Nine recommendations for the emergency department for patients presenting with low back pain based on management and post-discharge outcomes in an Australian, tertiary emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain and develop recommendations for analgesic management, discharge planning and further healthcare utilisation of adults presenting to an Australian tertiary ED with radicular or low back pain (LBP). METHODS: This prospective cohort study included adults presenting with non-specific LBP or radicular pain to an Australian tertiary ED. Participants with trauma/cancer-related pain, and those requiring hospital admission or surgical interventions were excluded. The primary outcome was pharmacological and non-pharmacological management delivered in ED, retrospectively collected via electronic medical records. The secondary outcomes include discharge management use, and changes made due to post-discharge healthcare utilisation, as observed by weekly telephone questionnaires over 4-weeks follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 100 participants recruited, 94 completed follow-up. In ED, pharmacological management was received by 85%, including opioids (62%) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS, 63%). Non-pharmacological management was received by 73%, including patient education (71%) and exercise prescription (37%). In the first-week post-discharge, changes to initial discharge plan occurred in 50%, mostly carried out by GPs (76%). Over the follow-up period, 51% received additional investigations/referrals. Pharmacological use decreased by 38% and non-pharmacological use decreased by 10%. 16% of opioid-naïve patients continued using opioids 4-weeks post-discharge. CONCLUSION: ED presentations for LBP were more often treated pharmacologically than non-pharmacologically, with opioids commonly prescribed and NSAIDs potentially under-utilised. Post-discharge, additional investigations/referrals, discharge analgesia reductions and maintenance of non-pharmacological management were common. Opioid initiation as a result of LBP presentations, signifies a potential 'gateway' towards unintentional long-term use. Key study findings form our nine recommendations to inform ED LBP pain management.

Restriction of oxycodone in the emergency department (ROXY-ED): A randomised controlled trial.

Background: The prescription of opioids in emergency care has been associated with harm, including overdose and dependence. The aim of this trial was to assess restriction of access to oxycodone (ROXY), in combination with education and guideline modifications, versus education and guideline modifications alone (standard care) to reduce oxycodone administration in the Emergency Department (ED). Methods: An unblinded, active control, randomised controlled trial was conducted in an adult tertiary ED. Participants were patients aged 18-75 years who had analgesics administered in the ED. The primary intervention was ROXY, through removal of all oxycodone immediate release tablets from the ED imprest, with availability of a small supply after senior clinician approval. The intervention did not restrict prescription of discharge medications. The primary outcome measure was oxycodone administration rates. Secondary outcomes were administration rates of other analgesic medications, time to initial analgesics and oxycodone prescription on discharge. Results: There were 2258 patients eligible for analysis. Oxycodone was administered to 80 (6.1%) patients in the ROXY group and 221 (23.3%) patients in the standard care group (relative risk (RR) 0.26; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.33; p < .001). Tapentadol was prescribed more frequently in the ROXY group (RR 2.17; 95% CI: 1.71-2.74), while there were no differences in prescription of other analgesic medications. On discharge, significantly fewer patients were prescribed oxycodone (RR 0.51; 95% CI: 0.39-0.66) and no differences were observed in prescription rates of other analgesic medications. There was no difference in time to first analgesic (HR 0.94; 95% CI: 0.86-1.02). Conclusions: Restricted access to oxycodone was superior to education and guideline modifications alone for reducing oxycodone use in the ED and reducing discharge prescriptions of oxycodone from the ED. The addition of simple restrictive interventions is recommended to enable rapid changes to clinician behaviour to reduce the potential harm associated with the prescribing of oxycodone in the ED.

