Implementation of an Advanced Pharmacy Practice Model in the Emergency Department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of this retrospective descriptive study was to quantify clinical activities performed by pharmacists in an advanced pharmacy practice model in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Data from January 2015 to August 2017 extracted from the department of pharmacy's electronic documentation system and the hospital's electronic medical record were collected and reviewed. Cost savings was derived from the system with adaptation from the previous literature and had been validated by our institution's administration as an acceptable reflection of the impact for activity. RESULTS: The ED pharmacy team participated in a total of 4106 clinical activities that resulted in a cumulative cost avoidance of $5 387 679. Overall, the most common clinical activities that the pharmacy team provided included pharmacotherapy consult (63.3%) and response to medical emergencies (20.7%). A total of 16 219 medication orders placed by ED clinicians were prospectively reviewed and 379 interventions were accepted by ED clinicians. Turnaround times for medication verification in median (interquartile range [IQR]) for 2015, 2016, and 2017 were 2 minutes (1-6 minutes), 3 minutes (1-6 minutes), and 2 minutes (1-5 minutes), respectively. A total of 14 peer-reviewed publications, primarily based on pharmacy practice or use of pharmacotherapy for acute pain, were published by a research program led by the ED pharmacotherapist. CONCLUSION: We created and implemented an advanced practice model tailored to our institution's needs. The model maximized opportunities for pharmacists to provide direct patient care, practice at the top of their license, and encouraged the safe and effective use of medications.

Comparing Nonopioids Versus Opioids for Acute Pain in the Emergency Department: A Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: Pain is the most common reason for patient visits in the emergency department (ED). Opioids have been long considered the standard of care for acute pain in the ED. Because of the opioid crisis, investigation and implementation of novel practices to manage pain is needed. The use of various nonopioids has been suggested as a plausible alternative to opioids, with emerging literature to support its use for acute pain in the ED. STUDY QUESTION: To evaluate the safety, efficacy, opioid-sparing effects of nonopioids in patients who present with acute pain in the ED. DATA SOURCES: We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE (July 1970 to January 2019). STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trials that evaluated nonopioids versus opioids in the ED were eligible. The clinical outcomes measured were change in pain scores compared with baseline, the incidence of adverse events, and use of rescue analgesia. RESULTS: Twenty-five randomized controlled trials that evaluated the use of nonopioids in 2323 patients [acetaminophen (APAP) (n = 651), diclofenac (n = 547), ketamine (n = 272), ketorolac (n = 225), lidocaine (n = 219), ibuprofen (n = 162), ibuprofen & APAP (n = 162), hydroxyzine & dihydroergotamine (n = 85)] met inclusion criteria. Four trials found significant greater reductions in pain scores, favoring nonopioids. In all trials, the duration of pain relief provided by nonopioids was not sustained over an extended period. Eighteen trials reported no significant differences in reduction of pain scores. Two trials reported improved pain reduction with opioids and one trial reported noninferiority. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from primary literature suggests that nonopioids could be a feasible alternative to opioids for management of acute pain in the ED as it is effective, safe, and decreases the need for rescue analgesia.

Intranasal Sufentanil Versus Intravenous Morphine for Acute Pain in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Pilot Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients in the United States frequently seek medical attention in the emergency department (ED) to address their pain. The intranasal (i.n.) route provides a safe, effective, and painless alternative method of drug administration. Sufentanil is an inexpensive synthetic opioid with a high therapeutic index and rapid onset of action, making it an attractive agent for management of acute pain in the ED. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of i.n. sufentanil as the primary analgesic for acute pain in the ED. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled trial that evaluated the use of i.n. sufentanil 0.7 µg/kg via mucosal atomizer device vs. intravenous morphine 0.1 mg/kg in adult patients who presented to the ED with acute pain. The primary outcome was patient's pain score at 10 min after administration of intervention. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, the need for rescue analgesia, and patient satisfaction after treatment. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled in each group. There was no significant difference in pain scores at 10 min after administration of intervention (sufentanil: 2.0, interquartile range = 2.0-3.3 vs. morphine: 3.0, interquartile range = 2.0-5.3, p = 0.198). No serious adverse events were reported. Rescue analgesia was not requested in either group. No significant difference in median satisfaction scores was found. CONCLUSION: The use of i.n. sufentanil at 0.7 µg/kg/dose resulted in rapid and safe analgesia with comparable efficacy to i.v. morphine for up to 30 min in patients who presented with acute pain in the ED.

