BEE FIRST: A standardized point-of-care ultrasound approach to a patient with dyspnea.

Dyspnea is a common complaint in patients who present to the emergency department and can be due to numerous etiologies. This case report details a 90-year-old female with a history significant for hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and new diagnosis of ovarian malignancy whose symptoms increased over the past three days. Point-of-care Ultrasonography showed multiple B-lines, a plethoric IVC without respiratory variation, a markedly low EF and a lack of RV dilation. There was also no evidence of effusion which led the emergency medicine team to the diagnosis of acute decompensated heart failure. This quick diagnosis was possible due to using the standardized POCUS approach guided by the BEE FIRST algorithm. BEE FIRST can help physicians remember: B-lines are indicative of interstitial thickening, Effusion such as pericardial or pleural should be checked for, Ejection Fraction is useful in assessing for heart failure, IVC/Infection/Infarct correlates with central venous pressure, and can be used to assess volume status, check for enlargement, evidence of pneumonia, subpleural consolidation "shred sign", hepatization of lung, and/or pulmonary infarction related to pulmonary embolism, Right Heart Strain can indicate pulmonary embolism or pulmonary hypertension, Sliding Lung can assess for pneumothorax and pleural characteristics, and lastly, Thrombosis/Tumor can assess for myxoma and interrogation of lower extremities for deep vein thrombosis can aid in dyspnea differentiation. In this report, we demonstrate how the framework BEE FIRST offers a standardized stepwise approach to the utilization of POCUS in a patient with acute dyspnea in the ED setting.

Perception and Practice Among Emergency Medicine Health Care Providers Regarding Discharging Patients After Opioid Administration.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the current attitudes, perceptions, and practices of emergency medicine providers and nurses (RNs) regarding the discharge of adult patients from the emergency department (ED) after administration of opioid analgesics. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered at 3 hospital sites with a combined annual ED census of >180,000 visits per year. All 59 attending emergency physicians (EPs), 233 RNs, and 23 advanced practice clinicians (APCs) who worked at these sites were eligible to participate. FINDINGS: Thirty-five EPs (59.3%), 88 RNs (37.8%), and 14 APCs (60.9%) completed the survey for an overall response rate of 51.75%. Most respondents were female (95 [69.9%]). The factor ranked most important to consider when discharging a patient from the ED after administration of opioids was the patient's functional status and vital signs (median, 2.00; interquartile range, 2.00-3.50). More RNs (84 [96.6%]) than EPs (29 [82.9%]) reported that developing an ED policy or guideline for safe discharge after administration of opioids is important to clinical practice (P = 0.02). Only 8 physicians (23.5%) reported that they did not prescribe intramuscular morphine, and 15 (42.9%) reported that they did not prescribe intramuscular hydromorphone. EPs (7 [20.0%]) and RNs (3 [3.4%]) differed in regard to whether they were aware if any patients to whom they administered an opioid had experienced an adverse drug-related event (P = 0.01). Most EPs (24 [68.6%]) and RNs (54 [61.4%]) believed that the decision for patient discharge should be left to both the emergency medicine provider and the RN. IMPLICATIONS: Most study participants believed that developing a policy or guideline for safe discharge after administration opioids in the ED is important to clinical practice. Only a few physicians reported that they did not prescribe intramuscular hydromorphone or morphine. Most participants believed the discharge decision after administration of opioids in the ED should be primarily determined by both the emergency medicine provider and the RN.

Injury due to mechanical falls: future directions in gender-specific surveillance, screening, and interventions in emergency department patients.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that among older adults (≥65 years), falls are the leading cause of injury-related death. Fall-related fractures among older women are more than twice as frequent as those for men. Gender-specific evidence-based fall prevention strategy and intervention studies show that improved patient-centered outcomes are elusive. There is a paucity of emergency medicine literature on the topic. As part of the 2014 Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) consensus conference on "Gender-Specific Research in Emergency Care: Investigate, Understand, and Translate How Gender Affects Patient Outcomes," a breakout group convened to generate a research agenda on priority questions to be answered on this topic. The consensus-based priority research agenda is presented in this article.

Emergency Medicine Gender-specific Education.

The 2014 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference has taken the first step in identifying gender-specific care as an area of importance to both emergency medicine (EM) and research. To improve patient care, we need to address educational gaps in this area concurrent with research gaps. In this article, the authors highlight the need for sex- and gender-specific education in EM and propose guidelines for medical student, resident, and faculty education. Specific examples of incorporating this content into grand rounds, simulation, bedside teaching, and journal club sessions are reviewed. Future challenges and strategies to fill the gaps in the current education model are also described.

Future directions in sex- and Gender-specific Emergency Medicine.

The 2014 Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) consensus conference "Gender-Specific Research in Emergency Medicine: Investigate, Understand, and Translate How Gender Affects Patient Outcomes" convened a diverse group of stakeholders to target gaps in emergency medicine (EM) sex- and gender-specific research and identify research priorities. At the close of the conference, the executive committee sought feedback from group leaders and conference attendees about the next critical steps in EM sex- and gender-specific research, goals for their own future research, and anticipated barriers in pursuing this research. This article summarizes this feedback on the future directions in sex- and gender-specific research in emergency care and strategies to overcome barriers.