical introductionA 68-year-old man, with known spasticity and a total left hip arthroplasty (THA) performed 6 years ago, was brought to our ED after falling down the stairs. Laying on the stretcher, his left leg was internally rotated and in hyperflexion. An X-ray of the left hip was performed. The diagnosis of posterior hip dislocation was made (figure 1). The patient received sedation and analgesia with 75 mg propofol and 9 mg esketamine intravenously, and a closed reduction procedure was attempted using manual flexion, adduction, traction and internal rotation. Unfortunately, the reduction failed.emermed;37/1/53/F1F1F1Figure 1The patient's X-ray. QUESTION: Why is closed reduction not effective in this case?The femoral head is located more cranially expected, due to material failure. The whole THA should be replaced.This is an anterior dislocation. The closed reduction procedure should be performed by using extension, abduction, traction and internal rotation.The femoral head is not reduced centrally in the acetabulum and the closed reduction procedure should be repeated more forcefully.A dual-mobility cup is used and the liner is not in place anymore. Revision surgery is required. For answer see page 2.

When the factory shuts down.

CLINICAL INTRODUCTION: A 56-year-old man without known medical history was brought to our ED after he was found next to his bed, agitated and with waxing and waning consciousness. He has been bedbound for 5 days after a long-standing period of malnutrition. Physical examination reveals Kussmaul breathing, heart rate of 62/min and blood pressure of 135/100 mm Hg, normal cardiac, abdominal and a non-focal neurological examination other than confusion and altered level of consciousness. An EKG was performed (figure 1).emermed;36/1/51/F1F1F1Figure 1EKG at presentation in our ED. QUESTION: What abnormalities are the clues to the severity of his condition? How would you confirm your suspicion?The minimally prolonged QTc time.The subtle horizontal ST segment elevation in V2 and V3.The subtle positive deflection at the J point.Nothing, this EKG is not interpretable because of the movement of baseline.

Treating her well.

CLINICAL INTRODUCTION: A 44-year-old woman presents pain free to our ED after experiencing 45 min of tightening of the chest with radiation to her left arm, diaphoresis and nausea. Her vital signs are normal except for her high BP, which is 180/110. She reports recurrent episodes of chest pain in the past 1.5 weeks, unrelated to exercise. She visited a general practitioner who prescribed pain medication and treated her new-onset hypertension. Besides the recently found hypertension, heavy smoking is her only other traditional risk factor for cardiovascular disease. QUESTION: What finding on figure 1 should make you concerned?emermed;35/4/246/F1F1F1Figure 1Initial ECG.The U-wave in the precordial leadsThe biphasic P-wave in lead IThe negative T-waves in aVR as well as aVLThe biphasic T-waves in V2 and V3.

Propofol versus midazolam for procedural sedation in the emergency department: A study on efficacy and safety.

BACKGROUND: Procedural sedation for painful procedures in the emergency department (ED) can be accomplished with various pharmacological agents. The choice of the sedative used is highly dependent on procedure- and patient characteristics and on personal- or local preferences. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of procedural sedations performed in the EDs of 5 hospitals in the Netherlands over a 4year period to evaluate the efficacy- (success rate of the intended procedure) and safety (incidence of sedation (adverse) events) of propofol sedations compared to midazolam sedations. RESULTS: A total of 592 ED sedations were included in our study. Patients sedated with propofol (n=284, median dose 75mg) achieved a deeper level of sedation (45% vs. 25% deep sedation, p<0.001), had a higher procedure success rate (92% vs. 81%, p<0.001) and shorter median sedation duration (10 vs. 17min, p<0.001) compared to patients receiving midazolam (n=308, median dose 4mg). A total of 112 sedation events were registered for 99 patients. Transient apnea was the most prevalent event (n=73), followed by oxygen desaturation (n=18) airway obstruction responsive to simple maneuvers (n=13) and hypotension (n=6). Propofol sedations were more often associated with the occurrence of apnea's (20% vs. 10%, p=0.004), whereas clinically relevant oxygen desaturations (<90%) were found more often in patients sedated with midazolam (8% vs. 1%, p=0.001). No sedation adverse events were registered CONCLUSION: Propofol is more effective and at least as safe as midazolam for procedural sedation in the ED.

Additive value of dobutamine stress echocardiography in patients with an anomalous origin of a coronary artery.

An anomalous origin of a coronary artery (AOCA) is the second most common cause of non-traumatic sudden cardiac death in young athletes. Patients with a malignant course of an AOCA of the right coronary artery only need surgical correction when myocardial ischaemia is detected. An AOCA and its malignant or benign course can be detected by coronary angiography, coronary computed tomography or cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Detection of ischaemia can be more difficult since even a negative maximal-effort stress ECG does not exclude a potential lethal coronary anomaly. Also, there are no case series or trials showing sensitivity or specificity for any form of ischaemia detection for AOCA in the literature. Although not described previously in adults, dobutamine stress echocardiography was previously described in a paediatric population with AOCA. We are the first to describe ischaemia detection by dobutamine stress echocardiography in three adult patients with an AOCA of the right coronary artery who were subsequently referred for surgery.