Introduction of an emergency medicine pharmacist-led sepsis alert response system in the emergency department: A cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine effects of implementing a sepsis alert response system in the ED that included early intervention by emergency medicine (EM) pharmacists. METHODS: A prospective cohort (8 February 2016 to 28 February 2018) of patients after implementation of a sepsis alert response system in an Australian ED was compared to a retrospective cohort (3 January 2015 to 7 February 2016) of patients with sepsis who presented during EM pharmacist working hours and were admitted to the ICU. RESULTS: There were 184 patients, including 80 patients pre- and 104 patients post-implementation. The post-intervention cohort was triaged at a higher acuity, had higher quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) scores and higher initial lactate measurements. After the intervention, antimicrobial agents were administered to patients within 60 min of presentation more often (21 [26.3%] to 85 [81.7%], P < 0.001). After adjusting for presenting triage category, admission lactate and presenting qSOFA scores, this association remained significant (adjusted odds ratio 9.99; 95% confidence interval 4.7-21.3). Significant improvements were observed for proportion of patients who had intravenous fluids initiated within 60 min (47.5% vs 72.1%); proportion of patients who had serum lactate measured within 60 min (50.0% vs 77.9%) and proportion of patients who had blood cultures performed within 60 min (52.5% vs 85.6%). CONCLUSION: Implementation of a sepsis alert response that included early involvement of the EM pharmacist was associated with improvement in time to antimicrobials and other components of the sepsis bundle. An upfront, multidisciplinary approach to patients presenting to the ED with suspected sepsis should be considered more broadly.

Informing the Alfred Registry for Emergency Care Project: An analysis of presenting complaint documentation in an emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of an ED presenting complaint (PC) tool that categorised all ED PCs into 10 categories. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 1445 consecutive patient encounters was conducted. The primary outcome was the frequency of use of the 10 PC categories. RESULTS: Of the 1203 patient encounters meeting inclusion criteria, the PC tool was completed by clinicians in 574 (47.7%). When completed, the tool's 10 options were selected for most presentations (72.3%). CONCLUSION: The PC tool captured the majority of presenting complaints in 10 categories. External validation is recommended.

Introduction of a modified analgesic ladder in the emergency depart-ment: Effect on oxycodone use for back pain.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the introduction of an analgesic ladder and targeted education on oxycodone use for patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). DESIGN: A retrospective pre-post implementation study was conducted. Data were extracted for patients presenting from June to July 2016 (preintervention) and June to July 2017 (post-intervention). SETTING: The EDs of a major metropolitan health service and an affiliated community-based hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with back pain where nonpharmacological interventions such as mobilization and physiotherapy are recommended as the mainstay of treatment. INTERVENTIONS: A modified analgesic ladder introduced in May 2017. The ladder promoted the use of simple analgesics such as paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAIDs) prior to opioids and tramadol in preference to oxycodone in selected patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The proportion of patients prescribed oxycodone and total doses administered. RESULTS: There were 107 patients pre and 107 post-intervention included in this study. After implementation of the analgesic ladder, 78 (72.9 percent) preintervention patients and 55 (51.4 percent) post-intervention patients received oxycodone in ED (p = 0.001). The median oxycodone doses administered in the ED was 14 mg (interquartile range: 5-20 mg) and 5 mg (interquartile range: 5-10 mg; p < 0.001), respectively. On discharge from hospital, a prescription for oxycodone was issued for 36 (33.6 percent) patients preintervention and 26 (24.3 percent) patients post-intervention (p = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with back pain, implementation of a modified analgesic ladder was associated with a statistically significant but modest reduction in oxycodone prescription. Consideration of multifaceted interventions to produce major and sustained changes in opioid prescribing is required.

Rapid Administration of Methoxyflurane to Patients in the Emergency Department (RAMPED) Study: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Methoxyflurane Versus Standard Care.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of methoxyflurane versus standard care for the initial management of severe pain among adult emergency department (ED) patients. METHODS: This randomized parallel-group open-label phase IV trial of methoxyflurane was conducted in a tertiary hospital ED setting in Australia. Inclusion criteria required adult patients to have an initial pain score ≥ 8 on the 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either inhaled methoxyflurane (3 mL) or standard analgesic treatment at ED triage. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving clinically substantial pain reduction, defined as a ≥50% drop in the pain score at 30 minutes. Secondary outcomes included the pain score at multiple time points (15, 30, 60, 90 minutes) and the difference in the proportion of patients achieving a >2-point reduction on the NRS. RESULTS: There were 120 patients randomized and analyzed between September 4, 2019, and January 16, 2020. The primary outcome was achieved in six (10%) patients in the methoxyflurane arm and three (5%) in the standard care arm (p = 0.49). A higher proportion of patients in the methoxyflurane arm reported a >2-point drop on the NRS at all time points (17% vs. 5% at 15 minutes, 25% vs. 9% at 30 minutes, 30% vs. 10% at 60 minutes, and 33% vs. 13% at 90 minutes). Methoxyflurane use was also associated with lower median pain scores at all time points. CONCLUSION: Initial management with inhaled methoxyflurane in the ED did not achieve the prespecified substantial reduction in pain, but was associated with clinically significant lower pain scores compared to standard therapy.

