Outcomes associated with prehospital epinephrine in adult and pediatric patients with anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Prompt epinephrine administration is important to improve outcomes in anaphylaxis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of prehospital epinephrine on clinical outcomes of hospital admission, biphasic reactions, and emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) in a cohort of ED patients who had anaphylaxis including both children and adults. METHODS: We conducted a single-center prospective and retrospective cohort study of patients who had anaphylaxis from April 2008 to December 2022. Associations between prehospital epinephrine administration with biphasic reactions and ED LOS were assessed with univariable models and the association with ED disposition was assessed with both univariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 1107 patient visits were included for analysis. The median patient age was 29 (IQR: 14-50), 593 (53.6%) patients were of female sex, and 366 (33.1%) were younger than 18 years of age. Patients in the prehospital epinephrine group were also less likely to experience a biphasic reaction (5.4% vs 9.3%; odds ratio [OR] 0.56, 95% CI: 0.34-0.92) and had a decreased ED LOS (median 4.0 hours vs 4.7 hours). There was no difference in hospital admission between patients with and without prehospital epinephrine in both the univariable (19.5% vs 15.7%; OR 1.30, 95% CI: 0.94-1.79) and multivariable (adjusted OR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.71-1.64) models. CONCLUSION: Prehospital epinephrine administration reduced the odds of a biphasic reaction and decreased ED LOS but did not reduce hospitalization in this cohort of ED patients who had anaphylaxis. Our findings suggest that timely administration of prehospital epinephrine is associated with improved patient outcomes.

Anaphylaxis: A 2023 practice parameter update.

This practice parameter update focuses on 7 areas in which there are new evidence and new recommendations. Diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis have been revised, and patterns of anaphylaxis are defined. Measurement of serum tryptase is important for diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify underlying mast cell disorders. In infants and toddlers, age-specific symptoms may differ from older children and adults, patient age is not correlated with reaction severity, and anaphylaxis is unlikely to be the initial reaction to an allergen on first exposure. Different community settings for anaphylaxis require specific measures for prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. Optimal prescribing and use of epinephrine autoinjector devices require specific counseling and training of patients and caregivers, including when and how to administer the epinephrine autoinjector and whether and when to call 911. If epinephrine is used promptly, immediate activation of emergency medical services may not be required if the patient experiences a prompt, complete, and durable response. For most medical indications, the risk of stopping or changing beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication may exceed the risk of more severe anaphylaxis if the medication is continued, especially in patients with insect sting anaphylaxis. Evaluation for mastocytosis, including a bone marrow biopsy, should be considered for adult patients with severe insect sting anaphylaxis or recurrent idiopathic anaphylaxis. After perioperative anaphylaxis, repeat anesthesia may proceed in the context of shared decision-making and based on the history and results of diagnostic evaluation with skin tests or in vitro tests when available, and supervised challenge when necessary.

Relationship between individual and country-level socio-economic background, USMLE step scores, and demographics of international medical graduates and residency match results.

PURPOSE: Twenty five percent of practicing physicians in the US are International Medical Graduates (IMGs) - physicians who completed their medical school training outside of the United States and Canada. There are multiple studies demonstrating higher socio-economic background is associated with medical school matriculation in the US. However, despite a substantial prevalence of IMGs in the American healthcare system, studies of the association between demographics, socio-economic background, and securing a residency position in the match are lacking. METHODS: We created a survey with questions on residency match-related data and information on personal socio-economic background. An invitation to participate in the study was sent to all IMGs that applied to the included residency programs after the conclusion of the 2022 residency match. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare survey responses to the odds of securing a residency match. RESULTS: The total number of survey respondents was 744 (response rate 15.1%). We found that younger age, higher United States Medical License Examination (USMLE) scores, higher-income country of origin (including the United States), fewer match attempts, applying to fewer specialties, having parents with college degree or higher, and coming from higher-than-average or lower-than-average family income were independently associated with increased odds of matching. Gender, personal income, and visa status did not demonstrate significant associations with residency match. CONCLUSIONS: Residency match is a significant expense for IMGs, especially for those from lower-income countries. International applicants from higher socio-economic backgrounds might have advantages in securing medical residency positions in the United States when controlling for other variables.