Intravenous Lidocaine for Intractable Renal Colic Unresponsive to Standard Therapy.

CLINICAL FEATURES: Renal colic is defined as a flank pain radiating to the groin caused by kidney stones in the ureter (urolithiasis). Renal colic is a frequent cause of Emergency Department visits. Most renal colic cases present as acute distress and severe back and/or abdominal pain that require prompt treatment with analgesics. THERAPEUTIC CHALLENGE: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids are traditionally used for renal colic in the Emergency Department. This trend of practice is based on clinical experience and expert opinion. Consensus guidelines that provide evidence-based approach for the management of renal colic are limited. One consensus guideline from Europe provides a systematic approach for the management of pain with the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugss and opioids. However, no guidance is provided on how to manage patients who do not respond to these agents. SOLUTION: Intravenous lidocaine 120 mg in 100 mL normal saline was infused over 10 minutes for pain management for intractable renal colic unresponsive to standard therapy. Three minutes after initiation of lidocaine infusion, the patient reported numeric pain rating scale 1/10. At 5 minutes, the reported numeric pain rating scale was 0/10 and remained for 60 minutes after initiation of lidocaine infusion. No adverse events were reported during or after the infusion, and no subsequent analgesia was required.

Opioid-Induced Hyperalgesia in the Nonsurgical Setting: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH) is a phenomenon that causes an increased pain sensitization and perception of pain to noxious stimuli secondary to opioid exposure. While this clinical effect has been described in the surgical setting, it is unclear if OIH occurs in the nonsurgical setting. STUDY QUESTION: To review the available literature which evaluated OIH in nonsurgical settings. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed (January 1946-July 2017) using a variety of keywords for OIH. This review included randomized controlled trials with objectives to identify OIH in the nonsurgical setting. The clinical outcomes of interest were identification of OIH, adverse events, and impact of OIH on opioid consumption. RESULTS: The search identified 8 studies that fulfilled the criteria. Six studies enrolled healthy male volunteers, 1 study used chronic low-back patients, and another used heroin-dependent treatment-seeking adults. Studies used various opioids and dosages, including remifentanil, alfentanil, fentanyl, morphine, methadone, and buprenorphine. Three primary experimental pain induction models were used to evaluate for OIH. Measured outcomes included hyperalgesia area, pain threshold, and pain tolerance. All 5 studies that used the electrical stimulation model identified OIH as a significant outcome. However, only 2 of 5 studies using the cold pressor model and 1 of 3 studies using the heat pressor model identified OIH. None of the trials explored clinical outcomes, such as effects on opioid consumption. CONCLUSIONS: Most included studies identified OIH as a significant outcome within the nonsurgical setting. However, due to conflicting conclusions and various limitations, the clinical impact of OIH could not be assessed. Clinicians should monitor for effects of OIH in the nonoperative setting because there is insufficient evidence from the available literature to conclude that OIH is consistently observed in this setting.

Recognition of Sympathetic Crashing Acute Pulmonary Edema (SCAPE) and use of high-dose nitroglycerin infusion.

Sympathetic Crashing Acute Pulmonary Edema (SCAPE), or flash pulmonary edema, is the extreme end of the acute pulmonary edema spectrum. A sympathetic surge occurs as a result of decreased systemic perfusion resulting in further increases in afterload, causing the patient to decompensate. Patients can decompensate quickly, therefore patients require rapid interventions. The use of high-dose nitroglycerin (HDN) has been a topic of interest as it is believed to achieve preload and afterload reduction. However, its use continues to be controversial due to concerns of drug induced hypotension, syncope or paresthesia. Although there are Free Open Access Medical Education (FOAM) based podcasts as well as few studies to suggest the use of HDN, the evidence is limited by statistical flaws, incomplete dosing parameters and inconsistent methods of administration. In order to address these limitations, a protocol at our ED was created to ensure the safe and effective use of HDN. Here, we present a case of HDN use for the management of SCAPE based on this protocol.

