Development of a Clinical Risk Score to Risk Stratify for a Serious Cause of Vertigo in Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Identify high-risk clinical characteristics for a serious cause of vertigo in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Multicentre prospective cohort study over 3 years at three university-affiliated tertiary care EDs. Participants were patients presenting with vertigo, dizziness or imbalance. Main outcome measurement was an adjudicated serious diagnosis defined as stroke, transient ischemic attack, vertebral artery dissection or brain tumour. RESULTS: A total of 2,078 of 2,618 potentially eligible patients (79.4%) were enrolled (mean age 77.1 years; 59% women). Serious events occurred in 111 (5.3%) patients. We used logistic regression to create a 7-item prediction model: male, age over 65, hypertension, diabetes, motor/sensory deficits, cerebellar signs/symptoms and benign paroxysmal positional vertigo diagnosis (C-statistic 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92 to 0.98). The risk of a serious diagnosis ranged from 0% for a score of <5, 2.1% for a score of 5 to 8, and 41% for a score >8. Sensitivity for a serious diagnosis was 100% (95% CI, 97.1% to 100%) and specificity 72.1% (95% CI, 70.1% to 74%) for a score <5. CONCLUSION: The Sudbury Vertigo Risk Score identifies the risk of a serious diagnosis as a cause of a patient's vertigo and if validated could assist physicians in guiding further investigation, consultation, and treatment decisions, improving resource utilization and reducing missed diagnoses.

Hospital policy of tranexamic acid to reduce transfusion in major non-cardiac surgery (TRACTION): protocol for a phase IV randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an inexpensive and widely available medication that reduces blood loss and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in cardiac and orthopaedic surgeries. While the use of TXA in these surgeries is routine, its efficacy and safety in other surgeries, including oncologic surgeries, with comparable rates of transfusion are uncertain. Our primary objective is to evaluate whether a hospital-level policy implementation of routine TXA use in patients undergoing major non-cardiac surgery reduces RBC transfusion without increasing thrombotic risk. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A pragmatic, registry-based, blinded, cluster-crossover randomised controlled trial at 10 Canadian sites, enrolling patients undergoing non-cardiac surgeries at high risk for RBC transfusion. Sites are randomised in 4-week intervals to a hospital policy of intraoperative TXA or matching placebo. TXA is administered as 1 g at skin incision, followed by an additional 1 g prior to skin closure. Coprimary outcomes are (1) effectiveness, evaluated as the proportion of patients transfused RBCs during hospital admission and (2) safety, evaluated as the proportion of patients diagnosed with venous thromboembolism within 90 days. Secondary outcomes include: (1) transfusion: number of RBC units transfused (both at a hospital and patient level); (2) safety: in-hospital diagnoses of myocardial infarction, stroke, deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism; (3) clinical: hospital length of stay, intensive care unit admission, hospital survival, 90-day survival and the number of days alive and out of hospital to day 30; and (4) compliance: the proportion of enrolled patients who receive a minimum of one dose of the study intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Institutional research ethics board approval has been obtained at all sites. At the completion of the trial, a plain language summary of the results will be posted on the trial website and distributed in the lay press. Our trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04803747.

Utilization of Shock Team and Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VA-ECMO) in the Management of Cardiogenic Shock in Northern Ontario.

Background: Despite advancements in critical care and coronary revascularization, cardiogenic shock (CS) outcomes remain poor. Implementing a shock team and use of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) have been associated with improved CS outcomes, but its feasibility in remote and rural areas remains unknown. Methods: This retrospective study included patients with CS who required mechanical circulatory support (MCS) at Health Sciences North, Sudbury, Ontario. The analysis aimed to accomplish 2 objectives: first, to review the outcomes associated with use of Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) and, second, to assess the feasibility of establishing a shock team to facilitate the local implementation of VA-ECMO. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Results: The outcomes of 15 patients with CS who received Impella between 2015 and 2021 were reviewed. Their average age was 65 years (standard deviation [SD]: 13), and 8 patients (53%) were female. CS was ischemic in 12 patients (80%). Transfemoral Impella CP (cardiac power) was the most frequently used (93%). Thirteen patients (87%) died during the index hospital stay post-Impella because of progressive circulatory failure. The shock team was established following consultations with several Canadian MCS centres, leading to the development of a protocol to guide use of MCS. There have been 4 cases in which percutaneous VA-ECMO using Cardiohelp (Getinge/Maquet, Wayne, NJ) has been used; 3 (75%) survived beyond the index hospitalization. Conclusions: This analysis demonstrated the feasibility of implementing a shock team in remote Northern Ontario, enabling the use of VA-ECMO with success in a centre with a sizeable rural catchment area. This initiative helps address the gap in cardiac care outcomes between rural and urban areas in Ontario.

