Emergency department length of stay and outcomes of emergency department-based intensive care unit patients.

OBJECTIVE: Emergency department (ED) boarding of patients who are critically ill is associated with poor outcomes. ED-based intensive care units (ED-ICUs) may mitigate the risks of ED boarding. We sought to analyze the impact of ED length of stay (LOS) before transfer to an ED-ICU on patient outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed adult ED patients managed in the ED-ICU at a US medical center. Bivariate and multivariable linear regressions tested ED LOS as a predictor of inpatient ICU and hospital LOS, and separate bivariate and multivariable logistic regressions tested ED LOS as a predictor of inpatient ICU admission, 48-hour mortality, and hospital mortality. Multivariable analyses' covariates were age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), Emergency Severity Index, and eSimplified Acute Physiology Score (eSAPS3). RESULTS: We included 5859 ED visits with subsequent care in the ED-ICU. Median age, CCI, eSAPS3, ED LOS, and ED-ICU LOS were 62 years (interquartile range [IQR], 48-73 years), 5 (IQR, 2-8), 46 (IQR, 36-56), 3.6 hours (IQR, 2.5-5.3 hours), and 8.5 hours (IQR, 5.3-13.4 hours), respectively, and 46.3% were women. Bivariate analyses showed negative associations of ED LOS with hospital LOS (ß = -3.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.9 to -1.0), inpatient ICU admission (odds ratio [OR], 0.86, 95% CI, 0.84-0.88), 48-hour mortality (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.98), and hospital mortality (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.85-0.92), but no association with inpatient ICU LOS. Multivariable analyses showed a negative association of ED LOS with inpatient ICU admission (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.88-0.93), but no associations with other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We observed no significant associations between ED LOS before ED-ICU transfer and worsened outcomes, suggesting an ED-ICU may mitigate the risks of ED boarding of patients who are critically ill.

Euglycemic diabetic ketoacidosis associated with SGLT2i use: Case series.

INTRODUCTION: Euglycemic diabetic ketoacidosis (EuDKA) associated with Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) use has been described but remains poorly understood. Data on Emergency Department (ED) presentation, resource utilization, and safety outcomes for these patients are lacking. We report a case series of patients diagnosed with EuDKA in the ED. METHODS: An electronic medical record search identified adult patients presenting to a large tertiary ED with EuDKA. They were screened for concurrent use of SGLT2i. Clinical presentation, resource utilization, safety, and disposition data were collected and described. RESULTS: Five patients were included for analysis. Median age [range] was 57 [43-73] years. Presenting symptoms included nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and altered mental status. Initial results included: serum glucose 191 mg/dL [176-215], venous pH 7.01 [6.95-7.30], serum HCO3 8 mEq/L [6-13], anion gap 27 [26-31], serum beta-hydroxybutyrate 9.9 mmol/L [9.2-12.3], and urine ketones 150 [150-150]. Patients remained on an insulin infusion for 18.77 h [11.25-56.48]. There were zero episodes of hypoglycemia and one episode of hypokalemia while on insulin infusion. Time to resolution of metabolic acidosis was 23.82 h [15.45-24.77]. DISCUSSION: We report a case series of ED patients with EuDKA associated with SGLT2i use, and describe presentation characteristics, resource utilization, and safety outcomes. Emergency physicians should be aware of the association between SGLT2i use and EuDKA. An appropriate work-up should be pursued for patients taking an SGLT2i who present with symptoms suggestive of DKA, including nausea, vomiting, malaise, and altered mental status, or are noted to have an unexplained elevated anion gap metabolic acidosis.

Emergency Department-based Intensive Care Unit Use Peaks Near Emergency Department Shift Turnover.