The use of intranasal analgesia for acute pain control in the emergency department: A literature review.

BACKGROUND: Traditional routes for administration of pain medications include oral (PO), intravenous (IV), or intramuscular routes (IM). When these routes are not feasible, the intranasal (IN) route may be considered. The objectives of this evidence-based review were: to review the literature which compared the safety and efficacy of IN analgesia to traditional routes and to determine if IN analgesia should be considered over traditional routes for acute pain control in the ED. METHODS: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from July 1970 to July 2017 were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) that evaluated the use of IN analgesia for acute pain in the ED were included. Methodological quality of the trials was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria. RESULTS: Eleven randomized controlled trials (RCT) met the inclusion criteria. Four trials found significant reductions in pain scores, favoring IN analgesia. However, in all of the trials, pain relief was not sustained. Three trials reported superior pain reduction with comparators and three trials reported no statistical significance. One trial described effective pain relief with IN analgesia but did not provide data on statistical analysis. CONCLUSION: Eleven randomized controlled trials with various methodological flaws revealed conflicting conclusions. There is limited evidence to support the use of the IN analgesia over traditional routes for acute pain in the ED. The IN route may be a good alternative in scenarios where IV access is not feasible, patients are refusing injectable medications, or a fast onset of pain relief is needed.

The Feasibility and Impact of Prospective Medication Review in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the feasibility and impact of prospective medication review (PMR) in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all nonadmitted ED patients who were prescribed medication orders by ED clinicians from September 2014 to September 2015 to determine the time intervals utilized during each step of the medication use process and quantify the number of interventions conducted by the pharmacist and cost avoidance accrued from the interventions. RESULTS: A total of 834 medication orders were included for evaluation. The median time for order verification, order verification to dispense, and dispense to administration were 3 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] = 1-7 minutes), 20 minutes (IQR = 7-45 minutes), and 10 minutes (IQR = 6-16 minutes). The median time interval for order verification was longer during the overnight pharmacy shift (median = 5 minutes, IQR = 2-9 minutes) compared to the day and evening shifts (median = 3 minutes, IQR = 1-6 minutes). A total of 563 interventions were recommended by the pharmacists and accepted by ED clinicians. These interventions equated to US$47 585 worth of cost avoidance. CONCLUSION: The PMR is a feasible process that resulted in safe and effective use of medications without causing delays to patient care.

The Use of Intravenous Lidocaine for the Management of Acute Pain Secondary to Traumatic Ankle Injury: A Case Report.

Sports-related injuries are a frequent cause of visits to the emergency department (ED) across the United States. A majority of these injuries affect the lower extremities with the ankle as the most frequently reported site. Most sports-related injuries are not severe enough to require inpatient hospitalization; however, they often lead to acute distress and pain which require prompt treatment with analgesics. Approximately 22% of patients who presented to the ED required pharmacotherapy for acute pain management. Opioids have been traditionally used for the management of severe acute pain in the ED; however, there are growing concerns for opioid overuse and misuse. As a result, there is growing controversy regarding the appropriate selection of analgesic agents, optimal dosing, and need for outpatient therapy which has contributed to changes in prescribing patterns of opioids in the ED. Lidocaine, a class 1b antiarrhythmic, has been utilized as an analgesic agent. Its use has been documented for the management of intractable chronic pain caused by cancer, stroke, neuropathies, or nephrolithiasis. However, literature describing the use of intravenous lidocaine for the management of acute pain secondary to trauma is limited to a single case series. This case report describes the use of intravenous lidocaine in a 17-year-old male who presented to the ED in acute distress secondary to ankle dislocation and fracture. This report serves to describe additional clinical experience with intravenous lidocaine for the management of acute pain secondary to ankle fracture in the emergency department.