Introduction: En dépit des avancées des soins aux patients en phase critique et de la revascularisation coronarienne, les résultats du choc cardiogénique (CC) semblent mauvais. La mise en place d'une équipe de choc et l'utilisation de l'oxygénation extracorporelle (ECMO, de l'anglais extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) par voie veino-artérielle (VA) (VA-ECMO) ont été associées à de meilleurs résultats du CC, mais on ignore sa faisabilité dans les régions éloignées et rurales. Méthodes: La présente étude rétrospective portait sur des patients en CC qui ont eu besoin d'une assistance circulatoire mécanique (ACM) à Horizon Santé-Nord, à Sudbury, en Ontario. L'analyse visait 2 objectifs : le premier objectif était de passer en revue les résultats associés à l'utilisation de Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) et, le deuxième était d'évaluer la faisabilité de la mise en place d'une équipe de choc pour faciliter la mise en œuvre locale de la VA-ECMO. Le principal critère d'évaluation était la mortalité intrahospitalière. Résultats: Nous avons passé en revue les résultats cliniques de 15 patients ayant subi un CC qui avaient reçu une Impella entre 2015 et 2021. L'âge moyen était de 65 ans (écart type [ET] : 13), et 8 patients (53 %) étaient des femmes. Le CC était d'origine ischémique chez 12 patients (80 %). L'Impella CP (cardiac power, soit la pompe cardiaque) par voie transfémorale était la plus fréquemment utilisée (93 %). Treize patients (87 %) sont morts durant le séjour de référence à l'hôpital après l'utilisation de l'Impella en raison d'insuffisance circulatoire progressive. La mise en place de l'équipe de choc à la suite des consultations dans plusieurs centres canadiens d'ACM a mené à l'élaboration d'un protocole d'utilisation de l'ACM. Il y a eu 4 cas chez lesquels la VA-ECMO par voie percutanée à l'aide de Cardiohelp (Getinge/Maquet, Wayne, New Jersey, É.-U.) a été utilisée ; 3 (75 %) ont survécu après l'hospitalisation de référence. Conclusions: Cette analyse a démontré la faisabilité de la mise en place d'une équipe de choc dans les régions éloignées du nord de l'Ontario, qui a permis d'utiliser efficacement la VA-ECMO dans un centre d'une circonscription hospitalière rurale non négligeable. Cette initiative aide à remédier à l'écart des résultats en soins cardiaques entre les régions rurales et urbaines de l'Ontario.

Mortality and risk factors associated with misdiagnosis of acute aortic syndrome in Ontario, Canada: a population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Acute aortic syndrome (AAS) is a life-threatening aortic emergency. It describes three diagnoses: acute aortic dissection, acute intramural haematoma and penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer. Unfortunately, there are no accurate estimates of the miss rate for AAS, risk factors for missed diagnosis or its effect on outcomes. METHODS: A population-based retrospective cohort study of anonymously linked data for residents of Ontario, Canada, was carried out. Incident cases of AAS were identified between 2003 and 2018 using a validated algorithm based on ICD codes and death. Before multivariate modelling, all categorical variables were analysed for an association with missed AAS diagnosis using χ2 tests. These preliminary analyses were unadjusted for clustering or any covariates. Finally, we performed multilevel logistic regression analysis using a generalised linear mixed model approach to model the probability of a missed case occurring. RESULTS: There were 1299 cases of AAS (age mean (SD) 68.03±14.70, woman 500 (38.5%), rural areas (n=111, 8.55%)) over the study period. Missed cases accounted for 163 (12.5%) of the cohort. Mortality (non-missed AAS 59.7% vs missed AAS 54.6%) and surgical intervention (non-missed AAS 31% vs missed AAS 30.7%) were similar in missed and non-missed cases. However, lower acuity (Canadian triage acuity scale >2 (OR 2.45 95% CI 1.71 to 3.52) (the scale is from 1 to 5, with 1 indicating high acuity) had a higher odds of being a missed case and non-ambulatory presentation (OR 0.47 95% CI 0.33 to 0.67) and presenting to a teaching (OR 0.60 95% CI 0.40 to 0.90)) or cardiac centre (OR 0.41 95% CI 0.27 to 0.62) were associated with a lower odds of being a missed case. CONCLUSIONS: The high rate of misdiagnosis has remained stable for over a decade. Non-teaching and non-cardiac hospitals had a higher incidence of missed cases. Mortality and rates of surgery were not associated with a missed diagnosis of AAS. Educational interventions should be prioritised in non-teaching hospitals and non-cardiac centres.

