Assessing risk of major adverse cardiac events among patients with chest pain and cocaine use using the HEART score.

INTRODUCTION: Chest pain (CP), a common presentation in the emergency department (ED) setting, is associated with significant morbidity and mortality if emergency clinicians miss the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The HEART (History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk Factors, Troponin) score had been validated for risk-stratification patients who are at high risk for ACS and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). However, the use of cocaine as a risk factor of the HEART score was controversial. We hypothesized that patients with cocaine-positive (COP) would not be associated with higher risk of 30-day MACE than cocaine-negative (CON) patients. METHODS: This retrospective study included adult patients who presented to 13 EDs of a University's Medical System between August 7, 2017 to August 19, 2021. Patients who had CP and prospectively calculated HEART scores and urine toxicology tests as part of their clinical evaluation were eligible. Areas Under The Receiver Operating Curve (AUROC) were calculated for the performance of HEART score and 30-day MACE for each group. RESULTS: This study analyzed 46,210 patients' charts, 663 (1.4%) were COP patients. Mean age was statistically similar between groups but there were fewer females in the COP group (26.2% vs 53.2%, p < 0.001). Mean (+/- SD) HEART score was 3.7 (1.4) comparing to 3.1 (1.8, p < 0.001) between COP vs CON groups, respectively. Although more COP patients (54%) had moderate HEART scores (4-6) vs. CON group (35.2%, p < 0.001), rates of 30-day MACE were 1.1% for both groups. HEART score's AUROC was 0.72 for COP and 0.78 for CON groups. AUROC for the Risk Factor among COP patients, which includes cocaine, was poor (0.54). CONCLUSION: This study, which utilized prospective calculated HEART scores, demonstrated that overall performance of the HEART score was reasonable. Specifically, our analysis showed that the rate of 30-day MACE was not affected by cocaine use as a risk factor. We would recommend clinicians to consider the HEART score for this patient group.

Discrepancies between Retrospective Review of "Real-Time" Electronic Health Record Documentation and Prospective Observer Documentation of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Quality Metrics in an Academic Cardiac Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Every year, approximately 200,000 patients will experience in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in the United States. Survival has been shown to be greatest with the prompt initiation of CPR and early interventions, leading to the development of time-based quality measures. It is uncertain how documentation practices affect reports of compliance with time-based quality measures in IHCA. METHODS: A retrospective review of all cases of IHCA that occurred in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit (CICU) at an academic quaternary hospital was conducted. For each case, a member of the code team (observer) documented performance measures as part of a prospective cardiac arrest quality improvement database. We compared those data to those abstracted in the retrospective review of "real-time" documentation in a Resuscitation Narrator module within electronic health records (EHRs) to investigate for discrepancies. RESULTS: We identified 52 cases of IHCA, all of which were witnessed events. In total, 47 (90%) cases were reviewed by observers as receiving epinephrine within 5 min, but only 42 (81%) were documented as such in the EHR review (p = 0.04), meaning that the interrater agreement for this metric was low (Kappa = 0.27, 95% CI 0.16-0.36). Four (27%) eligible patients were reported as having defibrillation within 2 min by observers, compared to five (33%) reported by the EHR review (p = 0.90), and with substantial agreement (Kappa = 0.73, 95% CI 0.66-0.79). There was almost perfect agreement (Kappa = 0.82, 95% CI 0.76-0.88) for the initial rhythm of cardiac arrest (25% shockable rhythm by observers vs. 29% for EHR review, p = 0.31). CONCLUSION: There was a discrepancy between prospective observers' documentation of meeting quality standards and that of the retrospective review of "real-time" EHR documentation. A further study is required to understand the cause of discrepancy and its consequences.

Quality Improvement Curriculum for Intensive Care Unit Upgrades.

Patients admitted to the hospital ward from the emergency department (ED) occasionally decompensate and require transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU). An emergency medicine (EM) curriculum focused on review of these ICU upgrade cases could improve resident knowledge related to patient acuity, critical illness, and appropriate disposition. Furthermore, initial identification of critical pathology in the ED and earlier admission to the ICU could reduce delays in care and improve patient outcomes. We performed a retrospective analysis to determine the effectiveness of a resident quality improvement curriculum evaluating cases where patients require transfer from the inpatient floor to the ICU within 12 hours of admission from the ED. We compared postgraduate year 2 (PGY-2) EM residents who participated in the ICU upgrades curriculum during their first year to PGY-2 EM residents who did not participate in the curriculum. Analysis of the 242 qualifying ICU upgrade cases from July 2019-October 2021 showed post-curriculum residents were responsible for an average of 1.0 upgrades per resident compared to an average of 1.54 upgrades per resident (P = 0.12) for pre-curriculum residents. Although there was no statistically significant difference in ICU upgrades between the groups, there was a trend toward decreased ICU upgrade cases for residents who participated in the curriculum. Common reasons for ICU upgrade included worsening respiratory distress requiring higher level of respiratory support, recurrent hypotension after initial intravenous fluid resuscitation requiring vasopressor support, and declining mental status. This retrospective study showed no significant difference in the number of ICU upgrades for residents who completed the ICU upgrades curriculum compared to residents who were not enrolled in the course. However, the study was likely underpowered to detect a significant difference in the groups, and there was a trend toward reduced ICU upgrades for residents who completed the curriculum. ICU upgrade cases were frequently associated with worsening respiratory status, hypotension, and mental status. These findings highlight the importance of reassessment of vital signs and mental status prior to determining disposition from the ED. Additional, larger studies are needed to better determine the curriculum's impact on resident proficiency in recognizing critical illness and reducing ICU upgrades.

Airway Oscillometry Detects Spirometric-Silent Episodes of Acute Cellular Rejection.

Rationale: Acute cellular rejection (ACR) is common during the initial 3 months after lung transplant. Patients are monitored with spirometry and routine surveillance transbronchial biopsies. However, many centers monitor patients with spirometry only because of the risks and insensitivity of transbronchial biopsy for detecting ACR. Airway oscillometry is a lung function test that detects peripheral airway inhomogeneity with greater sensitivity than spirometry. Little is known about the role of oscillometry in patient monitoring after a transplant.Objectives: To characterize oscillometry measurements in biopsy-proven clinically significant (grade ≥2 ACR) in the first 3 months after a transplant.Methods: We enrolled 156 of the 209 double lung transplant recipients between December 2017 and March 2019. Weekly outpatient oscillometry and spirometry and surveillance biopsies at Weeks 6 and 12 were conducted at our center.Measurements and Main Results: Of the 138 patients followed for 3 or more months, 15 patients had 16 episodes of grade 2 ACR (AR2) and 44 patients had 64 episodes of grade 0 ACR (AR0) rejection associated with stable and/or improving spirometry. In 15/16 episodes of AR2, spirometry was stable or improving in the weeks leading to transbronchial biopsy. However, oscillometry was markedly abnormal and significantly different from AR0 (P < 0.05), particularly in integrated area of reactance and the resistance between 5 and 19 Hz, the indices of peripheral airway obstruction. By 2 weeks after biopsy, after treatment for AR2, oscillometry in the AR2 group improved and was similar to the AR0 group.Conclusions: Oscillometry identified physiological changes associated with AR2 that were not discernible by spirometry and is useful for graft monitoring after a lung transplant.