Computed tomography brain scan utilization in patients with headache presenting to emergency departments: a multinational study.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Recommended indications for emergency computed tomography (CT) brain scans are not only complex and evolving, but it is also unknown whether they are being followed in emergency departments (EDs). OBJECTIVE: To determine the CT utilization and diagnostic yield in the ED in patients with headaches across broad geographical regions. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from a multinational cross-sectional study of ED headache presentations over one month in 2019. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Hospitals from 10 participating countries were divided into five geographical regions [Australia and New Zealand (ANZ); Colombia; Europe: Belgium, France, UK, and Romania; Hong Kong and Singapore (HKS); and Turkey). Adult patients with nontraumatic headache as the primary presenting complaint were included. Patients were identified from ED management systems. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: The outcome measures were CT utilization and diagnostic yield. CT utilization was calculated using a multilevel binary logistic regression model to account for clustering of patients within hospitals and regions. Imaging data (CT requests and reports) were sourced from radiology management systems. MAIN RESULTS: The study included 5281 participants. Median (interquartile range) age was 40 (29-55) years, 66% were women. Overall mean CT utilization was 38.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 30.4-47.4%]. Regional utilization was highest in Europe (46.0%) and lowest in Turkey (28.9%), with HKS (38.0%), ANZ (40.0%), and Colombia (40.8%) in between. Its distribution across hospitals was approximately symmetrical. There was greater variation in CT utilization between hospitals within a region than between regions (hospital variance 0.422, region variance 0.100). Overall mean CT diagnostic yield was 9.9% (95% CI, 8.7-11.3%). Its distribution across hospitals was positively skewed. Regional yield was lower in Europe (5.4%) than in other regions: Colombia (9.1%), HKS (9.7%), Turkey (10.6%), and ANZ (11.2%). There was a weak negative correlation between utilization and diagnostic yield ( r  = -0.248). CONCLUSION: In this international study, there was a high variation (28.9-46.6%) in CT utilization and diagnostic yield (5.4-11.2%) across broad geographic regions. Europe had the highest utilization and the lowest yield. The study findings provide a foundation to address variation in neuroimaging in ED headache presentations.

Seguridad en urgencias sobre la referencia de pacientes no urgentes a centros de atención primaria / Safety of referral of patients with non-urgent conditions from the emergency room to primary care centers

Objetivos: determinar la seguridad al referir pacientes triage 4 y 5 desde un servicio de urgencias a centros de atención primaria, conociendo su disposición final y las posibles complicaciones por esta estrategia. Métodos: estudio observacional retrospectivo de 333 pacientes clasificados como triage 4 y 5 que fueron referidos desde el servicio de urgencias a un centro de atención primaria en febrero 2019. A través de la aseguradora se obtuvo la información sobre si asistieron o no a dicha cita programada y la conclusión final de la consulta. Resultados: 52 pacientes (15,6%) no asistieron a la cita programada sin que esto causara alguna complicación para su salud. De los 281 que sí asistieron, 1,4% fueron referidos a valoración especializada urgente sin que requirieran ingreso hospitalario y 98,6% fueron atendidos y manejados en forma ambulatoria por el médico de atención primaria. Se encontraron diferencias entre los no asistentes a la atención primaria en los subgrupos de edad entre 3 a 17 (p=0,009) y 18 a 37 años (p=0,04). Conclusiones: la estrategia de referencia de pacientes clasificados en 4 o 5 desde un servicio de urgencias a centros de atención primaria es segura, incluso si estos no asisten a la cita programada

Objectives: to determine the safety of referral of triage category 4 and 5 patients from the emergency room to primary care centers, aware of their final disposition and the potential complications of this strategy. Methods: a retrospective observational study of 333 triage category 4 and 5 patients who were referred from the emergency room to a primary care center in February 2019. Information on scheduled appointment attendance, and final consultation diagnosis was obtained from the insurer. Results: 52 patients (15.6%) failed to attend their scheduled appointment presenting no health complications. Of the 281 who attended their clinic appointment, 1.4% were referred for urgent specialist consultation without requiring hospital admission. The primary care physician provided care and management to 98.6% of studied patients on an outpatient basis. Differences were found among those failing to attend primary care in the 3 to 17 (p=0.009) and 18 to 37 years (p=0.04) age subgroups. Conclusions: triage category 4 and 5 patients referral strategy from the emergency service to primary care centers is safe, even if patients fail to attend their scheduled appointment

Is headache during pregnancy a higher risk for serious secondary headache cause? A HEAD study report.

OBJECTIVES: Pregnancy is defined as a 'red flag' in headache assessment. We aimed to describe the prevalence and causes of serious secondary headache in pregnant ED patients. METHODS: Unplanned secondary analysis of HEAD Study/HEAD Colombia data. RESULTS: 3.2% (117/3643) of ED headache patients aged 18-50 years were pregnant, of whom six (5.1%) had a serious secondary cause identified. The proportion of patients with serious headache causes was not significantly different between pregnant female, non-pregnant female and male patient subgroups (P = 0.89). CONCLUSION: Inclusion of pregnancy as a 'red flag' in ED headache assessment is not supported by these data.