Can you accurately rule out acute aortic syndrome by restricting imaging of the aorta to the area of the patient's pain?

BACKGROUND: Acute aortic syndrome (AAS) is a life-threatening condition necessitating timely and accurate diagnosis for appropriate treatment. Currently, the only way to rule out the diagnosis is advanced imaging. The most accessible is computed tomography of the entire aorta. Most scans are negative, exposing patients to radiation, increased time in the emergency department (ED), and non-significant incidental findings. This study investigated whether restricting imaging to the area of aortic-related pain accurately rules out AAS. METHODS: A health records review was conducted on consecutive cases from three academic EDs between 2015 and 2020. Data were extracted and verified from multiple sources. Participants included adults diagnosed with AAS based on radiological evidence. The diagnostic performance of the restricted imaging strategy was assessed; sensitivity and likelihood ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Data from 149 cases of AAS were collected, with the majority presenting with chest pain (46%) or abdominal pain (24%). The restricted imaging strategy demonstrated a sensitivity of 96% (95% CI 91.4-98.5%) in ruling out AAS. In a subset of patients with systolic blood pressure > 90 mmHg and without aortic aneurysm/repair (n = 86), the sensitivity was 100% (95% CI 96-100%). CONCLUSION: Restricting imaging to the area of pain in hemodynamically stable patients without known aortic aneurysm provides a highly sensitive approach to ruling out AAS.

Evaluation of the Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines Risk Prediction Tool for Acute Aortic Syndrome: The RIPP Score.

Introduction: Acute aortic syndrome (AAS) is a rare clinical syndrome with a high mortality rate. The Canadian clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis of AAS was developed in order to reduce the frequency of misdiagnoses. As part of the guideline, a clinical decision aid was developed to facilitate clinician decision-making (RIPP score). The aim of this study is to validate the diagnostic accuracy of this tool and assess its performance in comparison to other risk prediction tools that have been developed. Methods: This was a historical case-control study. Consecutive cases and controls were recruited from three academic emergency departments from 2002-2020. Cases were identified through an admission, discharge, or death certificated diagnosis of acute aortic syndrome. Controls were identified through presenting complaint of chest, abdominal, flank, back pain, and/or perfusion deficit. We compared the clinical decision tools' C statistic and used the DeLong method to test for the significance of these differences and report sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals. Results: We collected data on 379 cases of acute aortic syndrome and 1340 potential eligible controls; 379 patients were randomly selected from the final population. The RIPP score had a sensitivity of 99.7% (98.54-99.99). This higher sensitivity resulted in a lower specificity (53%) compared to the other clinical decision aids (63-86%). The DeLong comparison of the C statistics found that the RIPP score had a higher C statistic than the ADDRS (-0.0423 (95% confidence interval -0.07-0.02); P < 0.0009) and the AORTAs score (-0.05 (-0.07 to -0.02); P = 0.0002), no difference compared to the Lovy decision tool (0.02 (95% CI -0.01-0.05 P < 0.25)) and decreased compared to the Von Kodolitsch decision tool (0.04 (95% CI 0.01-0.07 P < 0.008)). Conclusion: The Canadian clinical practice guideline's AAS clinical decision aid is a highly sensitive tool that uses readily available clinical information. It has the potential to improve diagnosis of AAS in the emergency department.

