Emergency department patient knowledge concerning acetaminophen (paracetamol) in over-the-counter and prescription analgesics.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate patient knowledge of the acetaminophen (paracetamol) content of commonly used pain medications and the maximum daily recommended dose of acetaminophen. METHODS: A prospective, convenience sample of emergency department patients were enrolled. Data were recorded using a standardised questionnaire over 4 months. RESULTS: 1009 patients were enrolled. 492 patients (49%) did not know if Tylenol contained acetaminophen (paracetamol). The majority (66-90%) of patients did not know if Lortab, Vicodin, Percocet, non-aspirin pain reliever, ibuprofen, Motrin, or Advil contained acetaminophen. 568 patients (56%) reported not knowing the maximum daily dose of acetaminophen and only 71 patients (7%) reported the correct daily dose. CONCLUSIONS: Patient knowledge of the acetaminophen content of commonly used analgesic medications and its maximum recommended daily dose is limited. This may contribute to unintentional repeated supratherapeutic ingestion (RSTI) of acetaminophen, or overdose.

Hispanic and non-Hispanic white patient pain management expectations.

This study compares emergency department (ED) pain management expectations in Hispanic versus non-Hispanic white patients with painful conditions. A prospective convenience sample of patients was enrolled at a university ED. Patient expectations of pain relief were recorded on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). Surveys from 58 Hispanics and 408 non-Hispanic whites were completed and used for data analysis. Sample size was adequate to detect a minimum difference in pain relief of 13 mm. Both groups had similar chief complaints and degree of pain at presentation. Their demographics differed in age and language spoken. Mean expectations for pain relief were not significantly different (76mm [95% confidence interval (CI) 70-82] and 72mm [95% CI 70-74]) between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites, respectively. Mean expectations of a reasonable time to wait for pain medications were also not significantly different (31 minutes [95% CI 28-33] and 33 minutes [95% CI 26-48]) between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites, respectively.

Patient expectations for pain medication delivery.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate emergency department (ED) patient expectations for the delivery of pain medication and correlation of satisfaction with meeting patient needs for pain relief. In this prospective survey of 458 ED patients with pain, the patients reported a mean of 23 minutes as a reasonable wait for pain medication versus 78 minutes for the actual delivery of pain medication. Forty-five percent of patients received pain medication and 70% had their needs for pain relief met. Mean satisfaction for patients who had their needs for pain relief met was 83 mm versus 51 mm for patients whose needs for pain relief were not met (P <.001). Patients expect rapid delivery of pain medication after arrival in the ED. Time to delivery of pain medication in this ED does not meet patient expectations. Patients who had their needs for pain relief met were more satisfied with ED care.

The use of etomidate for rapid-sequence intubation in the air medical setting.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of etomidate for rapid-sequence intubation (RSI) in the air medical environment. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of a consecutive series of patients receiving etomidate for RSI by a university hospital-based air medical program. Records of all patients more than 10 years of age requiring intubation during a 13-month period were reviewed. Data collected included demographics, site of intubation, person performing intubation, indication, diagnosis, medications administered, complications, and pre- and post-

Atomized lidocaine as topical anesthesia for nasogastric tube placement: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of topical atomized 4% lidocaine in reducing the pain associated with nasogastric tube (NGT) placement. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in the emergency department of a university teaching hospital. Study participants were alert, hemodynamically stable adult patients requiring NGT placement for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes. Atomized 4% lidocaine or normal saline solution was administered in the nasopharynx and oropharynx before NGT placement. All patients also received topical 2% lidocaine jelly intranasally after atomization. The pain of NGT placement was measured using a standard 100-mm visual analog scale. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were enrolled in the study, with 20 in the lidocaine group and 20 in the placebo group. Mean pain scores were 37.4 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.4 to 49.4) for atomized lidocaine and 64.5 mm (95% CI 51.8 to 77.1) for placebo with a mean difference of 27.1 mm (95% CI 14.8 to 39.4), achieving both clinical and statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Atomized nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal 4% lidocaine results in clinically and statistically significant reductions in pain during NGT placement.

Anthrax threats: a report of two incidents from Salt Lake City.

The threat of anthrax as an agent of bioterrorism in the U.S. is very real, with 47 incidents of possible exposure involving 5664 persons documented by the Federal Bureau of Investigation over a 14-month period in 1998 and 1999. The highly visible and potentially devastating effects of these threats require a well-coordinated and well-organized Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Emergency Department (ED) response to minimize panic and reduce the potential spread of an active and deadly biologic agent. This requires planning and education before the event. We describe the events of two anthrax threats in a major metropolitan area. The appropriate EMS and ED response to these threats is outlined.

Field termination of unsuccessful out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation: acceptance by family members.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether family members accept field termination of unsuccessful out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation. METHODS: We carried out a prospective cohort study, using a structured interview, in an urban, municipal, advanced life support emergency medical services (EMS) system. The interview subjects were family members present at the scene in a consecutive series of unsuccessful out-of-hospital resuscitation attempts. RESULTS: During the 4-month study period, 140 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occurred. Follow-up with a family member was performed in 42 of the 53 cardiac arrests that met the inclusion criteria (79%). When resuscitation was terminated in the field (n = 25), 24 family members (96%) reported satisfaction with the decision. When resuscitation was terminated in the emergency department (n = 17), 14 family members (82%) reported satisfaction with the decision to transport the victim to the hospital. However, responses indicated that 13 of the family members (76%) might have accepted termination of resuscitation in the home. In all cases, relatives reported satisfaction with the paramedics' care and with the manner in which they were informed of the victims' deaths. CONCLUSION: Family members accept termination of unsuccessful out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation in the field.

Management of the short-bowel syndrome.

The patient with short-bowel syndrome after massive small-intestinal resection represents one of the greatest clinical challenges a general surgeon must face. Maintaining optimal nutritional and metabolic support until maximum bowel adaptation can occur is the top priority of therapy. Currently, no operative procedure for adjunctive management of the short-bowel syndrome is sufficiently safe and effective to recommend its routine use. Long-term parenteral nutrition remains the cornerstone of successful management.