Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine Treatment in a Population with a High Rate of Homelessness: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for opioid use disorders. A previous randomized trial comparing emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine to standard care showed dramatic improvement in follow-up. This is encouraging, but must be replicated to understand the generalizability of buprenorphine treatment. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the efficacy of an ED-initiated buprenorphine protocol similar to a previous randomized trial in a different population. METHODS: This ED-based descriptive study described the results of a project implementing an opioid use disorder treatment protocol that included buprenorphine. Patients with opioid use disorder were offered treatment with buprenorphine, a buprenorphine prescription whenever possible, and a follow-up visit to a clinic providing addiction treatment. The primary outcome was engagement in formal addiction treatment 30 days after the index visit. RESULTS: Of the 210 patients who accepted referral for outpatient medication-assisted treatment, 95 (45.2%) achieved the primary outcome. Two-thirds of these patients received a buprenorphine prescription at discharge; 40% were homeless. A regression analysis revealed one statistically significant predictor of the primary outcome: patients who were housed were 2.49 times more likely to engage in opioid use disorder treatment than patients who were homeless (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In this descriptive study of an ED-initiated buprenorphine protocol, follow-up was less than that reported in a previous randomized controlled trial. Two important differences between our study and the randomized trial are the high rate of homelessness and the fact that not every patient received a prescription for buprenorphine. The efficacy of ED-initiated treatment may depend on certain population characteristics.

Physiological Effects of a Spit Restraint Device Saturated With Artificial Saliva.

BACKGROUND: Spit restraint devices, also referred to as spit hoods, spit masks, or spit socks, are used by law enforcement and medical personnel to minimize transmission of communicable disease from bodily fluids from agitated individuals. Several lawsuits have implicated spit restraint devices as contributing to the death of individuals who are physically restrained by means of asphyxiation due to saturation of the mesh restraint device with saliva. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to evaluate whether a saturated spit restraint device has any clinically significant effects on the ventilatory or circulatory parameters of healthy adult subjects. METHODS: Subjects wore a spit restraint device dampened with 0.5% carboxymethylcellulose, an artificial saliva. Baseline vitals were taken, and a wet spit restraint device was then placed over the subject's head, and repeat measurements were taken at 10, 20, 30, and 45 min. A second spit restraint device was placed 15 min after the first. Measurements at 10, 20, 30, and 45 min were compared with baseline using paired t-tests. RESULTS: The mean age of 10 subjects was 33.8 years, and 50% were female. There was no significant difference between baseline and while wearing the spit sock for 10, 20, 30, and 45 min for the measured parameters including heart rate, oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO2, respiratory rate, or blood pressure. No subject indicated respiratory distress or had to terminate the study. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy adult subjects, there were no statistically or clinically significant differences in ventilatory or circulatory parameters while wearing the saturated spit restraint.

Evaluation of the ventilatory effects on human subjects in prolonged hip-flexed/head-down restraint position.

BACKGROUND: The restraint chair is a tool used by law enforcement and correction personnel to control aggressive, agitated individuals. When initiating its use, subjects are often placed in a hip-flexed/head-down (HFHD) position to remove handcuffs. Usually, this period of time is less than two minutes but can become more prolonged in particularly agitated patients. Some have proposed this positioning limits ventilation and can result in asphyxia. The aim of this study is to evaluate if a prolonged HFHD restraint position causes significant ventilatory compromise. METHODS: Subjects exercised on a stationary bicycle until they reached 85% of their predicted maximal heart rate. They were then handcuffed with their hands behind their back and placed into a HFHD seated position for five minutes. The primary outcome measurement was maximal voluntary ventilation (MVV). This was measured at baseline, after initial placement into the HFHD position, and after five minutes of being in the position while still maintaining the HFHD position. Baseline measurements were compared with final measurements for statistically significant differences. RESULTS: We analyzed data for 15 subjects. Subjects had a mean MVV of 165.3 L/min at baseline, 157.8 L/min after initially being placed into the HFHD position, and a mean of 138.7 L/min after 5 min in the position. The mean baseline % predicted MVV was 115%; after 5 min in the HFHD position the mean was 96%. This 19% absolute difference was statistically significant (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In healthy seated male subjects with recent exertion, up to five minutes in a HFHD position results in a small decrease in MVV compared with baseline MVV levels. Even with this decrease, mean MVV levels were still 96% of predicted after five minutes. Though a measurable decrease was found, there was no clinically significant change that would support that this positioning would lead to asphyxia over a five-minute time period.