Impact of community-based interventions on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Survival following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains low, typically less than 10%. Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and bystander-AED use have been shown to improve survival by up to fourfold in individual studies. Numerous community-based interventions have been implemented worldwide in an effort to enhance rates of bystander-CPR, bystander-AED use, and improve OHCA survival. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effect of such interventions on OHCA outcomes. Medline and Embase were systematically searched from inception through July 2021 for studies describing the implementation and effect of one or more community-based interventions targeting OHCA outcomes. Two reviewers screened articles, extracted data, and evaluated study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. For each outcome, data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Of the 2481 studies identified, 16 met inclusion criteria. All included studies were observational. They reported a total of 1,081,040 OHCAs across 11 countries. The most common interventions included community-based CPR training (n = 12), community-based AED training (n = 9), and dispatcher-assisted CPR (n = 8). Health system interventions (hospital or paramedical services) were also described in 11 of the included studies. Evidence certainty among all outcomes was low or very low according to GRADE criteria. On meta-analysis, community-based interventions with and without health system interventions were consistently associated with improved OCHA outcomes: rates of bystander-CPR, bystander-AED use, survival, and survival with a favorable neurological outcome. Bystander CPR-14 studies showed a significant increase in post-intervention bystander-CPR rates (n = 285 752; OR 2.26 [1.74, 2.94]; I2 = 99%, and bystander AED use (n = 37 882; OR 2.08 [1.44, 3.01]; I2 = 54%) and durvival-10 studies, pooling survival to hospital discharge and survival to 30 days (n = 79 206; OR 1.59 [1.20, 2.10]; I2 = 95%. The results provide foundational support for the efficacy of community-based interventions in enhancing OHCA outcomes. These findings inform our recommendation that communities, regions, and countries should implement community-based interventions in their pre-hospital strategy for OHCA. Further research is needed to identify which specific intervention types are most effective.

Torsades de pointes associated with remdesivir treatment for COVID-19 pneumonia.

Background: Prolonged QT interval (QTc) can be a serious adverse event from SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated treatment, including remdesivir. Methods: We present a case of a 55-year-old woman with COVID-19 pneumonia who was treated with remdesivir. The QTc on admission was 483 ms. After three doses of remdesivir, she had an episode of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia. Repeat QTc was significantly prolonged at 609 ms. She experienced a polymorphic ventricular tachycardic cardiac arrest the next morning, thought to be secondary to torsades de pointes. Results: Transthoracic echocardiogram showed normal biventricular function. Electrolytes were within normal limits. In the absence of other QTc-prolonging medications, remdesivir was thought to be inciting agent. Following discontinuation of remdesivir, the patient's QTc returned to baseline. Conclusions: There is a risk for cardiac events from QTc prolongation effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated treatment. We recommend pharmacological profile review and cardiac monitoring for patients receiving remdesivir.

Historique: Un intervalle QT prolongé (QTc) peut être un grave effet indésirable de l'infection par le SRAS-CoV-2 et du traitement qui s'y associe, y compris le remdésivir. Méthodologie: Les chercheurs présentent le cas d'une femme de 55 ans atteinte d'une pneumonie à COVID-19 qui a reçu un traitement au remdésivir. Son QTc à l'admission était de 483 ms. Après trois doses de remdésivir, elle a subi un épisode de tachycardie ventriculaire non soutenue. La reprise du QTc était particulièrement prolongé, à 609 ms. La patiente a vécu un arrêt cardiaque causé par une tachycardie ventriculaire polymorphe le lendemain matin, considéré comme secondaire à des torsades de pointe. Résultats: L'échocardiogramme transthoracique a révélé une fonction biventriculaire normale. Les électrolytes se situaient dans les limites normales. En l'absence d'autres médicaments pour prolonger le QTc, le remdésivir a été présumé comme responsable. Après l'arrêt de ce médicament, le QTc de la patiente est redevenu normal. Conclusions: La prolongation du QTc découlant de l'infection par le SRAS-CoV-2 et du traitement qui s'y associe entraîne un risque d'arrêt cardiaque. Il est recommandé de procéder à une évaluation du profil pharmacologique et d'assurer la surveillance cardiaque des patients qui reçoivent du remdésivir.