INTRODUCTION: The Emergency Critical Care Center (EC3) is an emergency department-based intensive care unit (ED-ICU) designed to improve timely access to critical care for ED patients. ED patients requiring intensive care are initially evaluated and managed in the main ED prior to transfer to a separate group of ED-ICU clinicians. The timing of patient transfers to the ED-ICU may decrease the number of handoffs between main ED teams and have an impact on both patient outcomes and optimal provider staffing models, but has not previously been studied. We aimed to analyze patterns of transfer to the ED-ICU and the relationship with shift turnover times in the main ED. We hypothesized that the number of transfers to the ED-ICU increases near main ED shift turnover times. METHODS: An electronic health record search identified all patients managed in the ED and ED-ICU in 2016 and 2017. We analyzed the number of ED arrivals per hour, the number of ED-ICU consults per hour, the time interval from ED arrival to ED-ICU consult, the distribution throughout the day, and the relationship with shift turnover times in the main ED. RESULTS: A total of 160,198 ED visits were queried, of which 5308 (3.3%) were managed in the ED-ICU. ED shift turnover times were 7 am, 3 pm, and 11 pm. The mean number of ED-ICU consults placed per hour was 221 (85 standard deviation), with relative maximums occurring near ED turnover times: 10:31 pm-11:30 pm (372) and 2:31 pm-3:30 pm (365). The minimum was placed between 7:31 am - 8:30 am (88), shortly after the morning ED turnover time. The median interval from ED arrival time to ED-ICU consult order was 161 minutes (range 6-1,434; interquartile range 144-174). Relative minimums were observed for patients arriving shortly prior to ED turnover times: 4:31 am - 5:30 am (120 minutes [min]), 12:31 pm - 1:30 pm (145 min), and 9:31 pm - 10:30 pm (135 min). Relative maximums were observed for patients arriving shortly after ED turnover times: 7:31 am - 8:30 am (177 min), 4:31 pm - 5:30 pm (218 min), and 11:31 pm - 12:30 am (179 min). CONCLUSION: ED-ICU utilization was highest near ED shift turnover times, and utilization was dissimilar to overall ED arrival patterns. Patients arriving immediately prior to ED shift turnover received earlier consults to the ED-ICU, suggesting these patients may have been preferentially transferred to the ED-ICU rather than signed out to the next team of emergency clinicians. These findings may guide operational planning, staffing models, and timing of shift turnover for other institutions implementing ED-ICUs. Future studies could investigate whether an ED-ICU model improves critically ill patients' outcomes by minimizing ED provider handoffs.

Incidence of adverse events in paediatric procedural sedation in the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the incidence of adverse events in the emergency department (ED) during procedural sedation in the paediatric population. Randomised controlled trials and observational studies from the past 10 years were included. We adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. SETTING: ED. PARTICIPANTS: Children. INTERVENTIONS: Procedural sedation. OUTCOMES: Adverse events like vomiting, agitation, hypoxia and apnoea. Meta-analysis was performed with random-effects model and reported as incidence rates with 95% CIs. RESULTS: A total of 1177 studies were retrieved for screening and 258 were selected for full-text review. 41 studies reporting on 13 883 procedural sedations in 13 876 children (≤18 years) were included. The most common adverse events (all reported per 1000 sedations) were: vomiting 55.5 (CI 45.2 to 65.8), agitation 17.9 (CI 12.2 to 23.7), hypoxia 14.8 (CI 10.2 to 19.3) and apnoea 7.1 (CI 3.2 to 11.0). The need to intervene with either bag valve mask, oral airway or positive pressure ventilation occurred in 5.0 per 1000 sedations (CI 2.3 to 7.6). The incidences of severe respiratory events were: 34 cases of laryngospasm among 8687 sedations (2.9 per 1000 sedations, CI 1.1 to 4.7; absolute rate 3.9 per 1000 sedations), 4 intubations among 9136 sedations and 0 cases of aspiration among 3326 sedations. 33 of the 34 cases of laryngospasm occurred in patients who received ketamine. CONCLUSIONS: Serious adverse respiratory events are very rare in paediatric procedural sedation in the ED. Emesis and agitation are the most frequent adverse events. Hypoxia, a late indicator of respiratory depression, occurs in 1.5% of sedations. Laryngospasm, though rare, happens most frequently with ketamine. The results of this study provide quantitative risk estimates to facilitate shared decision-making, risk communication, informed consent and resource allocation in children undergoing procedural sedation in the ED.

Safety and Effectiveness of Topical Anesthetics in Corneal Abrasions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Topical anesthetics are used in the emergency department (ED) to relieve eye pain and allow eye examinations in patients with corneal abrasions. There is concern for delayed corneal healing, which is associated with the long-term use of topical anesthetics, so outpatient use is not recommended. OBJECTIVES: We sought to systematically study the effectiveness and complications associated with the short-term use of topical anesthetics (≤72 hours) in the management of patients presenting to EDs with corneal abrasions. METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched from inception of the database until April 2014. We included studies of patients >16 years of age who were using topical anesthetics for <72 hours. Postoperative cases were not included. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients (68 in the intervention group and 72 in the control group) from 2 randomized trials were included in the analysis. Comparing control patients who did not use topical anesthetics to study patients who did use topical anesthetics, this meta-analysis found no significant difference in pain scores (standardized mean difference -1.01 [95% confidence interval {CI} -2.39 to 0.38), corneal healing (OR 1.31 [95% CI 0.53-3.27), or persistent symptoms (OR 0.98 [95% CI 0.06-16.69). The 2 trials reported no adverse effects. CONCLUSION: There were no differences regarding pain, persistent symptoms, or corneal healing when comparing short-term use of topical anesthetics to placebo in the treatment of corneal abrasion. Data on safety are sparse, and the use of this treatment is currently not supported by evidence.