The pragmatic use of industrial elastomeric facemasks in health care practice during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced health care workers to explore alternative personal protective equipment (PPE) strategies due to traditional product shortages in the setting of increased global demand. Some physicians have chosen to use elastomeric face masks (EFMs), traditionally used in non-healthcare industries. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of Emergency Medicine (EM) physicians working at a Level 1 Trauma Center who chose to use self-supplied EFMs for PPE. All subjects used commercial EFMs with disposable filters (N95, P95, or P100). All subjects chose their mask size independently with no input from employee health regarding appropriate fit. Per study protocol, subjects were fit tested periodically during clinical shifts over the course of the 6-week study period. All investigators performing fit testing underwent OSHA qualitative fit testing training. Data collected included mask/filters age, subjective assessment of mask seal quality, and fit test results. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: 105 fit tests were performed on physicians wearing EFMs over the course of 49 shifts. Physicians felt their fit was adequate for all tests performed. There were no fit test failures in any subjects. CONCLUSIONS: EFMs have an extremely low failure rate. Physicians are able to assess the adequacy of fit and accurately choose EFM size.

The efficacy of continuous use disposable N95 masks in clinical practice in the emergency department.

During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, many emergency departments (EDs) initiated continuous use of N95 disposable respirators (N95s) rather than discarding them after each use to conserve respirators. This study investigates the efficacy of wearing disposable N95s continuously during clinical work. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study of ED staff required to wear N95s continuously throughout their shifts. Subjects were doctors, nurses, and technicians who were previously fitted for their assigned N95 by employee health. Subjects were fit tested periodically throughout their shifts. Investigators filled out a questionnaire for each subject noting the hours of continuous N95 wear. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen N95s were evaluated, with 23 failures at first testing. These were not retested. Twenty-seven N95s passed at the start of a shift and did not have repeat testing during the course of the shift. These were excluded from further analysis. Seventeen N95s passed testing after several hours of continuous wear, but only had a single fit test done partway or at the end of a shift. These were assumed to have passed if tested at shift start, and were assigned as "passes" for continuous use. Forty-six N95s had an initial pass and were evaluated for continuous use, of which 6 subsequently failed later in the shift, giving a fail rate with continuous use of 9.5%. CONCLUSION: Continuous use of disposable N95s throughout an ED shift is reasonable during a PPE shortage if wearers are assured of fit at the start of their shift.

Elderly fall patients triaged to the trauma bay: age, injury patterns, and mortality risk.

BACKGROUND: Falls in the elderly are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. We sought to better categorize this patient population and describe factors contributing to their falls. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of geriatric patients presenting to a level 1 community trauma center. We queried our trauma database for all patients 65 years and older presenting with fall and triaged to the trauma bay from 2008 to 2013. Researchers reviewed the patients' trauma intake paperwork to assess mechanism, injury, and location of fall, whereas discharge summaries were reviewed to determine disposition, morbidity, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 650 encounters were analyzed. Five hundred thirty-nine resided at home (82.9%), 110 presented from nursing homes or assisted living (16.9%), and 1 came from hospice (0.15%). Ninety-five patients died or were placed on hospice as a result of their falls (14.7%), of which 88 came from home. Controlling for Injury Severity Score, living at home was an independent risk factor for fall-related mortality (odds ratio, 3.0). Comparing the elderly (age 65-79 years; n = 274) and the very elderly (age ≥80 years; n = 376), there were no differences in Injury Severity Score (P = .33), likelihood of death (P = .49), likelihood of C-spine injury (P = 1.0), or likelihood of other axial or long bone skeletal injury (P = .23-1.0). There was a trend for increased likelihood of head injury in very elderly patients (P = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Prevention measures to limit morbidity and mortality in elderly fall patients should be aimed at the home setting, where most severe injuries occur. Very elderly patients may be at increased risk for intracranial fall-related injuries.