The Use of Ketamine for Acute Treatment of Pain: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain is one of the most common reasons for emergency department (ED) visits in the United States. Ketamine is a sedative with N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonism. Recent literature has suggested that the use of subdissociative dose ketamine (SDDK) may be safe and effective for acute pain. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate ketamine in subdissociative doses as an adjunct for acute pain in the ED. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that evaluated the use of SDDK in adult patients who presented to the ED with acute pain. Patients received ketamine 0.3 mg/kg via intravenous piggyback over 15 min or placebo. Morphine 0.1 mg/kg intravenous push was administered with the study interventions. The primary outcome was the patient's pain score 15 min after initiation of the intervention. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, consumption of rescue analgesia, patient's length of stay, and patient satisfaction with treatment. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled in each group. Median pain scores in patients who received ketamine were lower than in controls at 15 min (3.5 [interquartile range {IQR} 1.0-7.3 vs. 6.0 [IQR 4.0-9.0], respectively; p = 0.018). No serious adverse events occurred. No difference was detected in the amount of rescue analgesia used or in length of stay. Patients who received ketamine reported a higher mean satisfaction score with their pain management (8.57 [standard deviation {SD} 2.1]) than patients who received placebo (6.05 [SD 2.6]; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: When used as an adjunct, SDDK administered at 0.3 mg/kg over 15 min resulted in safe and effective analgesia for ≤30 min in patients who presented with acute pain in the ED.

Hydrochlorothiazide Induced Lichen Planus in the Emergency Department.

Lichen planus (LP) is a mucocutaneous inflammatory disease that involves papulosquamous eruption of the skin, scalp, nails, and mucous membranes. This uncommon condition has a higher prevalence in African Americans and females. Women accounts for 50% of cutaneous LP (CLP) and 60% to 75% of oral LP (OLP) cases. Diagnosis is centered around clinical presentation. Patient evaluation requires a comprehensive physical examination to identify any potential sites of involvement. LP is usually described by the "Six P's": planar, purple, polygonal, pruritic, papules, and plaques. Drug-induced LP, or lichenoid drug reactions, is uncommon and usually indiscernible from other forms of LP. Lichenoid drug reactions exhibit parakeratosis, dermal infiltrates of eosinophils, or perivascular lymphocytic infiltrates affecting the reticular dermis. An extended time interval between the initiation of drug to the onset of symptoms usually does not exclude potential diagnosis of a lichenoid drug reaction. We describe a case of hydrochlorothiazide-induced LP without prolonged exposure to sunlight diagnosed in the emergency department (ED). In this case, a pharmacist-conducted medication reconciliation played an integral role in accurately recognizing this adverse drug reaction. Our case report adds to the limited available literature on the topic, most of which originated more than 30 years ago.

Intravenous Acetaminophen for Renal Colic in the Emergency Department: Where Do We Stand?

BACKGROUND: The efficacy, safety, opioid-sparing effects, and cost-benefit analyses of intravenous (IV) acetaminophen (APAP) in treating renal colic remain controversial. STUDY QUESTION: To evaluate the safety, efficacy, opioid-sparing effects, and cost-benefits of IV APAP in patients who present with renal colic in the emergency department (ED). DATA SOURCES: We systematically searched PubMed (January 1970 to April 2016). STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trials which evaluated IV APAP for renal colic in the ED were eligible. The clinical outcomes measured were change in pain scores from baseline, incidence of adverse events, use of rescue analgesia, and cost-benefits. Forest plots were constructed using the Mantel-Haenszel method in a random effect model to changes in pain scores from the baseline to designated intervals. RESULTS: The analysis suggested a difference in pain reduction favoring IV APAP over morphine. IV APAP had a significant effect in pain reduction than IV morphine (difference in mean pain score reduction = 7.5 in a 100-point visual analog scale (VAS); 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.99-13.00; P = 0.008). There was mild-to-moderate study heterogeneity (I = 42%). No difference was observed when IV APAP was compared with intramuscular piroxicam for pain reduction (difference in mean pain score reduction = 0.17 in a VAS reduction ≥50% VAS; 95% CI, -0.22 to 0.57) and to intramuscular diclofenac (difference in mean pain score reduction = 0.00 in a numeric rating scale reduction ≥50%; 95% CI, -0.12 to 0.12). The analysis for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs versus IV APAP revealed no difference (difference in mean pain score reduction = 0.01 in a 100-point VAS; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.13; P = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, we found that data on the efficacy, safety, opioid-sparing effects, and cost-benefit analyses of IV APAP for renal colic were weak. Based on the available data, IV APAP should not be considered as an alternative to opioids or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the primary management of renal colic in the ED.

The Use of Intravenous Acetaminophen for Acute Pain in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: Acetaminophen (APAP) is a mainstay for pain management worldwide. The intravenous (IV) formulation has been widely used in Europe for more than 20 years in adults and children. In the United States, IV APAP obtained full approval from the Food and Drug Administration in 2010. There is emerging literature to suggest the use of IV APAP for pain reduction in the emergency department (ED). This evidence-based review examines the evidence pertaining to the use of IV APAP for acute pain control in the ED. METHODS: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that described or evaluated the use of IV APAP for acute pain in the ED were included. Duplicate articles, unpublished reports, abstracts, review articles, and non-English literature were excluded. The primary outcome of interest in this review was the difference in pain score between IV APAP and active comparator or placebo from baseline to a cutoff time specified in the original trials. Secondary outcome measures were the incidence of adverse events and reduction in the amount of adjuvant analgesics consumed by patients who received IV APAP. Methodologic quality of the trials was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria. RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs with various methodologic flaws, which enrolled a total of 1,472 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The level of evidence for the individual trials ranged from very low to moderate. In three of the 14 trials, a significant reduction in pain scores was observed in patients who received IV APAP. The first trial found a significant reduction in mean pain scores when IV APAP was compared to IV morphine at 30 minutes after drug administration (4.7 ± 2.3 vs. 2.9 ± 2.2). In the second trial, patients who received IV APAP reported of lower pain scores (31.7 ± 18 mm, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.2 to 25.2 mm) compared to those who received IV morphine (48.3 ± 14.1 mm, 95% CI = 8.2 to 25.2 mm), 15 minutes after drug administration. A third trial found a significant reduction (p = 0.005) in the mean pain scores when IV APAP was compared to intramuscular piroxicam at 90 minutes after drug administration. In the remaining eight trials, pain scores were not statistically different when IV APAP was compared to other pain medications. The incidence of side effects associated with IV APAP was very low. CONCLUSIONS: Fourteen RCTs with various methodologic flaws provided limited evidence to support the use of IV APAP as the primary analgesic for acute pain control in patients who present to the ED.

Impact of an Integrated Pharmacy Transitions of Care Pilot Program in an Urban Hospital.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of an integrated Pharmacy Transitions of Care (PTC) pilot program on reducing hospital readmissions and improving patient satisfaction. METHODS: This prospective observational cohort study compares patients who participated in the PTC program to a control of usual hospital discharged patients during January through April 2014. The PTC program provided discharge medication review, medication counseling, delivery of medications to bedside, clinic scheduling, and follow-up phone calls. The primary outcome measure was 30-day readmissions. Secondary outcomes included emergency department (ED) visits, pharmacist interventions, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Seventy patients participated in the PTC program. Compared to the control (n = 725), the study group had decreased 30-day all-cause readmissions (5.7% vs 13.8%, P = .08), 30-day readmissions for the same diagnosis (2.9% vs 8.1%, P = .18), and ED visits (18.6% vs 25%, P = .82). Twenty-five interventions during discharge medication review included discontinuation of unnecessary medications and correction of medication dose or frequency. The majority of patients were satisfied with the medication education provided (94%) and the timely delivery of prescriptions to bedside (96%). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in 30-day readmission rates. However, pharmacists were able to make a positive impact on patient satisfaction and improve understanding of medications during discharge.

A Case of an Older Adult Patient and Drugs Associated with Serotonin Syndrome.

Older adults have increased risk for depression, and the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) is common. Serotonin syndrome is a potential adverse event associated with the use of SSRIs, the combination of SSRIs and trazodone, and the combination of SSRIs and linezolid. Pharmacists are ideal for assessing older adult drug regimens and recognizing potential drug interactions associated with proserotonergic drugs and alleviating adverse events for patients.

Implementation of a 24-hour pharmacy service with prospective medication review in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: It is reported that more than 128 million patients are seen in emergency departments (EDs) annually. Patient overcrowding had been associated with an increased occurrence of medication errors. PURPOSE: Due to increased patient volume and the need for improved patient safety, a 24-hour pharmacy service was established for our institution's ED. The purpose of the study is to quantify and demonstrate the impact of a 24-hour pharmacy service in an urban ED. METHODS: This was a retrospective descriptive study conducted at a regional level 1 trauma center. The study period occurred between December 2012 and July 2013. The following variables were quantified and analyzed: number of medication orders reviewed, number of intravenous medications compounded, and number of clinical interventions that were recommended by the ED pharmacy team (EDPT) and accepted by ED clinicians. RESULTS: A total of 3,779 medication orders were reviewed by the EDPT. Of these orders, 3,482 (92%) were prospectively reviewed. A total of 3,068 (81.2%) and 711 (18.8%) orders were reviewed for the adult and pediatric ED, respectively. During the study period, the EDPT procured 549 intravenous admixtures and conducted 642 clinical interventions. Most of the interventions involved providing drug information for physicians and nurses (45.9%), adjusting drug dosages (21.1%), and recommending antimicrobial therapy (15.1%). CONCLUSION: The implementation of a 24-hour pharmacy service at our institution was an innovative practice that increased the role of pharmacists in the ED. The EDPT conducted prospective medication review, procured intravenous admixtures from a sterile environment, and provided therapeutic recommendations for the ED interdisciplinary team.

The use of subdissociative-dose ketamine for acute pain in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: Ketamine is a well-known anesthetic with its use trailing back to the 1960s. It has antagonistic effects at the N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor. There is emerging literature to suggest the use of subdissociative-dose ketamine (SDDK) for pain reduction. This evidence-based review evaluates the evidence regarding the use of SDDK for acute pain control in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that described or evaluated the use of SDDK for acute pain in the ED were included. Literature was excluded if it was not published in English. Duplicate articles, unpublished reports, abstracts, and review articles were also excluded. Quality assessment and evaluation of literature were evaluated based on the GRADE criteria. The primary outcome of interest in this review was the difference in pain score from baseline to cutoff time as specified in the studies. Secondary outcome measures were the incidence of adverse events and reduction in the amount of adjuvant opioids consumed by patients who received SDDK. RESULTS: Four RCTs met the inclusion criteria, which enrolled a total of 428 patients. Three adult trials and one pediatric trial were identified. The level of evidence for the individual trials ranged from low to moderate. A significant reduction in pain scores was only found in two of the four trials. One trial found a significant reduction in mean pain scores when ketamine was compared to morphine (p < 0.05). Another trial reported a significant decrease in mean distress scores, favoring SDDK over fentanyl (1.0 vs. 2.7, p < 0.05). One trial found a significant reduction in the amount of morphine consumed, favoring ketamine over placebo (0.14 mg/kg, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.13 to 0.16 mg/kg vs. 0.2 mg/kg, 95% CI = 0.18 to 0.22 mg/kg; p < 0.001). An emergence phenomenon was reported in one trial. CONCLUSIONS: Four RCTs with methodologic limitations failed to provide convincing evidence to either support or refute the use of SDDK for acute pain control in the ED.