Epidemiology, mortality and miss rate of acute aortic syndrome in Ontario, Canada: a population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Acute aortic syndrome (AAS) is a life-threatening emergency. It describes three distinct diagnoses: acute aortic dissection, acute intramural hematoma and penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer. There are currently no accurate estimates for incidence, mortality or misdiagnosis. Our objectives were to determine the incidence, mortality and miss rate of acute aortic syndrome in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A population-based retrospective cohort study of anonymously linked data for residents of Ontario, Canada, was carried out. Incident cases of acute aortic syndrome were identified between 2003 and 2018 using a validated algorithm based on ICD-10 codes and death. Incidence (number of cases/population of Ontario), mortality, and miss rate were calculated. Miss rate was defined as when a patient was seen in the ED within 14 days prior to an acute aortic syndrome diagnosis with a presenting complaint consistent with acute aortic syndrome. RESULTS: There were 1299 cases of acute aortic syndrome over the study period [age mean (SD) 68.03 ± 14.70; female (n = 500, 38.5%); rural areas (n = 111, 8.6%)]. The overall annual incidence for acute aortic syndrome was 0.61 per 100,000. One year mortality decreased from 47.4 to 29.1%. ED mortality was 14.9%. In the 14 days prior to diagnosis 12.5% of patients were seen in the ED with a presentation consistent with acute aortic syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Annual incidence of acute aortic syndrome was found to be lower than other population-based studies. Also, the burden of mortality is seen in the ED. Education initiatives should focus on the identification of acute aortic syndrome in the ED to address mortality and miss rate.

RéSUMé: INTRODUCTION: Le syndrome aortique aigu (SAA) est une urgence qui met la vie en danger. Il décrit trois diagnostics distincts: dissection aortique aiguë, hématome intramural aigu et ulcère athéroscléreux pénétrant. Il n'existe actuellement aucune estimation précise de l'incidence, de la mortalité ou des diagnostics erronés. Nos objectifs étaient de déterminer l'incidence, la mortalité et le taux d'échec du syndrome aortique aigu dans le service des urgences (SU). MéTHODES: Une étude de cohorte rétrospective basée sur la population a été réalisée à partir de données liées anonymement pour les résidents de l'Ontario, Canada. Les cas incidents de syndrome aortique aigu ont été identifiés entre 2003-2018 à l'aide d'un algorithme validé basé sur les codes CIM-10 et les décès. L'incidence (nombre de cas/population de l'Ontario), la mortalité et le taux d'absence ont été calculés. Le taux d'omission a été défini comme le cas où un patient a été vu à l'urgence dans les 14 jours précédant un diagnostic de syndrome aortique aigu et que la plainte était conforme au syndrome aortique aigu. RéSULTATS: Il y a eu 1 299 cas de syndrome aortique aigu pendant la période d'étude (âge moyen (ET) 68,03 ±14,70 ; femmes (n = 500, 38,5 %) ; zones rurales (n = 111, 8,6%)). L'incidence annuelle globale du syndrome aortique aigu était de 0,61 pour 100 000. La mortalité à un an a diminué de 47,4 % à 29,1 %. La mortalité aux urgences était de 14,9 %. Au cours des 14 jours précédant le diagnostic, 12,5 % des patients ont été vus aux urgences avec une présentation compatible avec le syndrome aortique aigu. CONCLUSIONS: L'incidence annuelle de syndrome aortique aigu s'est avérée inférieure à celle d'autres études basées sur la population. En outre, le poids de la mortalité est observé aux urgences. Les initiatives de formation devraient se concentrer sur l'identification des syndrome aortique aigu aux urgences afin de réduire la mortalité et le taux d'échec.

Is a homemade cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) trainer non-inferior to a commercially available CPR mannequin in teaching high-quality CPR? A non-inferiority randomized control trial.

INTRODUCTION: Studies demonstrate that feedback devices help students achieve mastery of critical CPR skills and shorten the time from demonstration to competence. CPR feedback devices are costly and may not be available in low resource settings or in the context of online classes. We have developed a homemade feedback enabled CPR trainer. This trainer consists of a lid with two toilet rolls stacked on top. We have shown it is feasible to generate high quality CPR using this trainer, however the ability for this trainer to successfully be used in skill acquisition is unknown.Our main objective was to assess if learning CPR on a homemade toilet paper trainer was non-inferior to a commercially available mannequin when comparing post-training CPR scores. METHODS: We conducted a parallel non-inferiority randomized control trial using a variable block randomization to a 10-min training session on either a toilet paper or commercial mannequin trainer. Primary outcome was mean overall CPR score as determined by high fidelity mannequin software. A sample size of 62 per group was calculated based on a 90% power to assess for the lower limit of a two-sided 95% confidence interval above the non-inferiority limit of 10%. RESULTS: 125 participants were randomized to the toilet paper (n = 64) or commercial mannequin trainer (n = 61). There was no difference between groups in age, sex, height, weight or previous CPR training. There was an absolute difference of 2% (CI 95% 3.3 to 7.3%) in mean overall CPR score between groups (toilet paper = 82% (SD 15.9%), commercial mannequin = 84% (SD 15%). CONCLUSION: A homemade CPR trainer was non-inferior to a commercially available trainer. This study provides preliminary evidence supporting the use of a homemade, easily accessible trainer for basic compression-only CPR skill acquisition.