Impact of patient isolation on emergency department length of stay: A retrospective cohort study using the Registry for Emergency Care.

OBJECTIVE: The number of patients with suspected COVID-19 presenting to Australian EDs continues to impose a burden on healthcare services. Isolation is an important aspect of infection prevention and control, but has been associated with undesirable consequences among hospital inpatients. The aim of the present study was to determine if isolation is associated with an increased length of stay (LOS) in the ED. METHODS: The Registry for Emergency Care Project is a prospective cohort study with a series of nested sub-studies. The present study was a retrospective analysis of adult patients allocated an Australasian Triage Scale category of 1 or 2 who presented to a tertiary ED between 18 and 31 May 2020. The primary outcome was ED LOS. Regression methods were used to determine the independent association between ED isolation and LOS. RESULTS: There were 447 patients who met inclusion criteria, of which 123 (28%) were managed in isolation. The median (interquartile range) ED LOS was 259 (210-377) min for the isolation group and 204 (126-297) min for the non-isolation group, a difference in median ED LOS of 55 min (P < 0.001). Isolation was independently associated with a 23% increase in ED LOS (P = 0.002) and doubled the odds of an ED stay of more than 4 h (adjusted odds ratio 2.2 [1.4-3.4], P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Consistent with the anecdotal experience of Australian ED clinicians, the present study demonstrated an increased ED LOS for patients managed in isolation. Enhanced infection prevention and control precautions will be required during and beyond the current pandemic, creating significant ongoing challenges for emergency care systems.

Temperature screening has negligible value for control of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To report the incidence of fever among patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at a single centre. Temperature at time of testing and on repeat testing within 24 h were collected. RESULTS: At the time of testing, fever was detected (sensitivity) in 16 of 86 (19%; 95% confidence interval 11-28) episodes of positive tests for SARS-CoV-2. With repeat testing, fever was detected in 18 of 75 (24%; 95% confidence interval 15-35) episodes. CONCLUSIONS: In an Australian hospital, screening for fever lacked sensitivity for detection of patients with SARS-CoV-2.

Epidemiology and clinical features of emergency department patients with suspected COVID-19: Results from the first month of the COVID-19 Emergency Department Quality Improvement Project (COVED-2).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to describe the epidemiological and clinical features of ED patients with suspected and confirmed COVID-19. METHODS: The COVID-19 Emergency Department (COVED) Project is an ongoing prospective cohort study that includes all adult patients presenting to The Alfred Hospital ED who undergo testing for SARS-CoV-2. Current guidelines recommend testing for patients with fevers or chills, acute respiratory symptoms or a high-risk exposure history, as well as implementation of infection prevention and control precautions for all suspected and confirmed cases. Study outcomes include a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result and intensive respiratory support. RESULTS: In the period 1-30 April 2020, 702 of 3453 ED patients (20%; 95% CI 19-22) were tested, with a significant increase during the study period (incident rate ratio 1.019; 95% confidence interval 1.017-1.021, P < 0.001). The primary outcome of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test was recorded in 14 patients (2%; 95% confidence interval 1-3). Shortness of breath (77%), fatigue (100%), myalgia (67%) and diarrhoea (67%) were common among positive cases, while close contact (9%), fever (0%) and healthcare occupation (0%) were not. No positive cases required intensive respiratory support in the ED. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of ED patients with suspected COVID-19 is increasing. Low numbers of positive cases precluded development of accurate predictive tools, but the COVED Project is fulfilling an important role in monitoring the burden of infection prevention and control requirements on the ED. The increasing number of patients meeting isolation criteria has the potential to impact on patient flow and may lead to ED overcrowding.

