Transitioning Between Prostanoid Therapies in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension.

Background: New oral prostacyclin therapies and prostacyclin agonists have become available for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). However, methods for transitioning between oral, inhaled, and parenteral formulations are not well-established, except in the form of case reports and case series. Collectively, these emphasize the lack of a standardized process and approach in transitioning patients between PAH prostanoid therapies. In this case series, we report our experience at an accredited Pulmonary Hypertension center in transitioning between various oral, inhaled, and parenteral prostanoids to offer additional guidance on safe transitions in therapy. Methods: All cases of prostanoid transitions at an accredited Pulmonary Hypertension center from March 2018 to September 2019 were included in this report. The transition approach for each case was developed through a review of the literature, extrapolation of available pharmacokinetic data, and collaboration between pharmacists and clinicians. Results: This case series describes the transition of 3 patients from selexipag to parenteral treprostinil; 1 patient transitioning from parenteral treprostinil to selexipag; 1 patient transitioning from oral treprostinil to parenteral treprostinil; and 1 patient transitioning from inhaled treprostinil to selexipag. Four of the 6 patients presented here were transitioned to an alternate prostanoid on account of clinical worsening, while the remaining 2 patients transitioned due to intolerance of parenteral therapy and poor medication adherence. This case series includes patients with various etiologies of PAH including idiopathic PAH, methamphetamine-associated PAH, and scleroderma-associated PAH. All patients successfully completed each transition without serious adverse events. Conclusions: With the increasing utilization and availability of prostanoids, there is a critical need for a standardized approach in transitioning safely between different formulations without compromising treatment efficacy. In this case series, we present our clinical experiences, guided by available pharmacokinetic data, in transitioning between various prostanoid formulations.

Prospective, 10-year evaluation of the impact of Hispanic ethnicity on pain management practices in the ED.

INTRODUCTION: Hispanic ethnicity has been reported as an independent risk factor for oligoanalgesia in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVES: The objectives are to compare pain management practices in White and Hispanic patients in the ED to determine whether treatment differences exist. METHODS: Prospective analysis of a convenience sample of patients presenting to an urban, academic, tertiary-care ED over the 10-year period from 2000 to 2010. We compared patients with pain-related complaints of any nature, who self-identified their race as White or Hispanic, and evaluated initial morphine administration/dosing, arrival/disposition pain scores, and overall ED satisfaction scores (0-10 scale). RESULTS: Fifteen thousand sixty patients were enrolled. Eighty-one point 2 percent (n, 12 232) of the patients were White and 11.2% (n, 1680), Hispanic. White and Hispanic patients reported similar pain at presentation (6.7 vs 7.3, P < .001) and discharge/admission (4.6 vs 4.8, P = .14). Hispanic patients were not less likely to receive an analgesic during the ED visit (odds ratio, 1.06; confidence interval, 0.96-1.17; P = .62), nor less likely to receive an opioid analgesic (odds ratio, 0.97; confidence interval, 0.88-1.08; P = .70). Hispanic patients, on average, received similar initial doses of morphine (4.1 vs 4.3 mg, P = .29) and had similar wait times from arrival to initial dose of morphine (82 vs 86 minutes). Overall ED satisfaction scores were the same (8.7 vs 8.7, P = .65). CONCLUSION: White and Hispanic patients were similar in rates of initial morphine administration for pain-related complaints. These findings contrast with previous studies reporting lower rates of initial analgesia administration among Hispanic patients in the ED.

Web-based emergency department patient satisfaction surveys may introduce potential for bias.

BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (ED) have proposed utilizing a Web-based format to distribute patient satisfaction surveys, but the potential for bias in this distribution method has not been assessed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of ED patients who have access to the Internet to better understand potential bias in Web-based patient satisfaction surveys. METHODS: We distributed a 20-question survey to consenting, English-speaking adult patients presenting to the ED from December 2010 to March 2012. Patients reported demographic information and answered questions related to their access and use of the Internet. RESULTS: Seven hundred four patients participated in the study; 90% of Whites reported Internet access, vs. 82% of Hispanics (p = 0.034). Ninety-two percent of patients with at least some college education had Internet access, compared to 79% of those with a high school education level or lower (p ≤ 0.001). Of households reporting an income of > $22,000/year, 95% had Internet access, compared to 77% of those reporting a household income < $22,000/year (p ≤ 0.001). Ninety-four percent of participants < 40 years of age had Internet access, compared to 83% between the ages of 40 and 56 years, and 77% for those over 56 years of age (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A Web-based distribution of ED patient satisfaction surveys may underrepresent minorities, patients without college education, those with lower income, and patients older than 40 years. This information may provide guidance in interpreting results of Web-based patient satisfaction surveys and may suggest the need for multiple sampling methods.

Longitudinal trends in the treatment of abdominal pain in an academic emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal pain is a top chief complaint of patients presenting to Emergency Departments (ED). Historically, uncertainty surrounded correct management. Evidence has shown adequate analgesia does not obscure the diagnosis, making it the standard of care. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate trends in treatment of abdominal pain in an academic ED during a 10-year period. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated a convenience sample of patients in an urban academic tertiary care hospital ED from September 2000 through April 2010. Adult patients presenting with a chief complaint of abdominal pain were included in this study. Analgesic administration rates and times, pain scores, and patient satisfaction at discharge were analyzed to evaluate trends by year. RESULTS: There were 2,646 patients presenting with abdominal pain who were enrolled during the study period. Rates of analgesic administration generally increased each year from 39.9% in 2000 to 65.5% in 2010 (p value for trend <0.001). Similarly, time to analgesic administration generally decreased by year, from 116 min in 2000 to 81 min in 2009 (p < 0.001). There was no improvement in mean pain scores at discharge by year (p = 0.27) and 48% of patients during the 10-year period still reported moderate to severe pain at discharge. Patient satisfaction with pain treatment increased from a score of 7.1 to 9.0 during the study period (p < 0.005), following the trend of increase in analgesic administration. CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting to the ED with abdominal pain, analgesia administration increased and time to medication decreased during the 10-year period. Despite overall improvements in satisfaction, significant numbers of patients presenting with abdominal pain still reported moderate to severe pain at discharge.

Geriatric patients may not experience increased risk of oligoanalgesia in the emergency department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the pain management practices in geriatric patients in the emergency department (ED) with that in other adult ED patients to determine whether these patients face increased risk of oligoanalgesia. METHODS: This study was a prospective analysis of a convenience sample of patients presenting to an urban academic tertiary care hospital ED from 2000 through 2010. We compared patients aged 65 years and older (geriatric) with adults younger than 65 years and evaluated analgesic administration rates, opioid administration and dosing, and pain and satisfaction scores (0 to 10 scale). RESULTS: A total of 15,387 patients presented to the ED during the 10-year study period and agreed to participate in the study; 1,169 patients were geriatric (7.6%). Geriatric patients had a mean age of 75.0 years (SD 7.2 years), whereas mean age of the 14,218 nongeriatric patients was 35.5 years (SD 12.2 years). Geriatric patients reported less pain at presentation (6.2 versus 6.9). After adjusting for presentation pain scores, geriatric patients were not less likely to receive an analgesic during the ED visit (odds ratio 0.90; 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.05) or less likely to receive an opioid (odds ratio 1.01; 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.18). Geriatric patients, on average, received lower doses of morphine (3.3 versus 4.2 mg) and had longer waiting times for their initial dose of an analgesic medication (65 versus 75 minutes). CONCLUSION: Despite longer wait times for analgesia, geriatric and nongeriatric patients were similar in rates of analgesia and opioid administration for pain-related complaints. These findings contrast with previous studies reporting lower rates of analgesia administration among geriatric patients.