Does implementation of a diagnostic pathway for acute aortic syndrome including D-dimer increase the usage of D-dimer and computed tomography?

INTRODUCTION: The Canadian clinical practice guidelines propose a novel diagnostic pathway incorporating a clinical decision tool and D-dimer to aid in risk stratifying patients for acute aortic syndrome. The objective of this study was to assess if implementation of a diagnostic pathway incorporating D-dimer would increase the usage of D-dimer and computed tomography (CT) in a tertiary care emergency department. METHODS: Prospective single centre before and after study-recruiting patients over a 6-week period from a tertiary care emergency department. INTERVENTION: multi model implementation of a diagnostic pathway for acute aortic syndrome incorporating D-dimer. OUTCOME: proportion of patients receiving D-dimer testing/CT in the 2 weeks before and after implementation. RESULTS: We included 982 patients (Female 55%, Age mean 51.9, N = 492 pre intervention and N = 490 post intervention). The proportion that received a D-dimer test increased from 6.9 to 10.4% (p < 0.051), while the number of CT aortas remained stable (0.6% vs. 0.6%; p = 0.60). Documentation of pretest probability assessment increased from 1 to 3%, (p < 0.009) following the intervention. In the post intervention cohort, the tool was applied correctly in all cases (N = 17). CONCLUSION: This single centre study found that a diagnostic pathway for acute aortic syndrome including D-dimer could be implemented without a significant increase in test ordering during this first 2 weeks after implementation. This study adds to the argument for use of D-dimer to help risk stratify patients for the diagnosis of acute aortic syndrome. Future studies are needed to confirm the diagnostic accuracy of this pathway and the long-term impact on resource utilization.

RéSUMé: INTRODUCTION: Les guides de pratique clinique canadiens proposent une nouvelle voie de diagnostic intégrant un outil de décision clinique et du D-dimère pour aider à stratifier le risque chez les patients atteints du syndrome aortique aigu. L'objectif de cette étude était d'évaluer si la mise en place d'une voie diagnostique intégrant le dimère-D augmenterait l'utilisation du dimère-D et de la tomodensitométrie (TDM) dans un service d'urgence de soins tertiaires. MéTHODES: Centre unique prospectif avant et après l'étude - recrutement de patients sur une période de 6 semaines à partir d'un service d'urgence de soins tertiaires. Intervention : mise en œuvre multi-modèle d'une voie diagnostique pour le syndrome aortique aigu intégrant le D-dimère. Résultat : Proportion de patients ayant subi un test des D-dimères/TDM dans les deux semaines précédant et suivant la mise en œuvre. RéSULTATS: Nous avons inclus 982 patients (femmes 55 %, âge moyen 51,9, N = 492 avant l'intervention et N = 490 après l'intervention). La proportion de personnes ayant reçu un test D-dimère est passée de 6,9 % à 10,4 % (p < 0,051), tandis que le nombre d'aortes CT est demeuré stable (0,6 % contre 0,6 %; p = 0,60). La documentation de l'évaluation de la probabilité avant le test est passée de 1 % à 3 % (p<0,009) après l'intervention. Dans la cohorte post-intervention, l'outil a été appliqué correctement dans tous les cas (n = 17). CONCLUSION: Cette étude menée auprès d'un seul centre a révélé qu'une voie diagnostique pour le syndrome aortique aigu, y compris le D-dimère, pourrait être mise en œuvre sans qu'il y ait une augmentation significative de l'ordre des tests au cours des deux premières semaines suivant la mise en œuvre. Cette étude renforce l'argument en faveur de l'utilisation du D-dimère pour aider à stratifier les risques des patients pour le diagnostic du syndrome aortique aigu. De futures études sont nécessaires pour confirmer la précision du diagnostic de cette voie et l'impact à long terme sur l'utilisation des ressources.