Association between stringency of lockdown measures and emergency department visits during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Dutch multicentre study.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 outbreak disrupted regular health care, including the Emergency Department (ED), and resulted in insufficient ICU capacity. Lockdown measures were taken to prevent disease spread and hospital overcrowding. Little is known about the relationship of stringency of lockdown measures on ED utilization. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the frequency and characteristics of ED visits during the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 to 2019, and their relation to stringency of lockdown measures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective multicentre study among five Dutch hospitals was performed. The primary outcome was the absolute number of ED visits (year 2018 and 2019 compared to 2020). Secondary outcomes were age, sex, triage category, way of transportation, referral, disposition, and treating medical specialty. The relation between stringency of lockdown measures, measured with the Oxford Stringency Index (OSI) and number and characteristics of ED visits was analysed. RESULTS: The total number of ED visits in the five hospitals in 2019 was 165,894, whereas the total number of visits in 2020 was 135,762, which was a decrease of 18.2% (range per hospital: 10.5%-30.7%). The reduction in ED visits was greater during periods of high stringency lockdown measures, as indicated by OSI. CONCLUSION: The number of ED visits in the Netherlands has significantly dropped during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, with a clear association between decreasing ED visits and increasing lockdown measures. The OSI could be used as an indicator in the management of ED visits during a future pandemic.

Protocols for perioperative management of direct oral anticoagulants in hospitals: opportunities for improvement.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate and describe the protocolized perioperative management in patient using Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in Dutch hospitals. METHODS: Between August and December 2020, a nationwide survey in 70 hospitals in the Netherlands was conducted. We asked hospital pharmacists to submit their protocols for perioperative management of DOAC (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban and rivaroxaban) users. The protocols were assessed for a number of parameters divided into categories: interruption and restart timetables DOACs for elective procedures, criteria for the start of an urgent procedure without antidotes, criteria for the use of antidotes and advised antidotes for urgent procedures. RESULTS: A total of 49 hospitals (70%) sent a protocol for perioperative management of DOACs. Two pairs of protocols were identical because hospitals cooperated closely, leaving 47 individual protocols for analysis. Thirty-five of these protocols contained a policy for both elective and urgent procedure; five protocols contained only a policy for elective and seven only for urgent procedures. In protocols for elective procedure, we found great variation in interruption and restart timetables intended for patients with renal impairment (Estimated Glomerular Filtration Ratio < 80 ml/min). In case of urgent procedures, there is variation in choice of antidote, criteria for administration of an antidote and antidote dosing. CONCLUSION: This study provides an overview of the current state of the perioperative protocols in the Netherlands in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants. Protocols are often not complete and show important and unwanted variation. We have found that national guidelines do not provide unambiguous advice on all points (urgent procedures) and are therefore often elaborated at a local level. The results of this research can help in improving and harmonizing the perioperative protocols on a national level.

Protocolized management of bleeding in hospitals in The Netherlands in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate and describe the protocolized treatment of DOAC-related bleeds in all Dutch hospitals. METHODS: From August to December 2020 a nationwide survey among all 70 hospitals in the Netherlands was conducted on their protocols for management of bleeding in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs, i.e. apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban and dabigatran). The protocols were assessed the following characteristics: bleeding definitions (mild, moderate and severe bleed), diagnostic parameters (hemoglobin [Hb], loss of blood, surgical procedure needed, etc), first and second choice of treatment, effectiveness criteria and the level of evidence/references upon which protocols were based. RESULTS: All 70 hospitals responded (100%). We received 69 protocols in total, 6 of which were identical because hospitals worked together. In 35 (50%) of the protocols a definition of minor, moderate or severe bleeds was described. Diagnostic parameters for bleeds were present in 2%, 41% and 47% of protocols for a mild, moderate and severe bleed. While the first choice treatment for severe bleeding under dabigatran was idarucizumab in 96% of protocols, considerably more therapeutic options (mostly different prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) doses) are described for Xa inhibitors. When considering criteria for effectiveness more than 90% of protocols did not have a clear description. CONCLUSION: This study provides an overview of the current state of protocols for management of DOAC-related bleeding in The Netherlands. Protocols vary in the content of information provided and often do not include information, especially for diagnostic criteria and criteria for establishing the effectiveness of the intervention. The results of this study can assist in improving and harmonizing the protocols.

Low-dose ketamine or opioids combined with propofol for procedural sedation in the emergency department: a systematic review.