Updated guidance regarding the risk of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and recommended evaluation and management: A GRADE assessment and international consensus approach.

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and addresses revaccinating individuals with first-dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine revaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 revaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy and revaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute postvaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest revaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against premedication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history.

Frequency of headache in emergency department patients with anaphylaxis: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Multiple anaphylaxis mediators have been demonstrated to provoke migraine-like attacks following intravascular infusion, suggesting that anaphylaxis could cause headache; however, headache is rarely noted in anaphylaxis and is not included among diagnostic criteria. OBJECTIVE: Our study objectives were to estimate the frequency of headache among prospectively enrolled emergency department (ED) patients with anaphylaxis and assess the association of headache with patient and anaphylaxis characteristics. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of ED patients aged ≥5 years who met anaphylaxis diagnostic criteria from January 8, 2020 to September 9, 2022 was conducted. The primary outcome of interest was headache frequency among patients who met at least one anaphylaxis criterion. We explored the association of headache with patient characteristics and anaphylaxis characteristics. RESULTS: We included 63 patients with anaphylaxis. In all, 17 (27%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 17%-40%) patients reported the presence of a headache. Female patients had more than a nine times increased odds of having headache (odds ratio [OR] 9.3, 95% CI 1.14-77.1, p = 0.016). Presentation with headache was associated with the presence of dyspnea (OR 5.5, 95% CI 1.56-19.7, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Headache in anaphylaxis may be more common than previously recognized, especially in females. Larger prospective studies are needed to characterize headache as a marker of neurological involvement in anaphylaxis.

First-Attempt Intubation Success Among Emergency Medicine Trainees by Laryngoscopic Device and Training Year: A National Emergency Airway Registry Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We compare intubation first-attempt success with the direct laryngoscope, hyperangulated video laryngoscope, and standard geometry video laryngoscope among emergency medicine residents at various postgraduate years (PGY) of training. METHODS: We analyzed prospective data from emergency department (ED) patients enrolled in the National Emergency Airway Registry from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2018 using mixed-effects logistic regression to assess the association between PGY of training and first-attempt success by the device. RESULTS: Among 15,204 intubations performed by emergency medicine trainees, first-attempt success for PGY-1, PGY-2, and PGY3+ residents, respectively were: 78.8% (95% CI, 75.0 to 82.2%), 81.3% (79.4 to 83.0), and 83.6% (95% CI, 82.1 to 85.1) for direct laryngoscope; 87.2% (95% CI, 84.2 to 89.7), 90.4% (95% CI, 88.8 to 91.9%), and 91.2% (95% CI, 89.8 to 92.5%) for hyperangulated video laryngoscope; and 88.7% (95% CI, 86.1 to 90.9), 90.2% (95% CI, 88.7 to 91.5%), and 94.6% (95% CI 93.9 to 95.3%) for standard geometry video laryngoscope. Direct laryngoscope first-attempt success improved for PGY-2 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR],1.41; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.82) and PGY-3+ (aOR, 1.76; 1.36 to 2.27) trainees compared to PGY-1. Hyperangulated video laryngoscope success also improved for PGY-2 (aOR, 1.51; 1.1 to 2.05) and PGY-3+ (aOR, 1.56; 1.15 to 2.13) trainees compared to PGY-1. For the standard geometry video laryngoscope, only PGY-3+ (aOR, 1.72; 1.25 to 2.36) was associated with improved first-attempt success compared to PGY-1. CONCLUSION: Each laryngoscopy device class was associated with improvement in first-attempt success as training progressed. The video laryngoscope outperformed the direct laryngoscope for all operator groups, and PGY-1 trainees achieved higher first-attempt success using a standard geometry video laryngoscope than PGY-3+ trainees using a direct laryngoscope. These findings support the conjecture that in adult patients, a direct laryngoscope should not be routinely used for the first intubation attempt unless clinical circumstances, such as the presence of a soiled airway, would favor its success. These findings need to be validated with prospective randomized clinical trials.

