Predicting mortality from acetaminophen poisoning shortly after hospital presentation.

AIMS: Early identification of patients likely to die after acetaminophen (APAP) poisoning remains challenging. We sought to compare the sensitivity and time to fulfilment (latency) of established prognostic criteria. METHODS: Three physician toxicologists independently classified every in-hospital death associated with APAP overdose from eight large Canadian cities over three decades using the Relative Contribution to Fatality scale from the American Association of Poison Control Centres. The sensitivity and latency were calculated for each of the following criteria: King's College Hospital (KCH), Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) ≥33, lactate ≥3.5 mmol/L, phosphate ≥1.2 mmol/L 48+ hours post-ingestion, as well as combinations thereof. RESULTS: A total of 162 in-hospital deaths were classified with respect to APAP as follows: 26 Undoubtedly, 40 Probably, 27 Contributory, 14 Probably not, 25 Clearly not, and 30 Unknown. Cases from the first three classes (combined into n = 93 "APAP deaths") typically presented with supratherapeutic APAP concentrations, hepatotoxicity, acidaemia, coagulopathy and/or encephalopathy, and began antidotal treatment a median of 12 hours (IQR 3.4-30 h) from the end of ingestion. Among all patients deemed "APAP deaths", meeting either KCH or lactate criteria demonstrated the highest sensitivity (94%; 95% CI 86-98%), and the shortest latency from hospital arrival to criterion fulfilment (median 4.2 h; IQR 1.0-16 h). In comparison, the MELD criterion demonstrated a substantially lower sensitivity (55%; 43-66%) and longer latency (52 h; 4.4-∞ h, where "∞" denotes death prior to criterion becoming positive). CONCLUSIONS: Meeting either KCH or serum lactate criteria identifies most patients who die from acetaminophen poisoning at or shortly after hospital presentation.

Comparison of rates of opioid withdrawal symptoms and reversal of opioid toxicity in patients treated with two naloxone dosing regimens: a retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: When managing opioid overdose (OD) patients, the optimal naloxone regimen should rapidly reverse respiratory depression while avoiding opioid withdrawal. Published naloxone administration guidelines have not been empirically validated and most were developed before fentanyl OD was common. In this study, rates of opioid withdrawal symptoms (OW) and reversal of opioid toxicity in patients treated with two naloxone dosing regimens were evaluated. METHODS: In this retrospective matched cohort study, health records of patients who experienced an opioid OD treated in two urban emergency departments (ED) during an ongoing fentanyl OD epidemic were reviewed. Definitions for OW and opioid reversal were developed a priori. Low dose naloxone (LDN; ≤0.15 mg) and high dose naloxone (HDN; >0.15 mg) patients were matched in a 1:4 ratio based upon initial respiratory rate (RR). The proportion of patients who developed OW and who met reversal criteria were compared between those treated initially with LDN or HDN. Odds ratios (OR) for OW and opioid reversal were obtained via logistic regression stratified by matched sets and adjusted for age, sex, pre-naloxone GCS, and presence of non-opioid drugs or alcohol. RESULTS: Eighty LDN patients were matched with 299 HDN patients. After adjustment, HDN patients were more likely than LDN patients to have OW after initial dose (OR = 8.43; 95%CI: 1.96, 36.3; p = 0.004) and after any dose (OR = 2.56; 95%CI: 1.17, 5.60; p = 0.019). HDN patients were more likely to meet reversal criteria after initial dose (OR = 2.73; 95%CI: 1.19, 6.26; p = 0.018) and after any dose (OR = 6.07; 95%CI: 1.81, 20.3; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: HDN patients were more likely to have OW but also more likely to meet reversal criteria versus LDN patients.

Implementation of an emergency department atrial fibrillation and flutter pathway improves rates of appropriate anticoagulation, reduces length of stay and thirty-day revisit rates for congestive heart failure.

OBJECTIVES: An evidence-based emergency department (ED) atrial fibrillation and flutter (AFF) pathway was developed to improve care. The primary objective was to measure rates of new anticoagulation (AC) on ED discharge for AFF patients who were not AC correctly upon presentation. METHODS: This is a pre-post evaluation from April to December 2013 measuring the impact of our pathway on rates of new AC and other performance measures in patients with uncomplicated AFF solely managed by emergency physicians. A standardized chart review identified demographics, comorbidities, and ED treatments. The primary outcome was the rate of new AC. Secondary outcomes were ED length of stay (LOS), referrals to AFF clinic, ED revisit rates, and 30-day rates of return visits for congestive heart failure (CHF), stroke, major bleeding, and death. RESULTS: ED AFF patients totalling 301 (129 pre-pathway [PRE]; 172 post-pathway [POST]) were included; baseline demographics were similar between groups. The rates of AC at ED presentation were 18.6% (PRE) and 19.7% (POST). The rates of new AC on ED discharge were 48.6 % PRE (95% confidence interval [CI] 42.1%-55.1%) and 70.2% POST (62.1%-78.3%) (20.6% [p<0.01; 15.1-26.3]). Median ED LOS decreased from 262 to 218 minutes (44 minutes [p<0.03; 36.2-51.8]). Thirty-day rates of ED revisits for CHF decreased from 13.2% to 2.3% (10.9%; p<0.01; 8.1%-13.7%), and rates of other measures were similar. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence-based pathway led to an improvement in the rate of patients with new AC upon discharge, a reduction in ED LOS, and decreased revisit rates for CHF.

Missed opportunities for appropriate anticoagulation among emergency department patients with uncomplicated atrial fibrillation or flutter.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Emergency department (ED) patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter are at risk of stroke, and guidelines recommend anticoagulation for patients with increased cardiovascular risk. Emergency physicians have a unique opportunity to provide appropriate anticoagulation for such patients, and we wished to investigate whether this was accomplished. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used a database from 2 urban EDs to identify consecutive patients with an ED discharge diagnosis of atrial fibrillation or flutter from April 1, 2006, to March 31, 2010, who were managed solely by the emergency physician. Comorbidities, rhythms, and management were obtained by chart review, and complicated patients (those with an acute underlying medical condition) were excluded by predefined criteria. Patient medications on ED presentations were obtained through the provincial Pharmanet database. Patients were stratified into CHADS 2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age > 75, diabetes, stroke/transient ischemic attack) scores, and the primary outcome was the proportion of higher-risk (CHADS 2 score >0) patients who were discharged home with the incorrect anticoagulation by the emergency physician. The secondary outcome was the number of lower-risk (CHADS 2=0) patients who began receiving warfarin by the emergency physician orders. The regional ED database was interrogated to ascertain the number of patients who had a stroke at 30 days. RESULTS: Consecutive patients (1,090) were enrolled and 732 were discharged home with no cardiology consultation (657 fibrillation and 75 flutter). Of 151 higher-risk (CHADS 2 score >0) patients who should have been anticoagulated, 80 (53.0%; 95% confidence interval 44.7% to 61.0%) were discharged home from the ED without appropriate anticoagulation. In this group, 1 patient had an ischemic stroke at 24 days. Among 300 lower-risk patients (CHADS 2 score=0), 25 (8.3%; 95% confidence interval 5.6% to 12.2%) had warfarin initiated. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of ED patients with uncomplicated atrial fibrillation or flutter who were discharged without cardiology involvement, many were not appropriately anticoagulated before ED arrival, and more than half of such patients did not appear to have corrective measures initiated by the emergency physician. This may represent a potential opportunity to improve patient care and outcomes.