The use and misuse of the Dix-Hallpike test in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: A simple bedside test, the Dix-Hallpike test (DHT), can reliably diagnose benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) in patients with acute onset dizziness or vertigo. We evaluated patterns of DHT use by emergency physicians in patients presenting with dizziness and vertigo. Our objective was to assess the frequency and clinically appropriate use of the DHT in an emergency department. METHODS: A health records review was performed using data from patients who presented to a tertiary care emergency department between September 2014 and March 2018 with a primary complaint of vertigo or dizziness. Patient records were reviewed for documentation of symptoms consistent with BPPV and DHT usage. RESULTS: A total of 2309 patients met inclusion criteria. Of all dizzy patients who had complete documentation of signs and symptoms consistent with BPPV, 53% were assessed with a DHT. Of 469 patients who received a DHT, 134 (29%) of tests were done on patients who had documentation of at least one characteristic that was inconsistent with a diagnosis of BPPV. Eight patients who received a DHT were ultimately diagnosed with a central cause for their vertigo. CONCLUSIONS: The DHT is both underutilized and frequently applied to patients whose symptoms are not consistent with BPPV. This may result in prolonged patient discomfort and increased resource utilization, as well as increasing the risk of misdiagnosing central vertigo.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Un simple test de chevet, le test de Dix-Hallpike (DHT), peut diagnostiquer de manière fiable le vertige positionnel paroxystique bénin (VPPB) chez les patients présentant des étourdissements ou des vertiges d'apparition aiguë. Nous avons évalué les modèles d'utilisation de la DHT par les médecins d'urgence chez les patients présentant des étourdissements et des vertiges. Notre objectif était d'évaluer la fréquence et l'utilisation cliniquement appropriée du DHT dans un service d'urgence. MéTHODES: Un examen des dossiers de santé a été réalisé à partir des données de patients qui se sont présentés à un service d'urgence de soins tertiaires entre septembre 2014 et mars 2018 avec une plainte principale de vertige ou d'étourdissements. Les dossiers des patients ont été examinés afin de documenter les symptômes correspondant à l'utilisation du VPPB et de la DHT. RéSULTATS: Au total, 2 309 patients répondaient aux critères d'inclusion. Parmi tous les patients qui avaient des étourdissements et qui avaient une documentation complète des signes et des symptômes compatibles avec le VPPB, 53 % ont été évalués au moyen d'un DHT. Sur 469 patients qui ont reçu une DHT, 134 (29 %) des tests ont été effectués sur des patients qui avaient une documentation d'au moins une caractéristique incompatible avec un diagnostic de VPPB. Huit patients qui ont reçu une DHT ont finalement été diagnostiqués avec une cause centrale pour leur vertige. CONCLUSIONS: La DHT est à la fois sous-utilisée et fréquemment appliquée aux patients dont les symptômes ne correspondent pas au VPPB. Il peut en résulter une gêne prolongée pour le patient et une utilisation accrue des ressources, ainsi qu'un risque accru de diagnostic erroné du vertige central.

Diagnostic Accuracy of the HINTS Exam in an Emergency Department: A Retrospective Chart Review.

INTRODUCTION: The HINTS exam is a series of bedside ocular motor tests designed to distinguish between central and peripheral causes of dizziness in patients with continuous dizziness, nystagmus, and gait unsteadiness. Previous studies, where the HINTS exam was performed by trained specialists, have shown excellent diagnostic accuracy. Our objective was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the HINTS exam as performed by emergency physicians on patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with a primary complaint of vertigo or dizziness. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using data from patients who presented to a tertiary care ED between September 2014 and March 2018 with a primary complaint of vertigo or dizziness. Patient characteristics of those who received the HINTS exam were assessed along with sensitivity and specificity of the test to rule out a central cause of stroke. RESULTS: A total of 2,309 patients met criteria for inclusion in the study. Physician uptake of the HINTS exam was high, with 450 (19.5%) dizzy patients receiving all or part of the HINTS. A large majority of patients (96.9%) did not meet criteria for receiving the test as described in validation studies; most often this was because patients lacked documentation of nystagmus or described their symptoms as intermittent. In addition, many patients received both HINTS and Dix-Hallpike exams, which are intended for use in mutually exclusive patient populations. In no case was dizziness due to a central cause identified using the HINTS exam. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that despite widespread use of the HINTS exam in our ED, its diagnostic value in that setting was limited. The test was frequently used in patients who did not meet criteria to receive the HINTS exam (i.e., continuous vertigo, nystagmus, and unsteady gait). Additional training of emergency physicians may be required to improve test sensitivity and specificity.