Stercoral Colitis in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Review of Presentation, Management, and Outcomes.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Stercoral colitis is inflammation of the bowel wall caused by fecal impaction. Despite reported high morbidity and risk of perforation, little research assessing outcomes is available. This study characterizes the presentation, management, and outcomes of emergency department patients with stercoral colitis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of ED patients with stercoral colitis identified on computed tomography (CT) scan. Of 814, 522 visits to multiple EDs across the US, 269 met the inclusion criteria. Variables regarding patient presentation, management, and outcomes were extracted from electronic medical records. Results were analyzed with percentages and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Of 269 patients, the median age was 76 years. The most common chief concern was abdominal pain/distension (33.8%). However, abdominal pain was documented as absent in 62.1% of cases. The most common CT findings included fecal impaction (96.7%), bowel wall inflammation (72.9%), and fat stranding (48.3%). Eighty-four (31.2%) patients were discharged home from the ED, and over half of these (45/84, 53.6%) received no enema, laxatives, or disimpaction. Overall, 9 patients (3.3%, 95% CI 1.6% to 6.5%) required surgical management of a related complication within 3 months, 27 (10.0%, 95% CI 6.8% to 14.4%) returned to the ED within 72 hours, and 9 (3.3%, 95% CI 1.6% to 6.5%) died from a cause related to stercoral colitis within 3 months. CONCLUSION: Patients with stercoral colitis often present in a nonspecific manner, and short-term mortality is substantial. In this study, most discharged patients did not receive recommended treatment. This represents the largest ED study of stercoral colitis and provides further evidence linking this diagnosis with adverse outcomes.

Return Rates for Opioid versus Nonopioid Management of Patients with Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Research suggests that opioid treatment for abdominal pain, which comprises a large proportion of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED), may contribute to long-term opioid use without significant benefits with regard to symptom management. OBJECTIVES: This study seeks to assess the association between opioid use for management of abdominal pain in the ED and return ED visits for abdominal pain within 30 days for patients discharged from the ED at initial presentation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, multicenter observational study of adult patients presenting to and discharged from 21 EDs with a chief concern of abdominal pain between November 2018 and April 2020. The proportion of 30-day return visits to the ED for patients who received opioid analgesics was compared with a reference group of patients who only received acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or both. RESULTS: Of the 4745 patients, 1304 (27.5%) received opioids and 1101 (23.2%) only received either acetaminophen, NSAIDs, or both. Among those given opioids, 287 (22.0%) returned to the ED for abdominal pain within 30 days, compared with 162 (14.7%) of those in the reference group (odds ratio 1.57, 95% confidence interval 1.27-1.95, p-value < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients given opioids for abdominal pain in the ED had 57% increased odds of a return ED visit within 30 days compared with those given only acetaminophen or NSAIDs. This warrants further research on the use of nonopioid analgesics in the ED, especially in patients with anticipated discharge.

Anaphylaxis knowledge gaps and future research priorities: A consensus report.

BACKGROUND: Despite a better understanding of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and management of patients with anaphylaxis, there remain knowledge gaps. Enumerating and prioritizing these gaps would allow limited scientific resources to be directed more effectively. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically describe and appraise anaphylaxis knowledge gaps and future research priorities based on their potential impact and feasibility. METHODS: We convened a 25-member multidisciplinary panel of anaphylaxis experts. Panelists formulated knowledge gaps/research priority statements in an anonymous electronic survey. Four anaphylaxis themed writing groups were formed to refine statements: (1) Population Science, (2) Basic and Translational Sciences, (3) Emergency Department Care/Acute Management, and (4) Long-Term Management Strategies and Prevention. Revised statements were incorporated into an anonymous electronic survey, and panelists were asked to rate the impact and feasibility of addressing statements on a continuous 0 to 100 scale. RESULTS: The panel generated 98 statements across the 4 anaphylaxis themes: Population Science (29), Basic and Translational Sciences (27), Emergency Department Care/Acute Management (24), and Long-Term Management Strategies and Prevention (18). Median scores for impact and feasibility ranged from 50.0 to 95.0 and from 40.0 to 90.0, respectively. Key statements based on median rating for impact/feasibility included the need to refine anaphylaxis diagnostic criteria, identify reliable diagnostic, predictive, and prognostic anaphylaxis bioassays, develop clinical prediction models to standardize postanaphylaxis observation periods and hospitalization criteria, and determine immunotherapy best practices. CONCLUSIONS: We identified and systematically appraised anaphylaxis knowledge gaps and future research priorities. This study reinforces the need to harmonize scientific pursuits to optimize the outcomes of patients with and at risk of anaphylaxis.