Frequent Emergency Department Visitors Associated With a Pain-Discharge Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (EDs) have experienced an increase in annual patient visits and length of stay over the past decade. Management of frequent-user patients with pain-related diagnoses are challenging in a time-limited setting. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe characteristics of frequent ED users with pain-related diagnoses. METHODS: This was a retrospective longitudinal cohort study of hospital ED visits from two EDs in using encounters from September 2016 to August 2018. Frequent users were characterized as having four or more visits in a 1-year period and were further classified into three categories based on the number of pain-related visits in the study period. Descriptive statistics and regression analysis results are reported for all demographic and clinical characteristics for index encounters, patient level data, and pain subgroups. RESULTS: Of all patients, 11.3% (n = 5174) were identified as frequent users, accounting for 38.9% (n = 91,114) of all ED visits. Overall, frequent pain users were more likely to be of middle age (odds ratio [OR] 1.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-1.72), female (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.79-3.29), have commercial insurance (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.37-2.66), and have 10 or more ED encounters (super user status) in a 12-month period (OR 23.66, 95% CI 17.12-32.71). CONCLUSION: Understanding characteristics of ED frequent users with pain-related diagnoses may inform community-based interventions designed to reduce episodic care and thereby improve care coordination and management.

Clinical Features of Patients with COVID-19: is Temperature Screening Useful?

BACKGROUND: As many businesses reopen after government-induced restrictions, many public agencies and private companies, such as banks, golf courses, and stores, are using temperature screening to assess for possible coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection both for patrons and for employees. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the frequency of a fever ≥100.4°F and other symptoms associated with COVID-19 among patients in the emergency department (ED) who were tested in the ED for the illness. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of data from patients who were tested for acute COVID-19 infection from March 10, 2020 through June 30, 2020 at two EDs within the same health care system. Data collected included temperature, the presence or recent history of COVID-19-related symptoms, and COVID-19 test results. Descriptive statistics are reported for presenting fever and other COVID-19-related symptoms alone and in combination with presenting fever. RESULTS: A total of 6894 patients were tested for COVID-19. Among these, 330 (4.8%) tested positive for active infection. Of these patients, 64 (19.4%) presented with a fever ≥100.4°F (≥38.0°C). Increasing the number of COVID-19-related symptoms in combination with a presenting fever ≥100.4°F increased the number of people who could be identified as having a COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: About a quarter of patients who were tested positive for COVID-19 in our ED did not have a fever at presentation ≥100.4°F. Using only temperature to screen for COVID-19 in the community setting will likely miss the majority of patients with active disease.

A retrospective review of antibiotic use for acute respiratory infections in urgent-care patients.

Objective: We examined the use of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections in an urgent-care setting. Design: Retrospective database review. Setting: The study was conducted in 2 urgent-care clinics staffed by academic emergency physicians in San Diego, California. Patients: Visits for acute respiratory infections were identified based on presenting complaints. Methods: The primary outcome was a discharge prescription for an antibiotic. The patient and provider characteristics that predicted this outcome were analyzed using logistic regression. The variation in antibiotic prescriptions between providers was also analyzed. Results: In total, 15,160 visits were analyzed. The patient characteristics were not predictive of antibiotic treatment. Physicians were more likely than advanced practice practitioners to prescribe antibiotics (1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-1.42). For every year of seniority, a provider was 1.03 (95% CI, 1.02-1.03) more likely to prescribe an antibiotic. Although the providers saw similar patients, we detected significant variation in the antibiotic prescription rate between providers: the mean antibiotic prescription rate within the top quartile was 54.3% and the mean rate in the bottom quartile was 21.7%. Conclusions: The patient and provider characteristics we examined were either not predictive or were only weakly predictive of receiving an antibiotic prescription for acute respiratory infection. However, we detected a marked variation between providers in the rate of antibiotic prescription. Provider differences, not patient differences, drive variations in antibiotic prescriptions. Stewardship efforts may be more effective if directed at providers rather than patients.

Leveraging Remote Research Associates During a Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has seriously impacted clinical research operations in academic medical centers due to social distancing measures and stay-at-home orders. The purpose of this paper is to describe the implementation of a program to continue clinical research based out of an emergency department (ED) using remote research associates (RA). METHODS: Remote RAs were trained and granted remote access to the electronic health record (EHR) by the health system's core information technology team. Upon gaining access, remote RAs used a dual-authentication process to gain access to a host-based, firewall-protected virtual network where the EHR could be accessed to continue screening and enrollment for ongoing studies. Study training for screening and enrollment was also provided to ensure study continuity. RESULTS: With constant support and guidance available to establish this EHR access pathway, the remote RAs were able to gain access relatively independently and without major technical troubleshooting. Each remote RA was granted access and trained on studies within one week and self-reported a high degree of program satisfaction, EHR access ease, and study protocol comfort through informal evaluation surveys. CONCLUSIONS: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we virtualized a clinical research program to continue important ED-based studies.