Procedural sedation is routinely performed for procedures in the emergency department (ED). Propofol is a commonly used sedative, frequently combined with an opioid or low-dose ketamine as an analgesic. However, there is still controversy on the optimal combination of agents in current guidelines. The objective of this systematic review is to identify and present studies comparing low-dose ketamine to opioids when combined with propofol for procedural sedation in the ED and to describe the dosing regimen, observed efficacy, and side effects. For this systematic review, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines, EMBASE and PubMed databases were searched. Studies comparing propofol with opioids versus propofol with low-dose (es)ketamine in patients undergoing procedural sedation for procedures in the ED were included. Analyses were descriptive because of the high heterogeneity among included studies. The outcomes were dosing regimen, efficacy of analgesia, efficacy of sedation depth, efficacy of recovery and (adverse) events. We included four out of 2309 studies found in the literature search. Overall, the studies had a low risk of bias, but the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation evidence profile was downgraded due to the imprecision and inconsistency of the studies. All studies compared low-dose ketamine with fentanyl. Dosing ranged from 0.3 to 1.0 mg/kg (ketamine), 1.0-1.5 µg/kg (fentanyl) and 0.4-1.0 mg/kg (propofol). The efficacy of analgesia was measured by two studies, one favoring the fentanyl group, and one favoring the ketamine group. The efficacy of sedation depth was measured by one study, with the fentanyl group having a deeper sedation score. Two studies showed shorter recovery time with low-dose ketamine. One study showed a higher incidence of cardio-respiratory clinical events and interventions in the fentanyl group. Two studies showed significant differences of overall sedation events in the fentanyl group. One study did not find any significant differences of the incidence of sedation events. This systematic review did not provide sufficient evidence that the combination of low-dose ketamine and propofol is associated with a shorter recovery time and fewer sedation events compared to the combination of opioids and propofol.

The prediction of 24-h mortality by the respiratory rate and oxygenation index compared with National Early Warning Score in emergency department patients: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: The ROX index combines respiratory rate and oxygenation to predict the response to oxygen therapy in pneumonia. It is calculated by dividing the patient's oxygen saturation, by the inspired oxygen concentration, and then by the respiratory rate (e.g. 95%/0.21/16 = 28). Since this index includes the most essential physiological variables to detect deterioration, it may be a helpful risk tool in the emergency department (ED). Although small studies suggest it can predict early mortality, no large study has compared it with the National Early Warning Score (NEWS), the most widely validated risk score for death within 24 h. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the ability of the ROX index with the NEWS to predict mortality within 24 h of arrival at the hospital. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational multicentre analysis of data in the Netherlands Emergency Department Evaluation Database (NEED) on 270 665 patients attending four participating Dutch EDs. The ROX index and NEWS were determined on ED arrival and prior to ED treatment. RESULTS: The risk of death within 24 h increased with falling ROX and rising NEWS values. The area under the receiving operating characteristic curves for 24-h mortality of NEWS was significantly higher than for the ROX index [0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.91-0.92 versus 0.87; 95% CI, 0.86-0.88; P < 0.01]. However, the observed and predicted mortality by the ROX index was identical to mortality of 5%, after which mortality was underestimated. In contrast, up to a predicted 24-h mortality of 3% NEWS slightly underestimates mortality, and above this level over-estimates it. The standardized net benefit of ROX is slightly higher than NEWS up to a predicted 24-h mortality of 3%. CONCLUSION: The prediction of 24-h mortality by the ROX index is more accurate than NEWS for most patients likely to be encountered in the ED. ROX may be used as a first screening tool in the ED.

Adherence to protocols for the use of reversal agents in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the adherence to protocols for the use of reversal agents in direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) users in Dutch hospitals. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in seven hospitals in the Netherlands. Treatment protocols for bleeding and (urgent) procedures in patients on DOAC were collected from each hospital. All patient data on the use of reversal agents were retrospectively collected from September 2021 to April 2022 and compared to the protocols. The degree of per-protocol adherence (compliance score) was categorized into four levels as follows: poor (<45%), moderate (45-79%), high (80-89%), and full (> 90%) adherence rates. RESULTS: A total of 290 patients were included in our study. In patients with bleeding under DOAC, the protocol adherence for prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) was "moderate" (61%). In the remaining cases (39%), non-adherence was mainly caused by underdosing (68%), overdosing (12%), and a lack of indication (14%). Furthermore, idarucizumab was administered for bleeding with "full" adherence (96%). For andexanet alfa, adherence to the hospital bleeding protocol was "moderate" (67%), with a lack of indication being the only reason for non-adherence. In case of reversal for an urgent procedure, the protocol adherence for PCC was "low" (45%), with underdosing, a lack of indication, and missing lab data being the main reasons for non-adherence. Missing lab data on dabigatran plasma concentration before reversal was the main reason for "low" adherence (26%) in idarucizumab. The adherence for andexanet alfa was also "low" (0%). CONCLUSION: In case of reversal for bleeding under DOAC, overall adherence to the protocol was "moderate"; however, in patients needing an urgent procedure, it was "low." The major reasons for non-adherence were underdosing, off-label use, and a lack of specific lab testing. The results of this study can assist in improving the implementation of hospital protocols.