Association between emergency department modifiable risk factors and subsequent delirium among hospitalized older adults.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between potential emergency department (ED)-based modifiable risk factors and subsequent development of delirium among hospitalized older adults free of delirium at the time of ED stay. METHODS: Observational cohort study of patients aged ≥75 years who screened negative for delirium in the ED, were subsequently admitted to the hospital, and had delirium screening performed within 48 h of admission. Potential ED-based risk factors for delirium included ED length of stay (LOS), administration of opioids, benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, or anticholinergics, and the placement of urinary catheter while in the ED. Odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Among 472 patients without delirium in the ED (mean age 84 years, 54.2% females), 33 (7.0%) patients developed delirium within 48 h of hospitalization. The ED LOS of those who developed delirium was similar to those who did not develop delirium (312.1 vs 325.6 min, MD -13.5 min, CI -56.1 to 29.0). Patients who received opioids in the ED were as likely to develop delirium as those who did not receive opioids (7.2% vs 6.9%: OR 1.04, CI 0.44 to 2.48). Patients who received benzodiazepines had a higher risk of incident delirium, the difference was clinically but not statistically significant (37.3% vs 6.5%, OR 5.35, CI 0.87 to 23.81). Intermittent urinary catheterization (OR 2.05, CI 1.00 to 4.22) and Foley placement (OR 3.69, CI 1.55 to 8.80) were associated with a higher risk of subsequent delirium. After adjusting for presence of dementia, only Foley placement in the ED remained significantly associated with development of in-hospital delirium (adjusted OR 3.16, CI 1.22 to 7.53). CONCLUSION: ED LOS and ED opioid use were not associated with higher risk of incident delirium in this cohort. Urinary catheterization in the ED was associated with an increased risk of subsequent delirium. These findings can be used to design ED-based initiatives and increase delirium prevention efforts.

Changes in all-cause and cause-specific mortality during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Minnesota: population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in unprecedented increases in mortality in the U.S. and worldwide. To better understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality in the state of Minnesota, U.S.A., we characterize the changes in the causes of death during 2020 (COVID-19 period), compared to 2018-2019 (baseline period), assessing for differences across ages, races, ethnicities, sexes, and geographic characteristics. METHODS: Longitudinal population-based study using Minnesota death certificate data, 2018-2020. Using Poisson regression models adjusted for age and sex, we calculated all-cause and cause-specific (by underlying causes of death) mortality rates per 100,000 Minnesotans, the demographics of the deceased, and years of life lost (YLL) using the Chiang's life table method in 2020 relative to 2018-2019. RESULTS: We identified 89,910 deaths in 2018-2019 and 52,030 deaths in 2020. The mean daily mortality rate increased from 123.1 (SD 11.7) in 2018-2019 to 144.2 (SD 22.1) in 2020. COVID-19 comprised 9.9% of deaths in 2020. Other categories of causes of death with significant increases in 2020 compared to 2018-2019 included assault by firearms (RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.34-2.11), accidental poisonings (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.37-1.61), malnutrition (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.17-1.87), alcoholic liver disease (RR, 95% CI 1.14-1.40), and cirrhosis and other chronic liver diseases (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.09-1.50). Mortality rates due to COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 causes were higher among racial and ethnic minority groups, older adults, and non-rural residents. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a 17% increase in the death rate in Minnesota relative to 2018-2019, driven by both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 causes. As the COVID-19 pandemic enters its third year, it is imperative to examine and address the factors contributing to excess mortality in the short-term and monitor for additional morbidity and mortality in the years to come.

