Ketamine for Migraine in the Emergency Department.

Ketamine is utilized often in the emergency department (ED) for rapid sequence intubation, procedural sedation, and acute pain management. The treatment of migraine headache in the ED varies widely and is dependent on several factors including migraine cause, previous successful abortive methods, and provider preference. Several medications are currently employed to treat acute migraine including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, triptans, antihistamines, prochlorperazine, and corticosteroids, among others. Interest in ketamine as an abortive agent to treat migraine has increased as evidenced by recent studies evaluating its use in the ED. This review examines the data regarding the use of ketamine to treat migraine headache. The concept of treating migraine headache with ketamine has been studied for more than 20 years. Early studies conducted primarily in the outpatient setting evaluated ketamine through multiple routes of administration and differing migraine causes with varying results. These early data seem to suggest that ketamine provides relief from headache severity but provides little information regarding the optimal dose and route of administration. Recent active comparator and placebo-controlled trials in the ED utilizing subdissociative doses of ketamine (0.2-0.3 mg/kg intravenously) show conflicting results. To confound the decision regarding its use further, ED providers encounter differing recommendations regarding its place in therapy. Current data suggest that ketamine may provide pain relief to patients with migraine headache. Although there may be a role for ketamine in certain cases after more robust evidence becomes available, currently it is premature to incorporate ketamine into routine use. Several questions remain to be answered including its overall efficacy, place in therapy, dosage, and risk of undesirable side effects.

Surgical Site Infections in Patients With Type 3 Open Fractures: Comparing Antibiotic Prophylaxis With Cefazolin Plus Gentamicin Versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare rates of surgical site infection (SSI) in patients with type 3 open fractures who had received cefazolin plus gentamicin versus piperacillin/tazobactam for antibiotic prophylaxis. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS: Seven hundred sixty-six patients admitted between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2012, with open fractures were identified using the National Trauma Data Bank by searching International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes. Electronic medical record review revealed 134 patients with type 3 open fractures, of which 72 were included in the final analysis. INTERVENTION: Administration of cefazolin plus gentamicin or piperacillin/tazobactam for type 3 open fracture antibiotic prophylaxis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: SSI, nonunion, death, and rehospitalization rates at 1 year. RESULTS: Surgical site infection at 1 year occurred in 12 of 37 patients (32.4%) in the cefazolin plus gentamicin group and 11 of 35 patients (31.4%) in the piperacillin/tazobactam group (P = 1.000). Nonunion, death, and rehospitalization rates at 1 year were similar between the 2 groups. Although there was no statistically significant difference in SSI at 30 days between groups, the rate was higher in the cefazolin plus gentamicin group (21.6% vs. 11.4%; P = 0.246). CONCLUSIONS: At our institution, use of piperacillin/tazobactam as compared with cefazolin plus gentamicin for antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with type 3 open fractures showed similar rates of SSI, nonunion, mortality, and rehospitalization at 1 year after injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Pharmacist input into statewide treatment protocols for emergency medical services.

PURPOSE: A pharmacist's role in helping Vermont health officials standardize pharmacotherapy-related protocols used by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel across the state is described. SUMMARY: Pharmacists with expertise in emergency medicine (EM) or critical care are ideally positioned to provide guidance on optimizing and standardizing medication-use aspects of state and local EMS protocols. In 2012, the medical director of the EMS division of the Vermont Department of Health requested that an EM pharmacist at a Burlington academic medical center review draft EMS protocols designed to replace the existing patchwork of local protocols with statewide standards of care; among the 92 draft protocols reviewed, 62 pertained to medication use. The pharmacist provided a wide range of suggestions on 33 protocols, including (1) evidence-based recommendations on use of vasopressor agents for septic shock, (2) recommendations to optimize medication ordering and preparation in the prehospital setting, (3) recommendations on prehospital management of pediatric shock and appropriate use of chemical restraints, and (4) recommendations to promote use of smart infusion pumps by EMS personnel. All of the pharmacist's suggestions were incorporated into the final protocols, which took effect in March 2014. The protocols have helped standardize care for patients receiving EMS services throughout Vermont while reducing the potential for medication errors. CONCLUSION: An EM pharmacist participated in the review and development of statewide EMS treatment protocols that focused on choice of medication therapy, dosage, administration, and identification and minimization of potential risks of medication errors.

Delays in the administration of antimicrobials in the emergency department and the impact of an educational intervention to improve this administration.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess the factors associated with delays in emergency department (ED) antimicrobial administration and to determine whether an educational intervention would reduce the incidence of such delays. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective observational cohort study of patients aged 18-89 years who received intravenous antimicrobial(s) in a single ED and were subsequently admitted (March 2011). Using multivariable logistic regression, we analyzed whether demographic and operational factors were significantly associated with delayed ED antimicrobial administration (> 30 min from physician order to nurse initiation time). We then conducted an educational intervention with ED/hospital staff to disseminate knowledge of these identified factors. After the intervention, we carried out a prospective observational cohort study of participants with the same inclusion criteria (March 2012), using the large sample z-test to analyze whether the incidence of such delays was significantly reduced. RESULTS: A total of 575 ED antimicrobial orders (302 patients) before the intervention and 493 antimicrobial orders (275 patients) after the intervention fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The median time to antimicrobial administration (interquartile) was 48 min (17-130 min) before the intervention and 49 min (17-156 min) after the intervention. Variables significantly increasing or decreasing the odds of delayed ED antimicrobial administration were older age [OR: 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.003-1.03], one-time dosing (OR: 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.92), and second (OR: 2.40, 95% CI 1.39-4.14), and third (OR: 3.66, 95% CI 1.69-7.92) antimicrobial administration (multiple agents ordered). The incidence of antimicrobial administration was 35.8% within 30 min before the intervention and 34.7% after the intervention (z-test: 0.39, P = 0.70). CONCLUSION: Older age, multiple agent orders, and dosing ordering pattern showed a significant association with delays in ED antimicrobial administration. An educational intervention to disseminate knowledge of these factors did not result in a reduction in such delays.