ABSTRACT
Importance: The incidence of opioid-associated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OA-OHCA) has grown from less than 1% of OHCA in 2000 to between 7% and 14% of OHCA in recent years; American Heart Association (AHA) protocols suggest that emergency medical service (EMS) clinicians consider naloxone in OA-OHCA. However, it is unknown whether naloxone improves survival in these patients or in patients with undifferentiated OHCA. Objective: To evaluate the association of naloxone with clinical outcomes in patients with undifferentiated OHCA. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of EMS-treated patients aged 18 or older who received EMS treatment for nontraumatic OHCA in 3 Northern California counties between 2015 and 2023. Data were analyzed using propensity score-based models from February to April 2024. Exposure: EMS administration of naloxone. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge; the secondary outcome was sustained return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Covariates included patient and cardiac arrest characteristics (eg, age, sex, nonshockable rhythm, any comorbidity, unwitnessed arrest, and EMS agency) and EMS clinician determination of OHCA cause as presumed drug-related. Results: Among 8195 patients (median [IQR] age, 65 [51-78] years; 5540 male [67.6%]; 1304 Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander [15.9%]; 1119 Black [13.7%]; 2538 White [31.0%]) with OHCA treated by 5 EMS agencies from 2015 to 2023, 715 (8.7%) were believed by treating clinicians to have drug-related OHCA. Naloxone was administered to 1165 patients (14.2%) and was associated with increased ROSC using both nearest neighbor propensity matching (absolute risk difference [ARD], 15.2%; 95% CI, 9.9%-20.6%) and inverse propensity-weighted regression adjustment (ARD, 11.8%; 95% CI, 7.3%-16.4%). Naloxone was also associated with increased survival to hospital discharge using both nearest neighbor propensity matching (ARD, 6.2%; 95% CI, 2.3%-10.0%) and inverse propensity-weighted regression adjustment (ARD, 3.9%; 95% CI, 1.1%-6.7%). The number needed to treat with naloxone was 9 for ROSC and 26 for survival to hospital discharge. In a regression model that assessed effect modification between naloxone and presumed drug-related OHCA, naloxone was associated with improved survival to hospital discharge in both the presumed drug-related OHCA (odds ratio [OR], 2.48; 95% CI, 1.34-4.58) and non-drug-related OHCA groups (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.04-1.77). Conclusions and Relevance: In this retrospective cohort study, naloxone administration as part of EMS management of OHCA was associated with increased rates of ROSC and increased survival to hospital discharge when evaluated using propensity score-based models. Given the lack of clinical practice data on the efficacy of naloxone in OA-OHCA and OHCA in general, these findings support further evaluation of naloxone as part of cardiac arrest care.
Subject(s)
Emergency Medical Services , Naloxone , Narcotic Antagonists , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Humans , Naloxone/therapeutic use , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/drug therapy , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/mortality , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Male , Female , California/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Aged , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Emergency Medical Services/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome , Adult , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/statistics & numerical dataABSTRACT
Introduction: The opioid epidemic is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Prior work has shown that emergency department (ED) opioid prescribing can increase the incidence of opioid use disorder in a dose-dependent manner, and systemic changes that decrease default quantity of discharge opioid tablets in the electronic health record (EHR) can impact prescribing practices. However, ED leadership may be interested in the impact of communication around the intervention as well as whether the intervention may differentially impact different types of clinicians (physicians, physician assistants [PA], and nurse practitioners). We implemented and evaluated a quality improvement intervention of an announced decrease in EHR default quantities of commonly prescribed opioids at a large, academic, urban, tertiary-care ED. Methods: We gathered EHR data on all ED discharges with opioid prescriptions from January 1, 2019-December 6, 2021, including chief complaint, clinician, and opioid prescription details. Data was captured and analyzed on a monthly basis throughout this time period. On March 29, 2021, we implemented an announced decrease in EHR default dispense quantities from 20 tablets to 12 tablets for commonly prescribed opioids. We measured pre- and post-intervention quantities of opioid tablets prescribed per discharge receiving opioids, distribution by patient demographics, and inter-clinician variability in prescribing behavior. Results: The EHR change was associated with a 14% decrease in quantity of opioid tablets per discharge receiving opioids, from 14 to 12 tablets (P = <.001). We found no statistically significant disparities in prescriptions based on self-reported patient race (P = 0.68) or gender (P = 0.65). Nurse practitioners and PAs prescribed more opioids per encounter than physicians on average and had a statistically significant decrease in opioid prescriptions associated with the EHR change. Physicians had a lesser but still significant drop in opioid prescribing in the post-intervention period. Conclusion: Decreasing EHR defaults is a robust, simple tool for decreasing opioid prescriptions, with potential for implementation in the 42% of EDs nationwide that have defaults exceeding the recommended 12-tablet supply. Considering significant inter-clinician variability, future interventions to decrease opioid prescriptions should examine the effects of combining EHR default changes with targeted interventions for clinician groups or individual clinicians.
Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Electronic Health Records , Emergency Service, Hospital , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Quality Improvement , Humans , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Opioid-Related Disorders/prevention & control , United States , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical dataABSTRACT
Importance: Chronic symptoms reported following an infection with SARS-CoV-2, such as cognitive problems, overlap with symptoms included in the definition of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of ME/CFS-like illness subsequent to acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, changes in ME/CFS symptoms through 12 months of follow-up, and the association of ME/CFS symptoms with SARS-CoV-2 test results at the acute infection-like index illness. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, multisite, longitudinal cohort study (Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry [INSPIRE]) enrolled participants from December 11, 2020, to August 29, 2022. Participants were adults aged 18 to 64 years with acute symptoms suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 infection who received a US Food and Drug Administration-approved SARS-CoV-2 test at the time of illness and did not die or withdraw from the study by 3 months. Follow-up surveys were collected through February 28, 2023. Exposure: COVID-19 status (positive vs negative) at enrollment. Main Outcome and Measures: The main outcome was the weighted proportion of participants with ME/CFS-like illness based on the 2015 Institute of Medicine clinical case definition using self-reported symptoms. Results: A total of 4378 participants were included in the study. Most were female (3226 [68.1%]). Mean (SD) age was 37.8 (11.8) years. The survey completion rates ranged from 38.7% (3613 of 4738 participants) to 76.3% (1835 of 4738) and decreased over time. The weighted proportion of participants identified with ME/CFS-like illness did not change significantly at 3 through 12 months of follow-up and was similar in the COVID-19-positive (range, 2.8%-3.7%) and COVID-19-negative (range, 3.1%-4.5%) groups. Adjusted analyses revealed no significant difference in the odds of ME/CFS-like illness at any time point between COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative individuals (marginal odds ratio range, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.42-1.67] to 1.18 [95% CI, 0.55-2.51]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this prospective cohort study, there was no evidence that the proportion of participants with ME/CFS-like illness differed between those infected with SARS-CoV-2 vs those without SARS-CoV-2 infection up to 12 months after infection. A 3% to 4% prevalence of ME/CFS-like illness after an acute infection-like index illness would impose a high societal burden given the millions of persons infected with SARS-CoV-2.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , Female , Adult , Male , Prospective Studies , Middle Aged , Longitudinal Studies , Prevalence , Young Adult , United States/epidemiology , AdolescentABSTRACT
While the early effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the United States labor market are well-established, less is known about the long-term impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection and Long COVID on employment. To address this gap, we analyzed self-reported data from a prospective, national cohort study to estimate the effects of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms at three months post-infection on missed workdays and return to work. The analysis included 2,939 adults in the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE) study who tested positive for their initial SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time of enrollment, were employed before the pandemic, and completed a baseline and three-month electronic survey. At three months post-infection, 40.8% of participants reported at least one SARS-CoV-2 symptom and 9.6% of participants reported five or more SARS-CoV-2 symptoms. When asked about missed work due to their SARS-CoV-2 infection at three months, 7.2% of participants reported missing ≥10 workdays and 13.9% of participants reported not returning to work since their infection. At three months, participants with ≥5 symptoms had a higher adjusted odds ratio of missing ≥10 workdays (2.96, 95% CI 1.81-4.83) and not returning to work (2.44, 95% CI 1.58-3.76) compared to those with no symptoms. Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 symptoms were common, affecting 4-in-10 participants at three-months post-infection, and were associated with increased odds of work loss, most pronounced among adults with ≥5 symptoms at three months. Despite the end of the federal Public Health Emergency for COVID-19 and efforts to "return to normal", policymakers must consider the clinical and economic implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on people's employment status and work absenteeism, particularly as data characterizing the numerous health and well-being impacts of Long COVID continue to emerge. Improved understanding of risk factors for lost work time may guide efforts to support people in returning to work.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Male , Adult , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Prospective Studies , Return to Work/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Employment , Self Report , Pandemics , Absenteeism , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic placed health care personnel (HCP) at risk for stress, anxiety, burnout, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). To address this, hospitals developed programs to mitigate risk. The objectives of the current study were to measure the availability and use of these programs in a cohort of academic emergency departments (EDs) in the United States early in the pandemic and identify factors associated with program use. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of ED HCP in 21 academic EDs in 15 states between June and September 2020. Site investigators provided data on the availability of 28 programs grouped into 9 categories. Individual support programs included: financial, workload mitigation, individual COVID-19 testing, emotional (e.g., mental health hotline), and instrumental (e.g., childcare) Clinical work support programs included: COVID-19 team communication (e.g., debriefing critical incident), patient-family communication facilitation, patient services (e.g., social work, ethics consultation), and system-level exposure reduction. Participants provided corresponding data on whether they used the programs. We used generalized linear mixed models clustered on site to measure the association between demographic and facility characteristics and program use. RESULTS: We received 1,541 survey responses (96% response rate) from emergency physicians or advanced practice providers, nurses, and nonclinical staff. Program availability in each of the 9 categories was high (>95% of hospitals). Program use was variable, with clinical work support programs used more frequently (28-50% of eligible HCP across categories) than individual employee support programs (6-13% of eligible HCP across categories). Fifty-seven percent of respondents reported that the COVID-19 pandemic had affected their stress and anxiety, and 12% were at elevated risk for PTSD. Program use did not significantly differ for HCP who reported symptoms of anxiety and/or stress compared to those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Early in the pandemic, support programs were widely available to ED HCP, but program use was low. Future work will focus on identifying barriers and facilitators to use and specific programs most likely to be effective during periods of highest occupational stress.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , United States/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , COVID-19 Testing , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Personnel/psychology , Delivery of Health Care , Emergency Service, HospitalABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Estimates of the prevalence of drug-related out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) vary, ranging from 1.8% to 10.0% of medical OHCA. However, studies conducted prior to the recent wave of fentanyl deaths likely underestimate the current prevalence of drug-related OHCA. We evaluated recent trends in drug-related OHCA, hypothesizing that the proportion of presumed drug-related OHCA treated by emergency medical services (EMS) has increased since 2015. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of OHCA patients treated by EMS providers in San Francisco, California between 2015 and 2023. Participants included OHCA cases in which resuscitation was attempted by EMS. The study exposure was the year of arrest. Our primary outcome was the occurrence of drug-related OHCA, defined as the EMS impression of OHCA caused by a presumed or known overdose of medication(s) or drug(s). RESULTS: From 2015 to 2023, 5044 OHCA resuscitations attended by EMS (average 561 per year) met inclusion criteria. The median age was 65 (IQR 50-79); 3508 (69.6%) were male. The EMS impression of arrest etiology was drug-related in 446/5044 (8.8%) of OHCA. The prevalence of presumed drug-related OHCA increased significantly each year from 1% in 2015 to 17.6% in 2023 (p-value for trend = 0.0001). After adjustment, presumed drug-related OHCA increased by 30% each year from 2015-2023. CONCLUSION: Drug-related OHCA is an increasingly common etiology of OHCA. In 2023, one in six OHCA was presumed to be drug related. Among participants less than 60 years old, one in three OHCA was presumed to be drug related.
Subject(s)
Drug Overdose , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/etiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/chemically induced , Male , San Francisco/epidemiology , Female , Retrospective Studies , Middle Aged , Emergency Medical Services/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Drug Overdose/epidemiology , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/statistics & numerical data , PrevalenceABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: While Black individuals experienced disproportionately increased firearm violence and deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic, less is known about community level disparities. We sought to evaluate national community race and ethnicity differences in 2020 and 2021 rates of penetrating trauma. METHODS: We linked the 2018-2021 National Emergency Medical Services Information System databases to ZIP Code demographics. We stratified encounters into majority race/ethnicity communities (>50% White, Black, or Hispanic/Latino). We used logistic regression to compare penetrating trauma for each community in 2020 and 2021 to a combined 2018-2019 historical baseline. Majority Black and majority Hispanic/Latino communities were compared to majority White communities for each year. Analyses were adjusted for household income. RESULTS: We included 87,504,097 encounters (259,449 penetrating traumas). All communities had increased odds of trauma in 2020 when compared to 2018-2019, but this increase was largest for Black communities (aOR 1.4, [1.3-1.4]; White communities - aOR 1.2, [1.2-1.3]; Hispanic/Latino communities - aOR 1.1. [1.1-1.2]). There was a similar trend of increased penetrating trauma in 2021 for Black (aOR 1.2, [1.2-1.3]); White (aOR 1.2, [1.1-1.2]); Hispanic/Latino (aOR 1.1, [1.1-1.1]). Comparing penetrating trauma in each year to White communities, Black communities had higher odds of trauma in all years (2018/2019 - aOR 3.0, [3.0-3.1]; 2020 - aOR 3.3, [3.3-3.4]; 2021 - aOR 3.3, [3.2-3.2]). Hispanic/Latino also had more trauma each year but to a lesser degree (2018/2019 - aOR 2.0, [2.0-2.0]; 2020 - aOR 1.8, [1.8-1.9]; 2021 - aOR 1.9, [1.8-1.9]). CONCLUSION: Black communities were most impacted by increased penetrating trauma rates in 2020 and 2021 even after adjusting for income.