Epidemiology and clinical features of emergency department patients with suspected COVID-19: Initial results from the COVID-19 Emergency Department Quality Improvement Project (COVED-1).

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 Emergency Department (COVED) Quality Improvement Project aims to provide regular and real-time clinical information to ED clinicians caring for patients with suspected and confirmed COVID-19. The present study summarises data from the first 2 weeks of the study. METHODS: COVED is an ongoing prospective cohort study that commenced on 1 April 2020. It includes all adult patients presenting to a participating ED who undergo testing for SARS-CoV-2. Data are collected prospectively and entered into a bespoke registry. Outcomes include a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test result and requirement for intensive respiratory support. RESULTS: In the period 1-14 April 2020, 240 (16%) of 1508 patients presenting to The Alfred Emergency and Trauma Centre met inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 (5%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The mean age of patients was 60 years and the commonest symptoms were acute shortness of breath (n = 122 [67%]), cough (n = 108 [56%]) or fever (n = 98 [51%]). Overseas travel or known contact with a confirmed case was reported by 24 (14%) and 16 (10%) patients, respectively. Fever or hypoxia was recorded in 23 (10%) and 11 (5%) patients, respectively. Eleven (5%) patients received mechanical ventilation in the ED, of whom none tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients presenting to a tertiary ED with suspected COVID-19, only a small proportion tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Although the low incidence of positive cases currently precludes the development of predictive tools, the COVED Project demonstrates that the rapid establishment of an agile clinical registry for emergency care is feasible.

Informing emergency care for all patients: The Registry for Emergency Care (REC) Project protocol.

OBJECTIVE: In Australia, the current ED burden related to COVID-19 is from 'suspected' rather than 'confirmed' cases. The initial aim of the Registry for Emergency Care (REC) Project is to determine the impact of isolation processes on the emergency care of all patients. METHODS: The REC Project builds on the COVID-19 Emergency Department Quality Improvement (COVED) Project. Outcomes measured include times to critical assessment and management. RESULTS: Clinical tools will be generated to inform emergency care, both during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The REC Project will support ED clinicians in the emergency care of all patients.

Informing emergency care for COVID-19 patients: The COVID-19 Emergency Department Quality Improvement Project protocol.

OBJECTIVES: There is an urgency to support Australian ED clinicians with real-time tools as the COVID-19 pandemic evolves. The COVID-19 Emergency Department (COVED) Quality Improvement Project has commenced and will provide flexible and responsive clinical tools to determine the predictors of key ED-relevant clinical outcomes. METHODS: The COVED Project includes all adult patients presenting to a participating ED and meeting contemporary testing criteria for COVID-19. The dataset has been embedded in the electronic medical record and the COVED Registry has been developed. RESULTS: Outcomes measured include being COVID-19 positive and requiring intensive respiratory support. Regression methodology will be used to generate clinical prediction tools. CONCLUSION: This project will support EDs during this pandemic.

Avoiding adult in-hospital cardiac arrest: A retrospective cohort study to determine preventability.

INTRODUCTION: This study had three main aims. Develop a methodology for reviewing in-hospital cardiac arrests (IHCA). Assess appropriateness and potential preventability of IHCAs. Identify areas for improvement within the rapid response system (RRS). DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of IHCA identified from an existing organisational electronic database of medical emergency (MET) and Code Blue team activation. Potential preventability of IHCA and Code Blue team activation were established by an expert panel based on a standardised case review process with descriptive and content analyses for each IHCA event. SETTING: A university affiliated tertiary referral hospital with an established two-tier RRS in Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Same day and multi-day stay patients identified from an existing database as having an IHCA defined as attempted resuscitation with chest compressions, defibrillation, or both from January 2014 to December 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures were: number of Code Blue activations; potential preventability of Code Blue activations and potential preventability of the IHCA event. RESULTS: A total of 120 IHCA events equating to 0.58 per 1000 total admissions occurred. 11 (9%) of IHCA were determined to be potentially preventable due to a failure to escalate, medication errors and inappropriate management. 39 (33%) of 120 Code Blue team activations were determined to be potentially preventable. These were typically due to lack of identification and documentation for end of life (EOL) care in 16 (62%) cases and inappropriate resuscitation when limitations of care were already in place in 10 (38%) cases. CONCLUSIONS: The study centre has a comparably low rate of preventable IHCA which could be reduced further through improvements in documentation and handover process. A focus on improved communication, recognition and earlier instigation of appropriate EOL care will reduce this rate further.

