The Implementation of an Emergency Medicine Telehealth System During a Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: In March of 2020, the World Health Organization declared coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-a disease caused by a novel coronavirus-a pandemic, and it continued to spread rapidly in the community. Our institution implemented an emergency medicine telehealth system that sought to expedite care of stable patients, decrease provider exposure to COVID-19, decrease overall usage rate of personal protective equipment, and provide a platform so that infected or quarantined physicians could continue to work. This effort was among the first to use telehealth to practice emergency medicine in the setting of a pandemic in the United States. DISCUSSION: Outside the main emergency departments at each of 2 sites of our academic institution, disaster tents were erected with patient care equipment and medications, as well as technology to allow for telehealth visits. The triage system was modified to appropriately select low-risk patients with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 who could be seen in these disaster tents. Despite some issues that needed to be addressed, such as provider discomfort, limited medication availability, and connectivity problems, the model was successful overall. CONCLUSIONS: Other emergency departments might find this proof of concept article useful. Telehealth will likely be used more broadly in the future, including emergency care. It is imperative that the health care system continues to adapt to respond appropriately to challenges such as pandemics.

Prevention of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with hematological malignancies and resolved hepatitis B virus infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with resolved hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection are at risk of HBV reactivation during treatment for hematological malignancies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the data on the efficacy of antiviral prophylaxis for the prevention of HBV reactivation in this group of patients. METHODS: We conducted a systemic literature search of PubMed including MEDLINE and EMBASE databases to 31 January 2019 to identify studies published in English comparing antiviral prophylaxis with no prophylaxis for HBV reactivation in patients treated for hematological malignancies. The search terms used were ("occult hepatitis B" OR "resolved hepatitis B") AND ("reactivation") AND ("haematological malignancy" OR "hematological malignancy" OR "chemotherapy" OR "immunotherapy" OR "chemoimmunotherapy" OR "lymphoma" OR "leukemia" OR "transplant"). The primary outcome was the reactivation of HBV infection. Pooled estimates of relative risk (RR) were calculated. RESULTS: We identified 13 relevant studies including two randomized controlled trials (RCT), one post hoc analysis from RCT and 10 cohort studies. There was a trend towards a lower rate of HBV reactivation using antiviral prophylaxis, but the difference was not significant (RR 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-1.40, P = 0.22). When limiting the analysis to the three prospective studies of patients receiving anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, we found antiviral prophylaxis was associated with a significantly lower risk of HBV reactivation (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.06-0.49, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Antiviral prophylaxis reduced the risk of HBV reactivation in patients receiving anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies for hematological malignancies but not in a broader group of patients receiving anticancer therapy.

Emergency Department Evaluation After Conducted Energy Weapon Use: Review of the Literature for the Clinician.

BACKGROUND: Conductive energy weapons (CEWs) are used daily by law enforcement, and patients are often brought to emergency departments (EDs) for medical clearance. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to review the medical literature on the topic of CEWs and to offer evidence-based recommendations to emergency physicians for evaluation and treatment of patients who have received a CEW exposure. METHODS: A MEDLINE literature search from 1988 to 2018 was performed and limited to human studies published from January 1, 1988 to November 1, 2018 written in English with the following keywords: TASER, conductive energy device(s), electronic weapon(s), conductive energy weapon(s), non-lethal weapon(s), conducted energy device(s), conducted energy weapon(s), conductive electronic device(s), and electronic control device(s). Studies identified then underwent a structured review from which results could be evaluated. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-three articles on CEWs were screened and 37 appropriate articles were rigorously reviewed. Evaluation and treatment recommendations are presented. These studies did not report any evidence of dangerous laboratory abnormalities, physiologic changes, or immediate or delayed cardiac ischemia or dysrhythmias after exposure to CEW electrical discharges of up to 15 s. CONCLUSIONS: The current medical literature does not support routine performance of laboratory studies, electrocardiography, or prolonged ED observation or hospitalization for ongoing cardiac monitoring after CEW exposure in an otherwise asymptomatic awake and alert patient.