Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Emerg Med ; 67(2): e119-e127, 2024 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38821847

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: As rates of opioid use disorder in the general population have increased, some have questioned whether IV opioids should be used routinely for treatment of acute severe pain in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVES: We determined the incidence of persistent opioid use among opioid-naïve patients exposed to IV opioids in the ED. METHODS: This was a prospective observational cohort study conducted in two EDs in the Bronx, NY. Opioid-naïve adults with severe pain who received IV opioids in the ED were followed-up 6 months later by telephone interview and review of the state opioid prescription database. We defined persistent opioid use as filling 6 or more prescriptions for opioids in the 6 months following the ED visit or an average of one prescription per month. RESULTS: We screened 1555 patients. Of these, 506 patients met entry criteria and provided analyzable data. Morphine was the IV opioid most frequently administered in the ED (478, 94%), followed by hydromorphone (20, 4%). Of the 506, 8 (2%) received both IV morphine and hydromorphone and 63 (12%) participants were prescribed an opioid for use after the ED visit. One patient/506 (0%) met our apriori criteria for persistent opioid use within 6 months. CONCLUSION: Among 506 opioid naïve ED patients administered IV opioids for acute severe pain, only one used opioids persistently during the subsequent 6 months.


Asunto(s)
Analgésicos Opioides , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Humanos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/organización & administración , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Estudios Prospectivos , Femenino , Masculino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/tratamiento farmacológico , Hidromorfona/uso terapéutico , Administración Intravenosa , Dolor Agudo/tratamiento farmacológico
2.
AEM Educ Train ; 7(2): e10861, 2023 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36994318

RESUMEN

Background: Drivers of physician burnout include an intricate interplay between health care organizational structures, societal influences, and individual-level factors. In the traditional workforce, peer-to-peer recognition programs (PRPs) have reduced burnout by building a sense of community and effectively creating a "wellness culture." We implemented a PRP in an emergency medicine (EM) residency and determined its impact on subjective symptoms of burnout and wellness. Methods: This was a prospective, pre- and postintervention study conducted in a single residency over a 6-month period. All 84 EM residents of the program were sent a voluntary anonymized survey that included a validated instrument on wellness and burnout. A PRP was initiated. After 6 months, a second survey was distributed. The outcome of the study was to examine whether the addition of a PRP reduced burnout and improved wellness. Results: There were 84 respondents to the pre-PRP survey and 72 to the post-PRP survey. Respondents reported an improvement after the inception of the use of the PRP in two factors that contribute to a physician's wellness: feeling recognized for accomplishments at work, which improved from 45% (38/84) affirmative to 63% (45/72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3%-32.4%, p = 0.025) and a comfortable and supportive work environment, which improved from 68% (57/84) to 85% (61/72; 95% CI 3.5%-29.3%, p = 0.014). There was no significant effect in the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index (PFI) as a result of this intervention over the 6 months. Conclusions: A PRP initiative resulted in improvements in several factors that drive physician wellness but overall burnout measured by the Stanford PFI did not show any improvement over the 6-month period. A future longitudinal study examining the continuous assessment of PRP on the EM residents throughout the entire course of 4 years of residency training would be beneficial to determine if it could change burnout from year to year.

3.
Acad Emerg Med ; 28(11): 1228-1235, 2021 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34133820

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the first-line medication for acute low back pain (LBP). It is unclear if the choice of NSAID impacts outcomes. We compared ibuprofen, ketorolac, and diclofenac for the treatment of acute, nonradicular LBP. METHODS: This was a three-armed, double-blind, comparative effectiveness study, in which we enrolled patients at the conclusion of an ED visit for musculoskeletal LBP and determined outcomes by telephone 5 days later. Patients were randomized to receive a 5-day supply of 600 mg of ibuprofen, 10 mg of ketorolac, or 50 mg of diclofenac, each to be used every 8 h as needed. Every participant also received LBP education. The primary outcome was improvement in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), a 24-item instrument on which lower scores indicate better LBP functional outcomes, between ED visit and day 5. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity, measured using the descriptors none, mild, moderate, and severe, and the presence of stomach irritation. RESULTS: A total of 868 patients were screened and 66 patients were enrolled in each of the three arms. Baseline characteristics were similar. Improvements in RMDQ by day 5 were as follows: ibuprofen 9.4, ketorolac 11.9, and diclofenac 10.9 (p = 0.34). Mild or no pain on day 5 was as follows: ibuprofen 38 of 61 (62%), ketorolac 47 of 59 (80%), and diclofenac 45 of 62 (71%; 95% CI for rounded mean difference of 17% between ibuprofen and ketorolac = 1, 33%, p = 0.04, number needed to treat = 6 [95% CI = 3-69]). Stomach irritation was reported by 16 of 62 (26%) ibuprofen patients versus three of 61 (5%) in the ketorolac arm and six of 64 (9%) in the diclofenac arm (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: There were no important differences between groups with regard to the primary outcome. These data do not rule out that possibility that ketorolac results in better pain relief and less stomach irritation than ibuprofen.


Asunto(s)
Dolor Agudo , Dolor de la Región Lumbar , Dolor Agudo/tratamiento farmacológico , Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/efectos adversos , Diclofenaco/uso terapéutico , Método Doble Ciego , Humanos , Ibuprofeno/uso terapéutico , Ketorolaco/uso terapéutico , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/tratamiento farmacológico
4.
Emerg Med Clin North Am ; 34(3): 453-67, 2016 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27475009

RESUMEN

The geriatric population makes up a large portion of the emergency patient population. Geriatric patients have less reserve and more comorbid diseases. They are frequently on multiple medications and are more likely to require aggressive treatment during acute illness. Although it may not be obvious, it is important to recognize the signs of shock as early as possible. Special care and monitoring should be used when resuscitating the elderly. The use of bedside ultrasound and monitoring for coagulopathies are discussed. Clinicians should be constantly vigilant and reassess throughout diagnosis and treatment. Ethical considerations in this population need to be considered on an individual basis.


Asunto(s)
Resucitación , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Manejo de la Vía Aérea/métodos , Humanos , Intubación Intratraqueal/métodos , Resucitación/métodos , Choque/diagnóstico , Choque/terapia
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA