Effects of Non-physician Practitioners on Emergency Medicine Physician Resident Education.

INTRODUCTION: The effects of non-physician practitioners (NPP) such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners on the education of emergency medicine (EM) residents have not previously been specifically evaluated. Emergency medicine societies have made policy statements regarding NPP presence in EM residencies without the benefit of empiric studies. METHODS: A cross-sectional, mixed methods questionnaire with strong validity evidence was distributed to current EM residents who were members of a large national society, the American Academy of Emergency Medicine Resident and Student Association (AAEM/RSA), between June 4-July 5, 2021. RESULTS: We received 393 partial and complete responses, representing a 34% response rate. A majority of respondents (66.9%) reported that NPPs have a detracting or greatly detracting impact on their education overall. The workload in the emergency department was reported generally as lighter (45.2%) to no impact (40.1%), which was cited in narrative responses as an aspect of both enhancing and detracting from resident physician education. Non-physician practitioner postgraduate programs in EM were associated with a 14x increase in the median number of procedures forfeited over the course of the prior year (median = 7.0 vs 0.5, P<.001). Among respondents, 33.5% reported feeling "not confident at all" in their ability to report concerns about NPPs to local leadership without retribution, and 65.2% reported feeling "not confident at all" regarding confidence in the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education to satisfactorily address concerns about NPPs raised in the end-of-year survey. CONCLUSION: Resident members of the AAEM/RSA reported having concerns about the effects of NPPs on their education and their confidence in being able to address the concerns.

Impacts of United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Scoring Change on Emergency Medicine Applicant Screening.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 has been used as a screening tool for residency selection. In February 2020, Step 1 numerical scoring changed to pass/fail. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to survey emergency medicine (EM) residency program attitudes towards the new Step 1 scoring change and to identify important applicant screening factors. METHODS: A 16-question survey was distributed through the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine listserv from November 11 through December 31, 2020. Given the Step 1 scoring change, the survey questioned the importance of EM rotation grades, composite standardized letters of evaluation (cSLOEs), and individual standardized letters of evaluation, using a Likert scale. Descriptive statistics of demographic characteristics and selection factors were performed along with a regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 107 respondents, 48% were program directors, 28% were assistant or associate program directors, 14% were clerkship directors, and 10% were in other roles. Sixty (55.6%) disagreed with pass/fail Step 1 scoring change and, of those, 82% believed that numerical scoring was a good screening tool. The cSLOEs, EM rotation grades, and interview were the most important selection factors. Residencies with 50 or more residents had 5.25 odds (95% CI 1.25-22.1; p = 0.0018) of agreeing with pass/fail scoring and those who ranked cSLOEs as the most important selection factor had 4.90 odds (95% CI 1.125-21.37; p = 0.0343) of agreeing with pass/fail scoring. CONCLUSIONS: Most EM programs disagree with pass/fail scoring of Step 1 and will most likely use Step 2 score as a screening tool. The cSLOEs, EM rotation grades, and interview are considered the most important selection factors.

ICU Admission Risk Factors for Latinx COVID-19 Patients at a U.S.-Mexico Border Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have examined the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the primarily Latinx community along the U.S.-Mexico border. This study explores the socioeconomic impacts which contribute to strong predictors of severe COVID-19 complications such as intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization in a primarily Latinx/Hispanic U.S.-Mexico border hospital. METHODS: A retrospective, observational study of 156 patients (≥ 18 years) Latinx/Hispanic patients who were admitted for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection at a U.S.-Mexico border hospital from April 10, 2020, to May 30, 2020. Descriptive statistics of sex, age, body mass index (BMI), and comorbidities (coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes, cancer/lymphoma, current use of immunosuppressive drug therapy, chronic kidney disease/dialysis, or chronic respiratory disease). Multivariate regression models were produced from the most significant variables and factors for ICU admission. RESULTS: Of the 156 hospitalized Latinx patients, 63.5% were male, 84.6% had respiratory failure, and 45% were admitted to the ICU. The average age was 67.2 (± 12.2). Those with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 had a higher frequency of ICU admission. Males had a 4.4 (95% CI 1.58, 12.308) odds of ICU admission (p = 0.0047). Those who developed acute kidney injury (AKI) and BMI 25-29.9 were strong predictors of ICU admission (p < 0.001 and p = 0.0020, respectively). Those with at least one reported comorbidity had 1.98 increased odds (95% CI 1.313, 2.99) of an ICU admission. CONCLUSION: Findings show that age, AKI, and male sex were the strongest predictors of COVID-19 ICU admissions in the primarily Latinx population at the U.S.-Mexico border. These predictors are also likely driven by socioeconomic inequalities which are most apparent in border hospitals.

Bamlanivimab Reduces ED Returns and Hospitalizations and May Reduce COVID-19 Burden on Low-resource Border Hospitals.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the effectiveness of bamlanivimab at reducing return emergency department (ED) visits in primarily Latinx/Hispanic patients with mild or moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Secondary aims were to evaluate the prevention of subsequent hospitalizations and deaths in a resource-limited United States (U.S.)-Mexico border hospital. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, open-label interventional study on 270 eligible adult patients diagnosed with mild-moderate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection who met criteria for receiving bamlanivimab from November 1, 2020 to January 31, 2021. The main outcomes of 14-day return visits to the ED and hospitalizations due to COVID-19 were compared between two groups - those who received bamlanivimab (exposed group) and those who did not receive bamlanivimab (unexposed group). Outcomes were analyzed through chi-square tests followed by multivariate regression modeling to adjust for patient demographics, characteristics, and comorbidities. RESULTS: There were 136 COVID-19 patients who received bamlanivimab in the ED prior to discharge and an unexposed group of 134 COVID-19 patients who were evaluated and discharged from the ED without receiving bamlanivimab. Overall, mean age was 61.7 (S.D. +/-13.9) years, mean body mass index (BMI) 31.0 (S.D. +/-6.6) kg/m2, 91.5% identified as Latinx/Hispanic, 51.9% male, and 80.7% reported at least one comorbidity. Most commonly reported comorbidities were obesity (22.6%), hypertension (59.6%), and diabetes (41.1%). The bamlanivimab group had a 22.8% (mean estimate = 0.7717, 95% CI [0.6482, 0.8611]) risk reduction or 84.4% (0.3030, 95% CI = 0.166, 0.554, p=.0001) absolute reduction of ED return visits within 14 days compared to controls after adjusting for chronic kidney disease. The bamlanivimab group had 19.0% (mean estimate=0.8097, 95% CI [0.6451, 0.9087]) risk reduction or 96.2% (0.235, 95% CI 0.100, 0.550, p=0.0008) absolute reduction of subsequent hospitalizations compared to unexposed patients after adjusting for diabetes status. CONCLUSION: Bamlanivimab infusions for high-risk COVID-19 patients in the ED substantially reduced the risk of return visits to the ED and hospitalizations in our primarily Latinx/Hispanic population. Monoclonal antibody infusions may help reduce hospital utilization during COVID-19 surges at U.S.-Mexico border hospitals.

Interobserver agreement between emergency clinicians and nurses for Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale.

OBJECTIVES: The Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) is a validated, commonly used tool to objectively quantify withdrawal symptoms, often in anticipation of treatment with buprenorphine. Our primary aim was to determine the agreement between emergency department (ED) nurses compared with emergency physicians in determining this score in ED patients who presented for opioid withdrawal treatment. Secondarily, we wanted to investigate the safety of buprenorphine induction in the ED setting. METHODS: Scoring for opioid withdrawal using the COWS was performed by ED clinicians and ED nurses independently on 120 patients. In addition to overall concordance, agreement (weighted kappa) was calculated between the 2 scores by various cutoffs: overall severity, COWS ≥ 5, and the 11 different individual measures. Patient documents also were reviewed for complications that could be possibly linked to buprenorphine induction. RESULTS: Our study sample of 120 subjects was 77% Hispanic and 78.3% male. The clinicians assigned a median interquartile range overall COWS score of 6 (2-12), which categorizes as mild withdrawal. Seventy-eight (65%) subjects met the criteria of withdrawal (≥ 5 COWS) and 69 (58%) received an induction dose of buprenorphine (range 2 mg-24 mg) during the ED visit. No adverse effects or worsening withdrawal were reported. The overall observed concordance, based on severity withdrawal categorization, for all clinician pairs, was 67.5% (81/120) (95% confidence interval [CI], 58.7-75.2%). The weighted kappa for that concordance was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.43-0.67), giving a moderate strength of agreement. When data are dichotomized by COWS score ≥5, concordance was 82.5% (99/120) (95% CI, 74.7%-88.3%) and the weighted kappa was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.51-0.78), indicating substantial agreement. The breakdown by the 11 factors that constitute COWS showed only substantial agreement for pulse measurement. CONCLUSION: The agreement between ED clinicians and nurses for the overall COWS scoring in patients presenting for opioid withdrawal treatment was substantial. COWS scoring by ED nurses may help expedite treatment with buprenorphine on presentation.

Self-Inflicted Gun Shot Wounds: A Retrospective, Observational Study of U.S. Trauma Centers.

INTRODUCTION: Intentional self-harm (suicide) by firearms is a growing problem in the United States. Currently, there are no large studies that have identified risk factors for patients who die from self-inflicted gunshot wounds. Our objectives are to 1) identify risk factors for patients with the highest morbidity and mortality from self-inflicted gunshot wounds (SIGSWs) at trauma centers 2) present the outcomes of victims of SIGSW by handguns (HG) versus all other specified guns (AOG) and 3) compare the presentations and outcomes of victims with head or face (HF) injuries to other regions of the body. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis from the National Trauma Database (NTDB) data between 2012 and 2013 of all SIGSW patients who presented to trauma centers. Categorical data included patient characteristics upon presentation and outcomes which were compared between patients with HG injury versus AOG injury using the Chi-Squared test, where AOG includes shotguns, hunting rifles, and military firearms. Additionally, analysis of head and face (HF) injuries versus other bodily injuries (OBI) were compared between the HG group versus AOG group using Chi-squared test. RESULTS: There were 7,828 SIGSWs, of those, 78% (6,115) were white and 84.3% (6,600) were male. There were 5,139 HG injuries, 1,130 AOG injuries, and 1,405 unidentified gun injuries. The HG group was likely to be older (>55 years old), hypotensive (systolic blood pressure < 90), have a lower Glasgow Coma Score (GCS < 9), use illegal, or use prescription drugs. In comparing HF injuries (4,799) versus other bodily injuries (OBI) (3,028), HF group was more likely to use handguns, expire in ED, require ICU, and have a higher percent of overall mortality. Of the total OBI, the thorax, upper extremities, and abdomen were the most commonly injured. CONCLUSION: In our retrospective study of SIGSWs, we were able to demonstrate that SIGSW by handguns are associated with higher rates of mortality versus all other types of firearms. SIGSWs in older white males with handguns are the most at-risk for severe complications. Future efforts should improve screening methods for handguns in suicidal patients and at developing prevention programs.

Large Cerebellar Stroke in a Young COVID-19-Positive Patient: Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), most frequently presents with respiratory symptoms, such as fever, dyspnea, shortness of breath, cough, or myalgias. There is now a growing body of evidence that demonstrates that severe SARS-CoV-2 infections can develop clinically significant coagulopathy, inflammation, and cardiomyopathy, which have been implicated in COVID-19-associated cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs). CASE REPORT: We report an uncommon presentation of a 32-year-old man who sustained a large vessel cerebellar stroke associated with a severe COVID-19 infection. He presented with a headache, worse than his usual migraine, dizziness, rotary nystagmus, and dysmetria on examination, but had no respiratory symptoms initially. He was not a candidate for thrombolytic therapy or endovascular therapy and was managed with clopidogrel, aspirin, and atorvastatin. During hospital admission he developed COVID-19-related hypoxia and pneumonia, but ultimately he was discharged to home rehabilitation. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: We present this case to increase awareness among emergency physicians of the growing number of reports of neurologic and vascular complications, such as ischemic CVAs, in otherwise healthy individuals who are diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. A brief review of the current literature will help elucidate possible mechanisms, risk factors, and current treatments for CVA associated with SARS-CoV-2.

Case Report of Thrombosis of the Distal Aorta with Occlusion of Iliac Arteries in COVID-19 Infection.

INTRODUCTION: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which is responsible for the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, has been associated with a variety of prothrombotic sequelae. The pathogenesis of this hypercoagulability has not yet been fully elucidated, but it is thought to be multifactorial with overactivation of the complement pathways playing a central role. There is emerging evidence that the resulting complications are not confined to the venous circulation, and even in patients without typical respiratory symptoms or traditional risk factors, there is a significant rate of arterial thromboembolic disease in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. CASE REPORT: We describe a patient presenting with bilateral leg pain without any respiratory symptoms or fever who ultimately was found to be COVID-19 positive and had thromboembolism of the aorta and bilateral iliac occlusion. This report reviews available evidence on the prevalence of arterial thromboembolism in COVID-19 patients and some proposed mechanisms of the pathophysiology of COVID-19-associated coagulopathy. CONCLUSION: It is important that the emergency physician maintain a high degree of suspicion for arterial thromboembolic disease in patients who are infected with COVID-19 even in the absence of typical respiratory symptoms. Additionally, COVID-19 should be considered in patients with unexplained thromboembolic disease, as this may increase the detection of COVID-19.

A Case of Covid-19 Diagnosed at Home With Portable Ultrasound and Confirmed With Home Serology Test.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has pushed us to find better ways to accurately diagnose what can be an elusory disease, preferably in a way that limits exposure to others. The potential for home diagnosis and monitoring could reduce infectious risk for other patients and health care providers, limit use of finite hospital resources, and enable better social distancing and isolation practices. CASE REPORT: We report a case of an otherwise healthy emergency physician diagnosed with COVID-19 at home using portable ultrasound, pulse oximetry, and antibody testing. Her clinical picture and typical lung findings of COVID-19 on ultrasound, combined with a normal echocardiogram and negative deep vein thrombosis study, helped inform her diagnosis. She then monitored her clinical course using pulse oximetry, was able to self-isolate for 4 weeks, and had an uneventful recovery. Her diagnosis was confirmed with a positive IgG antibody test after 3 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Novel times call for novel solutions and our case demonstrates one possible path for home diagnosis and monitoring of COVID-19. The tools used, namely ultrasound and pulse oximetry, should be familiar to most emergency physicians. Ultrasound in particular was helpful in eliminating other potential diagnoses, such as pulmonary embolus.

"Botched": A Case Report of Silicone Embolism Syndrome After Penile and Scrotal Injection.

INTRODUCTION: Silicone has been commonly used for both major and minor plastic and reconstructive surgery for decades. Due to the high costs associated with minor cosmetic procedures and plastic surgery, the unauthorized use of silicone injections by laypersons has become increasingly common. Improper or illegal subcutaneous injectable silicone has caused significant pulmonary complications and neurological complications, which can range from mild chest pain, hypoxia, and respiratory failure to coma and altered mental status. CASE REPORT: We present a patient who had a rare complication of respiratory failure secondary to silicone embolism syndrome (SES). SES is a rare, potentially deadly complication and has been associated with subcutaneous silicone injections. The diagnosis of SES can be challenging and requires a thorough patient history indicating recent cosmetic procedures. CONCLUSION: This case describes the first case of SES of a male patient who presented to a community emergency department complaining of dyspnea after an episode of self-administered injectable silicone into his penis and scrotum and who developed SES-induced respiratory failure.

Should Antiemetics be Given Prophylactically with Intravenous Opioids While Treating Acute Pain in the Emergency Department?: Clinical Practice Paper Approved by American Academy of Emergency Medicine Clinical Guidelines Committee.

BACKGROUND: It is common practice for emergency physicians to give parenteral opioids for acute pain, however, some treating physicians have concerns that using parenteral opioids can lead to nausea and vomiting when used alone. Therefore, antiemetics are often given prophylactically with opioids for nausea and vomiting in the emergency department (ED). This systematic review evaluates the use of prophylactic antiemetics with parenteral opioids for the treatment of acute pain in the ED. METHODS: A 10-year literature search using keywords was performed in PubMed for English-language human studies. Abstracts were screened to identify high-quality studies, which then underwent a more rigorous structured review. The recommendations are made based on the literature review. RESULTS: Eight articles met criteria for structured review and citation in this article. These include one review article, two randomized controlled trials, three prospective observational trials, one retrospective study, and one pre- and post-intervention trial. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the literature review, routine use of prophylactic antiemetics are not indicated with administration of parenteral opioids for treatment of acute pain in the ED, as nausea and vomiting are infrequent side effects. The recent literature clearly demonstrates that there are potential undesirable side effects from the use of antiemetics when using opioids. However, one subgroup of patients, those with a known history of nausea and vomiting after opioid use or a history of travel sickness, may benefit from the use of prophylactic antiemetic when being treated with parenteral opioids.

Ruptured Visceral Artery Aneurysms: A Deadly Cause of Epigastric Pain.

Visceral artery aneurysms (VAA) are rare, life-threatening disease processes that often affect the celiac, superior mesenteric, or inferior mesenteric arteries and their respective branches. The splenic, hepatic, superior mesenteric, and tripod celiac arteries are most commonly affected and have high rupture and mortality rates. This case describes splenic and celiac artery aneurysms in a patient that led to hemorrhagic shock and multisystem organ failure despite timely diagnosis and ligation. A brief review of the literature further elucidates the key risk factors in identifying patients with VAAs and their treatment course.

Dead Legs: A Case of Bilateral Leg Paralysis.

Aortoiliac occlusive disease (AOD) is a rare presentation of thrombosis of the abdominal aorta. Also known as Leriche syndrome, its classic description entails claudication of the buttocks, thighs, and calves, absent femoral pulses, and impotence. AOD risk factors include smoking, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, chronic renal insufficiency, and hypercoagulopathy. Ischemic complications of gastrointestinal malperfusion, renal infarction, and paralysis secondary to spinal cord ischemia are also noted. This case describes AOD complicated by a Stanford Type B aortic dissection leading to multi-system organ failure. A brief review of the literature further elucidates the key risk factors in identifying and treating Leriche syndrome.