Application of National Emergency X-Ray Utilizations Study low-risk c-spine criteria in high-risk geriatric falls.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: We sought to validate National Emergency X-Radiography Utilizations Study low-risk cervical spine (C spine) criteria in a geriatric trauma population. We sought to determine whether patients' own baseline mental status (MS) could substitute for Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) to meet the criteria "normal alertness." We further sought to refine the definition of "distracting injury." METHODS: This is a retrospective review of geriatric fall patients presenting to a level 1 trauma center and triaged to the trauma bay. We queried our database from 2008 to 2013. Abstractors recorded GCS, deviation from baseline MS, midline neck tenderness, intoxication, focal deficit, signs of trauma, and presence of other injury. Patients were considered at baseline MS if specific documentation was present on the chart, or if their GCS was 15. RESULTS: Six hundred sixty elderly fall patients were trauma alerts during the study period. Seventeen were excluded for incomplete records/death before imaging, leaving 647. The median age was 81 (interquartile range, 74-87). Fifty patients (8.0%) had C spine or cord injury. Two hundred ninety-four (44.5%) had baseline MS (including GCS 13-15), no spine tenderness, no intoxication, and no focal neurologic deficit. Of these, 18 had C-spine injury. Using physical findings of head trauma as the only "distracting injury," no injury would have been missed (sensitivity, 100% [confidence interval, 91.1-100]; specificity, 14.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that National Emergency X-Radiography Utilizations Study can be safely applied in elderly fall patients who are at their personal baseline MS. Furthermore, our data support a more narrow definition of distracting injury to include only patients with signs of trauma to the head.

Impact of the United States propofol ban on emergency providers' procedural sedation agent choice and patient length of stay.

BACKGROUND: In the recent past, propofol was temporarily removed from the emergency department (ED) for use in procedural sedation. We sought to determine which agents replaced it in clinical practice and the impact this change had on turnaround times (TAT) for sedated patients. METHODS: This study is a retrospective chart review at a level one trauma center. Patients receiving sedative agents (propofol, ketamine, midazolam, and etomidate) were identified by pharmacy codes, and their charts were then reviewed for demographics and TAT. Propofol was unavailable in the emergency department (ED) between May 2010 and February 2011. The study period extended from May 2009 until May 2011. Patients receiving sedation by non-emergency medicine physicians and those receiving sedation related to intubation were excluded. RESULTS: In total 2466 charts were reviewed and 209 met inclusion criteria. When propofol was available, the most commonly used sedative agent was etomidate (40%), followed by propofol (28%), ketamine (20%), and midazolam (6%). When propofol was unavailable, etomidate remained the most commonly used agent (43%), followed by ketamine (41%), and midazolam (11%). When propofol was available, the median TAT for sedated patients was 163 minutes compared to 178 minutes when propofol was unavailable (P=0.83). When propofol was the primary sedative agent used, the median TAT was 166 minutes as compared with a median TAT of 172 minutes for all other sedative agents combined (P=0.87). CONCLUSION: When propofol was unavailable, ketamine became a preferred ED sedation agent. Removal of propofol from the sedation armamentarium did not affect ED TAT.

Impact of the United States propofol ban on emergency providers' procedural sedation agent choice and patient length of stay / 世界急诊医学杂志（英文）

@#BACKGROUND: In the recent past, propofol was temporarily removed from the emergency department (ED) for use in procedural sedation. We sought to determine which agents replaced it in clinical practice and the impact this change had on turnaround times (TAT) for sedated patients. METHODS: This study is a retrospective chart review at a level one trauma center. Patients receiving sedative agents (propofol, ketamine, midazolam, and etomidate) were identified by pharmacy codes, and their charts were then reviewed for demographics and TAT. Propofol was unavailable in the emergency department (ED) between May 2010 and February 2011. The study period extended from May 2009 until May 2011. Patients receiving sedation by non-emergency medicine physicians and those receiving sedation related to intubation were excluded. RESULTS: In total 2466 charts were reviewed and 209 met inclusion criteria. When propofol was available, the most commonly used sedative agent was etomidate (40％), followed by propofol (28％), ketamine (20％), and midazolam (6％). When propofol was unavailable, etomidate remained the most commonly used agent (43％), followed by ketamine (41％), and midazolam (11％). When propofol was available, the median TAT for sedated patients was 163 minutes compared to 178 minutes when propofol was unavailable (P=0.83). When propofol was the primary sedative agent used, the median TAT was 166 minutes as compared with a median TAT of 172 minutes for all other sedative agents combined (P=0.87). CONCLUSION: When propofol was unavailable, ketamine became a preferred ED sedation agent. Removal of propofol from the sedation armamentarium did not affect ED TAT.