Severity grading system for acute allergic reactions: A multidisciplinary Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: There is no widely adopted severity grading system for acute allergic reactions, including anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions, thus limiting the ability to optimize and standardize management practices and advance research. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a severity grading system for acute allergic reactions for use in clinical care and research. METHODS: From May to September 2020, we convened a 21-member multidisciplinary panel of allergy and emergency care experts; 9 members formed a writing group to critically appraise and assess the strengths and limitations of prior severity grading systems and develop the structure and content for an optimal severity grading system. The entire study panel then revised the grading system and sought consensus by utilizing Delphi methodology. RESULTS: The writing group recommended that an optimal grading system encompass the severity of acute allergic reactions on a continuum from mild allergic reactions to anaphylactic shock. Additionally, the severity grading system must be able to discriminate between clinically important differences in reaction severity to be relevant in research while also being intuitive and straightforward to apply in clinical care. Consensus was reached for all elements of the proposed severity grading system. CONCLUSION: We developed a consensus severity grading system for acute allergic reactions, including anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions. Successful international validation, refinement, dissemination, and application of the grading system will improve communication among providers and patients about the severity of allergic reactions and will help advance future research.

Incidence of and risk factors for perioperative or periprocedural anaphylaxis in the United States from 2005 to 2014.

BACKGROUND: The estimated worldwide incidence of perioperative or periprocedural anaphylaxis (PA) is between 1 in 1250 and 1 in 20,000 procedures. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence of PA in the United States and compare patient characteristics and underlying risk factors using a large national database. METHODS: Using deidentified data from the nationwide inpatient sample from 2005 to 2014, we identified cases of PA through the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes and conducted a retrospective analysis. RESULTS: Among 35,647,347 surgeries and procedures, there were 5458 (0.015%) PA cases identified. The incidence of PA was 15.3 cases per 100,000 procedures. When compared with controls, PA cases had an increased mortality (3.4% vs 1.4%; P < .001), median length of stay (5 vs 3 days; P < .001), and median hospital cost ($45,155 vs $24,734; P < .001). The age group between 18 and 34 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.58; P < .001) and female sex (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.31-1.49; P < .001) were associated with increased odds of PA. Transplant (OR, 3.35; 95% CI, 2.59-4.34; P < .001), hematologic (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.30-2.05; P < .001), vascular (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.30-1.67; P < .001), and cardiac (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.30-1.67; P < .001) procedures were at increased risk for PA. Several comorbidities were associated with PA including chronic pulmonary disease (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.31-1.51; P < .001). CONCLUSION: The incidence of PA is 1 in 6531 procedures, with a mortality of 1 in 191,652 procedures. PA has worsening outcomes compared with controls. The risk factors of PA include age, sex, procedure type, and comorbidities.

Incidence and risk factors for near-fatal and fatal outcomes after perioperative and periprocedural anaphylaxis in the USA, 2005-2014.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of fatal and near-fatal outcomes after perioperative anaphylaxis is unknown in the USA. Previously identified risk factors of neuromuscular-blocker-induced fatal perioperative anaphylaxis include male sex, obesity, and use of beta blockers. We examined the incidence of fatal and near-fatal outcomes after perioperative anaphylaxis in the USA and the underlying risk factors using a large national database. METHODS: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2005 to 2014, we identified cases of fatal and near-fatal perioperative anaphylaxis, defined as perioperative anaphylaxis cases complicated by respiratory or cardiac arrest, using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. RESULTS: Amongst 5223 perioperative anaphylaxis cases, the proportion of near-fatal or fatal cases attributable to perioperative anaphylaxis was 7.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2-7.7), with near-fatal perioperative anaphylaxis cases accounting for 5.0% (95% CI: 4.4-5.6%) and fatal cases accounting for 2.0% (95% CI: 1.5-2.5%) of cases overall. Thus, the incidence of fatal or near-fatal perioperative anaphylaxis is 1.26 in 100 000 procedures. Risk factors for fatal or near-fatal perioperative anaphylaxis include age (≥65 yr); undergoing a cardiac procedure; and comorbid conditions of weight loss, non-metastatic solid tumours, metastatic cancer, paralysis, coagulopathy, renal failure, congestive heart failure, fluid and electrolyte disorder, and neurological disorders. Individuals with near-fatal or fatal perioperative anaphylaxis reactions had increased lengths of stay and hospital costs compared with controls. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of fatal or near-fatal perioperative anaphylaxis in the USA was 1.26 in 100 000 procedures. Risk factors for fatal or near-fatal outcomes include older age, cardiac procedures, and specific comorbidities.

Awake intubations in the emergency department: A report from the National Emergency Airway Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To describe awake intubation practices in the emergency department (ED) and report success, complications, devices used, and rescue techniques using multicenter surveillance. METHODS: We analyzed data from the National Emergency Airway Registry (NEAR). Patients with an awake intubation attempt between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2018 were included. We report univariate descriptive data as proportions with cluster-adjusted 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Of 19,071 discrete patient encounters, an awake technique was used on the first attempt in 82 (0.4%) patients. The majority (91%) of first attempts were performed by emergency medicine physicians. Angioedema (32%) and non-angioedema airway obstruction (31%) were the most common indications for an awake intubation attempt. The most common initial device used was a flexible endoscope (78%). Among all awake intubations first-attempt success was achieved in 85% (95% CI [76%-95%]), and peri-intubation complications occurred in 16% (95% CI [9%-26%]). CONCLUSION: Awake intubation in this multicenter cohort of emergency department patients was rare and was performed most often in patients with airway edema or obstruction. Emergency physicians performed the majority of first intubation attempts with high first-attempt success. Further studies are needed to determine optimal emergency airway management in this patient population.

Predictors of return visits to the emergency department among different age groups of older adults.

OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of 30-day emergency department (ED) return visits in patients age 65-79 years and age ≥ 80 years. METHODS: This was a cohort study of older adults who presented to the ED over a 1-year period. A mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to identify predictors for returning to the ED within 30 days. We stratified the cohort into those aged 65-79 years and aged ≥80 years. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. This study adhered to the STROBE reporting guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 21,460 ED visits representing 14,528 unique patients were included. The overall return rate was 15% (1998/13,300 visits) for age 65-79 years, and 16% (1306/8160 visits) for age ≥ 80 years. A history of congestive heart failure (CHF), dementia, or prior hospitalization within 2 years were associated with increased odds of returning in both age groups (for age 65-79: CHF aOR 1.36 [CI 1.16-1.59], dementia aOR 1.27 [CI 1.07-1.49], prior hospitalization aOR 1.36 [CI 1.19-1.56]; for age ≥ 80: CHF aOR 1.32 [CI 1.13-1.55], dementia aOR 1.22 [CI 1.04-1.42], and prior hospitalization aOR 1.27 [CI 1.09-1.47]). Being admitted from the ED was associated with decreased odds of returning to the ED within 30 days (aOR 0.72 [CI 0.64-0.80] for age 65-79 years and 0.72 [CI 0.63-0.82] for age ≥ 80). CONCLUSION: Age alone was not an independent predictor of return visits. Prior hospitalization, dementia and CHF were predictors of 30-day ED return. The identification of predictors of return visits may help to optimize care transition in the ED.

Assessment of ED triage of anaphylaxis patients based on the Emergency Severity Index.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the emergency department (ED) triage of anaphylaxis patients based on the Emergency Severity Index (ESI), assess the association between ESI triage level and ED epinephrine administration, and determine characteristics associated with lower acuity triage ESI assignment (levels 3 and 4). METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of adult and pediatric anaphylaxis patients between September 2010 and September 2018 at an academic ED. Patient characteristics and management were compared between Emergency Severity Index (ESI) triage level 1 or 2 versus levels 3 or 4 using logistic regression analysis. We adhered to STROBE reporting guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 1090 patient visits were included. There were 26 (2%), 515 (47%), 489 (45%), and 60 (6%) visits that were assigned an ESI triage level of 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Epinephrine was administered in the ED to 53% of patients triaged ESI level 1 or 2 and to 40% of patients triaged ESI level 3 or 4. Patients who were assigned a lower acuity ESI level of 3 or 4 had a longer median time from ED arrival to epinephrine administration compared to those with a higher acuity ESI level of 1 or 2 (28 min compared to 13 min, p < .001). A lower acuity ESI level was more likely to be assigned to visits with a chief concern of hives, rash, or pruritus (OR 2.33 [95% CI, 1.20-4.53]) and less likely to be assigned to visits among adults (OR, 0.43 [0.31-0.60]), patients who received epinephrine from emergency medical services (OR 0.56 [0.38-0.82]), presented with posterior pharyngeal or uvular angioedema (OR, 0.56 [0.38-0.82]), hypoxemia (OR, 0.34 [0.18-0.64]), or increased heart (OR 0.83 [0.73-0.95]) or respiratory (OR 0.70 [0.60-0.82]) rates. CONCLUSION: Patients triaged to lower acuity ESI levels experienced delays in ED epinephrine administration. Adult and pediatric patients with skin-related chief concerns were more likely to be to be assigned lower acuity ESI levels. Further studies are needed to identify interventions that will improve ED anaphylaxis triage.

