A pharmacist-driven deprescribing protocol for negative urine and sexually transmitted infection cultures in the emergency department increases antibiotic-free days.

PURPOSE: Emergency department (ED) pharmacists commonly perform positive culture follow-ups that result in optimized antibiotic prescribing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential positive impact on the outcome of antibiotic-free days through an ED pharmacist-driven protocol to contact patients with negative urine cultures and sexually transmitted infection (STI) test results who were discharged with antibiotics. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, observational, pre-post intervention study to determine antibiotic use in patients with negative urine cultures who were discharged from the Loyola Medical University Center ED with antibiotics prescribed. Patients were identified through daily positive culture reports. The primary outcome was days free of antibiotics, defined as the number of calendar days within 28 days after urine culture or STI test collection on which the patient did not receive any antibiotic treatments. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-two patients were screened. Sixty-three and twenty-six patients met the inclusion criteria in the pre- and postintervention groups, respectively. The study identified 163/465 (35.1%) antibiotic free days for the preintervention group, compared to 150.5/187 (80.5%) antibiotic-free days for the postintervention group. A majority of the patients did not have urinary tract infection as the chief complaint. The most common urinary and STI symptoms upon ED admission in the pre- and postintervention groups were dysuria (19.2% vs 28.1%) and unusual discharge (30.8% vs 28.6%), respectively. CONCLUSION: This study showed that a pharmacist-driven protocol increased the number of antibiotic-free days for patients prescribed empiric antibiotic therapy and discharged from the ED with subsequent negative urine cultures and STI results. We propose taking a novel approach in discontinuation of antibiotics by implementing an expansion of ED culture programs to include negative cultures that promote antimicrobial stewardship.

Pharmacotherapy optimization for rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department.

PURPOSE: Rapid-sequence intubation (RSI) is the process of administering a sedative and neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) in rapid succession to facilitate endotracheal intubation. It is the most common and preferred method for intubation of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). The selection and use of medications to facilitate RSI is critical for success. The purpose of this review is to describe pharmacotherapies used during the RSI process, discuss current clinical controversies in RSI medication selection, and review pharmacotherapy considerations for alternative intubation methods. SUMMARY: There are several steps to the intubation process requiring medication considerations, including pretreatment, induction, paralysis, and post-intubation sedation and analgesia. Pretreatment medications include atropine, lidocaine, and fentanyl; but use of these agents in clinical practice has fallen out of favor as there is limited evidence for their use outside of select clinical scenarios. There are several options for induction agents, though etomidate and ketamine are the most used due to their more favorable hemodynamic profiles. Currently there is retrospective evidence that etomidate may produce less hypotension than ketamine in patients presenting with shock or sepsis. Succinylcholine and rocuronium are the preferred neuromuscular blocking agents, and the literature suggests minimal differences between succinylcholine and high dose rocuronium in first-pass success rates. Selection between the two is based on patient specific factors, half-life and adverse effect profiles. Finally, medication-assisted preoxygenation and awake intubation are less common methods for intubation in the ED but require different considerations for medication use. AREAS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH: The optimal selection, dosing, and administration of RSI medications is complicated, and further research is needed in several areas. Additional prospective studies are needed to determine optimal induction agent selection and dosing in patients presenting with shock or sepsis. Controversy exists over optimal medication administration order (paralytic first vs induction first) and medication dosing in obese patients, but there is insufficient evidence to significantly alter current practices regarding medication dosing and administration. Further research examining awareness with paralysis during RSI is needed before definitive and widespread practice changes to medication use during RSI can be made.

Pharmacist authors of emergency medicine organization work products pertaining to pharmacotherapy.

PURPOSE: Despite the expertise that emergency medicine (EM) pharmacists bring to multidisciplinary teams in the emergency department (ED) setting, they are not commonly present on writing groups for guidelines, policies, or task forces pertaining to EM pharmacotherapy. The purpose of this article is to quantify EM pharmacist involvement on author bylines of guidelines, position statements, and other official documents that specifically encompass EM pharmacotherapy. METHODS: Official work products released between January 1, 2010, and May 1, 2021, were collected from the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM), and American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM) and the table of contents of the following journals: Annals of Emergency Medicine, Academic Emergency Medicine, and Journal of Emergency Medicine. A modified Delphi approach was used to gain consensus amongst the authors on which work products to include in the initial review and which works pertained to pharmacotherapy. The primary endpoint was the percentage of pharmacists listed as authors on EM work products pertaining to pharmacotherapy. RESULTS: Overall, 76 EM work products were identified. Forty-seven work products with a total of 248 authors contained at least 1 recommendation pertaining to pharmacotherapy. Of these 47 EM work products, 23 (49%) were from AAEM, 16 (34%) were from Annals of Emergency Medicine (published on behalf of ACEP), 5 (11%) were from Journal of Emergency Medicine (published on behalf of AAEM), and 3 (6%) were from SAEM. The median number of authors per work product was 4. There were 5 pharmacists listed on work products (2% of the total of 248 authors). Additionally, there were 9 nonpharmacist/nonphysician authors (4% of the total). CONCLUSION: Pharmacist inclusion on author lists of recently published EM work products pertaining to pharmacotherapy is extremely low. Given their unique knowledge pertaining to EM pharmacotherapy, an effort should be made to increase inclusion of pharmacists as authors of EM work products with recommendations that pertain to pharmacotherapy.