Aplicaciones de la ultrasonografía en el sistema nervioso central para Neuroanestesia y cuidado neurocrítico / Ultrasound applications in the central nervous system for neuroanaesthesia and neurocritical care

Ultrasonography performed by non-radiologist specialists is a tool that contributes to the diagnosis and monitoring of neurocritical patients. It is a non-invasive, low-cost, accurate and fast method that helps improve safety and timeliness in settings where prompt decision-making is imperative, such as in the operating room, critical care units or the emergency room. The objective is to conduct a narrative review, presenting ultrasound applications focused on the central nervous system that may be useful in neuroanaesthesia and neurocritical care. A search was performed of related terms on databases in the medical literature. Relevant papers where selected and reviewed to perform a non-systematic review focusing on the visualization of the midline and lateral ventricles, the measurement of the optic nerve sheath as a surrogate marker of intracranial hypertension, and the use of colour Doppler for visualizing the middle cerebral artery. It is expected that the use of ultrasound examination of the central nervous system will continue to evolve given its advantages, good correlation with studies considered as the gold standard, and the growing availability of the device. Advancements in this field are expected to improve timeliness and provide objective guidance for decision-making. We recognize the importance of developing skills in the use of this method of exploration in those services where it is required.

La ultrasonografía realizada por especialistas no radiólogos es una herramienta que contribuye al diagnóstico y monitoreo de los pacientes neurocríticos. Adicionalmente es económica, precisa, no invasiva y rápida, lo que mejora la seguridad y oportunidad en escenarios donde la toma inmediata de decisiones es imperativa tales como salas de cirugía, unidades de cuidado crítico o servicios de urgencias. El objetivo es realizar una revisión narrativa presentando las aplicaciones ultrasonográficas enfocadas al sistema nervioso central (SNC) que pueden ser útiles en neuroanestesia y cuidado neurocrítico. Se realizó una búsqueda en bases de datos de los términos relacionados en la literatura médica. Se seleccionaron y revisaron artículos de relevancia para realizar una revisión no sistemática que se centró en la visualización de la línea media, ventrículos laterales, medición de la vaina del nervio óptico como subrogador de hipertensión endocraneana y en la visualización de la arteria cerebral media a través de doppler color. Se prevé que continuarán los avances en la exploración ultrasonográfica del SNC debido a sus ventajas, la buena correlación con los estudios considerados como estándar de oro y la creciente disponibilidad de ecógrafo. Es de esperar que se mejore la oportunidad y ayude a dirigir la toma de decisiones objetivamente. Se reconoce la importancia del desarrollo de habilidades en el manejo de este método de exploración para aplicarlo en los servicios donde sea requerido.

¿Es justificable para las instituciones de salud la inclusión de urgentólogos en los equipos de emergencias médicas? / Is it justifiable for the health institutions to include emergency physicians in the medical emergency teams?

Propósito: esta revisión pretende responder a la pregunta si se justifica incluir médicos especialistas en medicina de urgencias en los equipos de emergencias médicas (EEM). Materiales y Métodos: se realizó la búsqueda y selección de la literatura relevantes en Pubmed y Medline, usando los términos: “Medical Emergency Teams”, “Rapid Response Teams”, “Acute Teams”; combinándolos con “Emergency Medicine”, “Emergency Physicians” y “Emergency Departments” desde 1990 hasta el año 2009. Resultados: Actualmente es recomendada la conformación de los EEM como una medida en pro de la seguridad intrahospitalaria del paciente; sin embargo la literatura es conflictiva ya que algunos estudios sugieren que las intervenciones de estos equipos no disminuyen la frecuencia de presentación del paro cardiorrespiratorio, ni las admisiones a las unidades de cuidados intensivos. No es posible justificar la presencia de urgentólogos en estos equipos desde el punto de vista terapéutico, pues no existe literatura que compare los resultados de estos equipos en cuanto a los miembros que los conforman, aunque desde el punto de vista administrativo la presencia de urgentólogos en los EEM potencialmente impacta negativamente en la dinámica del servicio de urgencias. En vista de lo anterior no es recomendable incluir médicos especialistas de medicina de urgencias en los EEM.

Purpose of the review: This review aims at answering whether it is justified to include emergency physicians in the medical emergency teams (METs). Material and methods: The relevant literature was analyzed and selected in Pubmed and Medline, using the following terms: “Medical Emergency Teams”, “Rapid Response Teams”, “Acute Teams”, and combined with “Emergency Medicine”, “Emergency Physicians” and “Emergency Departments” from 1990 until 2009. Results: It is currently recommended to set up METs as a measure in favor of intra-hospital patient safety. Nevertheless, the literature shows some discrepancies because some studies suggest that the intervention of such teams do not reduce the frequency of heart and respiratory failure nor admissions to the intensive care units. Therefore, it cannot be recommended to include emergency physicians within those teams given that the economic overcost involved for health institutions in emergency services may not compensate for the results achieved by METs.