Association between patients' body mass index and emergency department wait times: A multicenter observational cohort investigation by the reducing disparities increasing equity in emergency medicine (REDEEM) study group.

OBJECTIVE: Numerous studies have demonstrated evidence of obesity bias in healthcare settings, however, little is known about obesity bias in the Emergency Department (ED). The objective of this study was to investigate obesity bias in an ED setting by assessing the association between body mass index (BMI) and door-to-room (DTR) or door-to-provider (DTP) times among ED patients. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of all adult patient (age ≥ 18 years of age) visits to 21 Mayo Clinic and Mayo Clinic Health System EDs between November 1, 2018 and March 31, 2020. We compared DTR and DTP times based on BMI category. RESULTS: We found that median DTR and DTP times for adults with class 3 obesity are significantly shorter than patients in the normal weight category. For men with class 3 obesity, median DTR and DTP times were 7.5% and 5.4% shorter than men in the normal weight category. Relative to women in the normal weight category, the median DTR and DTP times were 4.6% and 3.8% faster for women in obesity class 1, 4.9% and 5.1% faster for women in obesity class 2, and DTR was 4.4% faster for women in obesity class 3. These percentage differences translated to slightly shorter wait times of 0.4-1.2 min compared to median wait times for patients with normal BMI. CONCLUSION: We did not find evidence of longer wait times experienced by people with obesity. Rather, patients with obesity often experienced wait times that were shorter than patients of normal weight.

Non-pharmacologic interventions improve comfort and experience among older adults in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: Determine if a comfort cart would improve older adults' comfort and facilitate communication during Emergency Department (ED) visits. METHODS: A comfort cart containing low-cost, non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient comfort and ability to communicate (e.g., hearing amplifiers, reading glasses) were made available to patients aged ≥65 years. Patients and clinicians were surveyed to assess effectiveness. We followed the Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence: SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines. RESULTS: Three hundred patients and 100 providers were surveyed. Among patients, 98.0%, 95.1%, and 67.5% somewhat or strongly agreed that the comfort cart improved comfort, overall experience, and independence, respectively. Among providers, 97.0%, 95.0%, 87.0%, and 83% somewhat or strongly agreed that the comfort cart provided comfort, improved patient satisfaction, increased ability to give compassionate care, and increased patient orientation. CONCLUSION: The comfort cart was an affordable and effective intervention that improved patients' comfort by facilitating communication, wellbeing, and compassionate care delivery.

Relationship Between Pain Management Modality and Return Rates for Lower Back Pain in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence suggests that opioid use for patients with acute low back pain does not improve functional outcomes and contributes to long-term opioid use. Little is known about the impact of opioid administration in the emergency department (ED) for patients with low back pain. OBJECTIVES: This study compares 30-day return rates after administration of various pain management modalities for emergency department (ED) patients with low back pain. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicenter observational study of patients in the ED who were diagnosed with low back pain and discharged home in 21 EDs between November 2018 and April 2020. Patients were categorized based on the pain management they received in the ED and compared with the reference group of patients receiving only nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, or a combination of the two. The proportions of ED return visits within 30 d for each medication category was calculated and associations between analgesia categories and proportions of return visits were assessed using logistic regression models to obtain odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Patients with low back pain who received any opioid, intravenous opioid, or intramuscular opioid had significantly increased proportions of a return visit within 30 d (32% [OR 1.78 {95% CI 1.21-2.64}]; 33% [OR 1.83 {95% CI 1.18-2.86}]; and 39% [OR 2.38 {95% CI 1.35-4.12}], respectively) when compared with patients who received nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (19%), acetaminophen (20%), or a combination of the two (8%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving opioids were more likely to return to the ED within 30 d than those receiving received nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetaminophen. This suggests that the use of opioids for low back pain in the ED may not be an effective strategy, and there may be an opportunity to appropriately treat more of these patients with nonopioid medications.