A Novel Approach for the Administration of Medications and Fluids in Emergency Scenarios and Settings.

The available routes of administration commonly used for medications and fluids in the acute care setting are generally limited to oral, intravenous, or intraosseous routes, but in many patients, particularly in the emergency or critical care settings, these routes are often unavailable or time-consuming to access. A novel device is now available that offers an easy route for administration of medications or fluids via rectal mucosal absorption (also referred to as proctoclysis in the case of fluid administration and subsequent absorption). Although originally intended for the palliative care market, the utility of this device in the emergency setting has recently been described. Specifically, reports of patients being treated for dehydration, alcohol withdrawal, vomiting, fever, myocardial infarction, hyperthyroidism, and cardiac arrest have shown success with administration of a wide variety of medications or fluids (including water, aspirin, lorazepam, ondansetron, acetaminophen, methimazole, and buspirone). Device placement is straightforward, and based on the observation of expected effects from the medication administrations, absorption is rapid. The rapidity of absorption kinetics are further demonstrated in a recent report of the measurement of phenobarbital pharmacokinetics. We describe here the placement and use of this device, and demonstrate methods of pharmacokinetic measurements of medications administered by this method.

First Use of a New Device for Administration of Buspirone and Acetaminophen to Suppress Shivering During Therapeutic Hypothermia.

Therapeutic hypothermia or targeted temperature management has been used after cardiac arrest to improve neurological outcomes and mortality. However, a side effect of temperature modulation is a centrally mediated shivering response. The Columbia Anti-Shivering Protocol sets up a systematic method of intravenous (IV) and oral medication escalation to suppress this response and preserve the benefits of this therapy. We present the case of a 59-year-old male who began shivering after therapeutic hypothermia for cardiac arrest, leading to a persistent rise in core temperature despite adequate sedation. He was also found to have gastric contents similar to coffee grounds through nasogastric tube suction. The shivering was effectively suppressed and the rising core temperature plateaued using rectal acetaminophen and buspirone administered by means of a novel device, the Macy Catheter. Also, when used in conjunction with other protocol-driven medications, the patient was able to achieve a core temperature of 33°C. The Macy Catheter appears to be a useful approach to rectally administer buspirone and acetaminophen, using an easy-to-place, nonsterile atraumatic device that requires no radiographic confirmation of placement.

Disparity in Patients' Self-Reported and Charted Medication Allergy Information.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare current adverse drug/allergy reaction reporting in patient electronic medical records/charts against information gathered during patient interviews in the emergency department. Our hypothesis was that current methods for allergy reporting results in significant discrepancy between what is documented and the actual allergy history upon interviewing the patient. METHODS: The study was conducted between December 2011 and April 2012 in an academic emergency department. This was a convenience sample study comparing a prospective patient interview with previously documented allergy histories. Demographics for sex, age, and race were recorded. Patients to be interviewed were adults with at least one documented allergy in their chart. Descriptive statistics and percentages were used for demographic and prevalence data. Agreement between interviews and charts was assessed for both the reaction type and the reaction descriptor. RESULTS: There were 101 patients interviewed during this 4-month period, and a total of 235 adverse drug reactions were recorded. There were 66 women and 35 men included in this study. The mean age was 51 ± 17 years. The median number of allergy instances for women was 2 (interquartile range 1-3) and for men the median number of allergy instances was 1 (interquartile range 1-2). The percentage of agreements for overall allergies was 85% and 50% for the type of reaction. Total profile agreement occurred in nine patients. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of agreement between interviews and charting for reaction type was 50%. Even with the use of electronic medical records, better methods are needed to properly record allergies to ensure patient safety and care.

An alternative for rapid administration of medication and fluids in the emergency setting using a novel device.

Routes of administration for medications and fluids in the acute care setting have primarily focused on oral, intravenous, or intraosseous routes, but, in many patients, none of these routes is optimal. A novel device (Macy Catheter; Hospi Corp) that offers an easy route for administration of medications or fluids via rectal mucosal absorption (proctoclysis) has recently become available in the palliative care market; we describe here the first known uses of this device in the emergency setting. Three patients presenting to the hospital with conditions limiting more typical routes of medication or fluid administration were treated with this new device; patients were administered water for hydration, lorazepam for treatment of alcohol withdrawal, ondansetron for nausea, acetaminophen for fever, aspirin for antiplatelet effect, and methimazole for hyperthyroidism. Placement of the device was straightforward, absorption of administered medications (judged by immediacy of effects, where observable) was rapid, and use of the device was well tolerated by patients, suggesting that this device may be an appealing alternative route to medication and fluid administration for a variety of indications in acute and critical care settings.