The diagnosis of acute urethral trauma.

BACKGROUND: During trauma resuscitation, blind catheterization of an injured urethra may aggravate the injury by disrupting a partially torn urethra. In busy trauma centers, retrograde urethrograms (RUG) prior to catheterisation for all patients with unstable pelvic fractures presents a challenge during trauma resuscitation, and the procedure is not commonly practiced despite Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) and World Health Organisation recommendations. The aim of this study was to determine the presenting clinical features of patients with urethral injuries and to predict major trauma patients needing further investigation to exclude this injury. METHODS: A retrospective review of adult major trauma patients diagnosed with urethral injuries during an 8-year period at a major trauma centre, was conducted. RESULTS: There were 998 major trauma patients with fractures of the pelvis over the study period, of whom 223 had pubic symphysis disruption. There were 29 patients with urethral injuries. The sensitivity of any one of the traditional signs of urethral trauma was 66.7% (95% CI: 46.0-82.8). After exclusion of patients with penetrating trauma and iatrogenic injuries, pubic symphysis disruption on initial pelvis AP X-ray and/or the clinical signs of urethral injury had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 84.4-100.0) for urethral trauma. DISCUSSION: Reliance on clinical features alone to predict urethral injury results in a substantial proportion of missed injuries in major trauma patients. RUGs did not appear to be needed in patients with no disruption of the pubic symphysis on initial pelvis X-ray or where no signs of urethral injury are present. In the absence of clinical signs and pubic symphysis disruption, blind urethral catheterisation may be attempted.

Emergency physician credentialing for resuscitative thoracotomy for trauma.

OBJECTIVE: A low case incidence and variable skill level prompted the development of a credentialing programme and specific surgical training in resuscitative thoracotomy for emergency physicians at The Alfred, a Level 1 Adult Victorian Major Trauma Service. METHODS: A review of the incidence of traumatic pericardial tamponade and the objectives of resuscitative thoracotomy were undertaken. RESULTS: A training programme involving pre-reading of a 17 page teaching manual, a 40 min didactic lecture and a 2 h surgical skills station using anaesthetized pigs were developed. The specific indication for resuscitative thoracotomy for this programme is ultrasound demonstrated cardiac tamponade secondary to blunt or penetrating truncal trauma in a haemodynamically unstable patient with a systolic blood pressure of less than 70 mmHg despite pleural decompression and intravenous volume replacement. Cardiac electrical activity must be present. The primary aims of resuscitative thoracotomy taught are release of cardiac tamponade, control of haemorrhage and access for internal cardiac massage. CONCLUSION: Emergency physicians working in high-volume Trauma Centres are expected to diagnose cardiac tamponade and on occasion decompress the pericardium. Specific training in the procedure should be undertaken.

Minor head injuries in children - an approach to management.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic head injury is a common occurrence in the paediatric population, with the majority of patients sustaining only mild head injury. OBJECTIVE: This article outlines the management of mild head injuries in children. DISCUSSION: A careful history including time of injury, the mechanism of injury, and any loss of consciousness or seizure activity; a thorough examination including a Glascow Coma Scale (GCS) score; and observation should be appropriate for most patients. Only a small number of injuries require further examination/imaging with computerised tomography. Indicators for transfer to hospital include GCS equal to or less than 12, focal neurological deficit, clinical evidence of skull fracture, loss of consciousness for more than 30 seconds, ataxia, amnesia, abnormal drowsiness, persistent headache, seizure following initial normal behaviour or recurrent vomiting. Postconcussive symptoms frequently occur after minor head injuries and parents and other family members should be aware of what symptoms to expect, and possible duration. Regular follow up until all symptoms have resolved is mandatory, with clear guidelines for stepwise resumption of physical activity.