Just the Facts: Protected code blue - Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the emergency department during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Emergency medical services (EMS) is called for a 65-year-old man with a 1-week history of cough, fever, and mild shortness of breath now reporting chest pain. Vitals on scene were HR 110, BP 135/90, SpO2 88% on room air. EMS arrives at the emergency department (ED). As the patient is moved to a negative pressure room, he becomes unresponsive with no palpable pulse. What next steps should be discussed in order to protect the team and achieve the best possible patient outcome?

Can Emergency Physicians Accurately Rule Out a Central Cause of Vertigo Using the HINTS Examination? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Dizziness is a common complaint presented in the emergency department (ED). A subset of these patients will present with acute vestibular syndrome (AVS). AVS is a clinical syndrome defined by the presence of vertigo, nystagmus, head motion intolerance, ataxia, and nausea/vomiting. These symptoms are most often due to benign vestibular neuritis; however, they can be a sign of a dangerous central cause, i.e., vertebrobasilar stroke. The Head Impulse test, Nystagmus, Test of Skew (HINTS) examination has been proposed as a bedside test for frontline clinicians to rule out stroke in those presenting with AVS. Our objective was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the HINTS examination to rule out a central cause of vertigo in an adult population presenting to the ED with AVS. Our aim was to assess the diagnostic accuracy when performed by emergency physicians versus neurologists. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane database, and relevant conference abstracts from 2009 to September 2019 and performed hand searches. No restrictions for language or study type were imposed. Prospective studies with patients presenting with AVS using criterion standard of computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance imaging were selected for review. Two independent reviewers extracted data from relevant studies. Studies were combined if low clinical and statistical heterogeneity was present. Study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Random effects meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5 and SAS 9.3. RESULTS: A total of five studies with 617 participants met the inclusion criteria. The mean (±SD) study length was 5.3 (±3.3) years. Prevalence of vertebrobasilar stroke ranged 9.3% to 44% (mean ± SD = 39.1% ± 17.1%). The most common diagnoses were vertebrobasilar stroke (mean ± SD = 34.8% ± 17.1%), peripheral cause (mean ± SD = 30.9% ± 16%), and intracerebral hemorrhage (mean ± SD = 2.2% ± 0.5%). The HINTS examination, when performed by neurologists, had a sensitivity of 96.7% (95% CI = 93.1% to 98.5%, I2  = 0%) and specificity of 94.8% (95% CI = 91% to 97.1%, I2  = 0%). When performed by a cohort of physicians including both emergency physicians (board certified) and neurologists (fellowship trained in neurootology or vascular neurology) the sensitivity was 83% (95% CI = 63% to 95%) and specificity was 44% (95% CI = 36% to 51%). CONCLUSIONS: The HINTS examination, when used in isolation by emergency physicians, has not been shown to be sufficiently accurate to rule out a stroke in those presenting with AVS.

National survey of emergency physicians on the risk stratification and acceptable miss rate of acute aortic syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: One in four cases of acute aortic syndrome are missed. This national survey examined Canadian Emergency physicians' opinion on risk stratification, the need for a clinical decision aid to risk stratify patients, and the required sensitivity of such a tool. METHODS: We surveyed 1,556 members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. We used a modified Dillman technique with a prenotification email and up to three survey attempts using electronic mail. Physicians were asked 21 questions about demographics, importance of certain high-risk features, investigation options, threshold for investigation, and if a clinical decision tool is required. RESULTS: We had a response rate of 32%. Respondents were 66% male, and 49% practicing >10 years, with 59% in an academic teaching hospital. A total of 93% reported a need for a clinical decision aid to risk stratify for acute aortic syndrome. A total of 99.6% of physicians were pragmatic accepting a non-zero miss-rate, two-thirds accepting <1%, and the remaining accepting a higher miss-rate. CONCLUSIONS: Our national survey determined that emergency physicians would use a highly sensitive clinical decision aid to determine which patients are at low, medium, or high-risk for acute aortic syndrome. The majority of clinicians have a low threshold (<1%) for investigating for acute aortic syndrome, but accept that a zero miss-rate is not feasible.