Safety of induction at standard doses of buprenorphine for inpatients with opioid use disorder.

Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) are commonly admitted to various inpatient services where treatment can be started. The typical initiation of buprenorphine involves delay of treatment until withdrawal symptoms occur, however, those symptoms may interfere with other medical therapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of initiation of buprenorphine for inpatients with OUD.We reviewed the charts of 99 patients for whom the inpatient addiction medicine consult service was contacted over a 15-month period from January 2020 to identify those patients started on buprenorphine. We abstracted data on toxicology results, prior use of buprenorphine, and Clinical Opioid Withdrawal Scale (COWS) and pain scores before and after the administration of buprenorphine.There was no significant difference in COWS classification post treatment based on ancillary or non use of full agonist therapy. There was no significant change in COWS scores based on prior buprenorphine or methadone use. 5% of patients developed moderate withdrawal (COWS score 12-24) after the initiation of buprenorphine. Twenty of the study patients (20%) developed a 2-point increase in pain scores after the initiation of buprenorphine. SUMMARY: The initiation of buprenorphine for inpatients rarely results in a significant increase in withdrawal symptoms. A larger percent of patients may have an increase in pain scores which would need to be managed. Further prospective work on this subject is warranted.

Nicotine Patch Prescription Fulfillment Rates for Emergency Department Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking cessation has significant health benefits, and the emergency department (ED) can be an important venue for smoking cessation counseling. Nicotine replacement therapy with transdermal patches has been shown to be associated with smoking cessation in a variety of studies. This study evaluated fulfillment rates for prescriptions for nicotine replacement transdermal patches (NRT-P) from the ED. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients receiving a prescription for a NRT-P product from January 2018-October 2019. Charts were reviewed to gather data including age, gender, presence of chronic heart or lung problems, and health insurance. We assessed the fulfillment rate of prescriptions using the Surescripts system, which is a functionality within our electronic health record system that queries participating pharmacies. Statistical analysis was conducted to determine associations between fill rates and the other variables collected from charts. RESULTS: We had follow-up on 500 patients prescribed nicotine patches. Of those patients, 44% filled their prescriptions. Those who filled their prescriptions were more likely to be female and have a history of chronic lung disease. Self-pay patients were least likely to fill their prescriptions. Overall, we had evidence of smoking cessation in 13% of patients. CONCLUSION: This study found that a substantial proportion of patients fail to fill their NRT-P prescriptions. Further work on means of enhancing fulfillment rates is warranted.

Effect of a stewardship intervention on adherence to uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis guidelines in an emergency department setting.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate adherence to uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTI) guidelines and UTI diagnostic accuracy in an emergency department (ED) setting before and after implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship intervention. METHODS: The intervention included implementation of an electronic UTI order set followed by a 2 month period of audit and feedback. For women age 18-65 with a UTI diagnosis seen in the ED with no structural or functional abnormalities of the urinary system, we evaluated adherence to guidelines, antimicrobial use, and diagnostic accuracy at baseline, after implementation of the order set (period 1), and after audit and feedback (period 2). RESULTS: Adherence to UTI guidelines increased from 44% (baseline) to 68% (period 1) to 82% (period 2) (P≤.015 for each successive period). Prescription of fluoroquinolones for uncomplicated cystitis decreased from 44% (baseline) to 14% (period 1) to 13% (period 2) (P<.001 and P = .7 for each successive period). Unnecessary antibiotic days for the 200 patients evaluated in each period decreased from 250 days to 119 days to 52 days (P<.001 for each successive period). For 40% to 42% of cases diagnosed as UTI by clinicians, the diagnosis was deemed unlikely or rejected with no difference between the baseline and intervention periods. CONCLUSIONS: A stewardship intervention including an electronic order set and audit and feedback was associated with increased adherence to uncomplicated UTI guidelines and reductions in unnecessary antibiotic therapy and fluoroquinolone therapy for cystitis. Many diagnoses were rejected or deemed unlikely, suggesting a need for studies to improve diagnostic accuracy for UTI.

Emergency department contrast practices for abdominal/pelvic computed tomography-a national survey and comparison with the american college of radiology appropriateness criteria(®).

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding the need for contrast agents for emergency abdominal computed tomography (CT). OBJECTIVES: We surveyed United States (US) academic Emergency Departments (EDs) to document national practice. We hypothesized variable contrast use for abdominal/pelvic CT, including variance from the American College of Radiology's (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria(®), an evidence-based guideline. METHODS: A survey was sent to physician leaders of US academic EDs, defined as primary site of an Emergency Medicine residency program. Respondents were asked about their institutions' use of oral, intravenous (i.v.), and rectal contrast for various abdominal/pelvic CT indications. Responses were compared with the approach given the highest appropriateness rating by the American College of Radiology. RESULTS: One hundred and six of 152 (70%) surveys were completed. Intravenous contrast was the most frequently cited contrast. At least 90% of respondents reported using i.v. contrast in 12 of 18 indications. Oral contrast use was more variable. In no indication did ≥90% of respondents indicate use of oral contrast, and in only two indications did ≥90% avoid its use. Rectal contrast was rarely used. The most common indications for which no contrast agent was used were suspected renal colic (79%), viscus perforation (19%), penetrating abdominal trauma (18%), and blunt abdominal trauma (15%). CONCLUSIONS: Contrast practices for abdominal/pelvic CT vary nationally, according to a survey of US academic EDs. For multiple indications, the contrast practices of a substantial number of respondents deviated from those recommendations given the highest clinical appropriateness rating by the American College of Radiology.

The effectiveness and adverse events of morphine versus fentanyl on a physician-staffed helicopter.

BACKGROUND: Morphine and fentanyl are both frequently used in prehospital trauma patients, but due to limited formulary size, we sought to study whether both drugs should be included. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of fentanyl as compared to morphine for patients requiring analgesic medications for a traumatic injury during transport via a physician-staffed air medical service. METHODS: Trauma patients were grouped by even and odd days (even - morphine 4 mg, odd - fentanyl 50 µg). Patients were excluded based on age (< 18 or > 64 years), hypotension, inability to communicate a pain score (intubated), or known allergy to the study drugs. During the flight, medical crew assessed numeric pain score, vital signs, and incidence of pruritis or nausea. RESULTS: There were 103 patients enrolled in the morphine arm and 97 patients in the fentanyl arm. The mean pain score at the beginning of enrollment was 8.0 ± 2.0 in the morphine arm and 8.0 ± 1.8 in the fentanyl arm. The mean final pain score was 5.8 ± 2.7 in the morphine arm and 5.5 ± 2.4 in the fentanyl arm (n.s. by either t-test or non-parametric testing). There was no significant difference in analgesia between fentanyl and morphine. There were no significant differences in the incidence of pruritis or vomiting between the two groups. Average transport time was 37 ± 8 min in the morphine group, and 43 ± 11 min in the fentanyl group. Average number of morphine doses was 3 ± 1.2. For fentanyl, average number of doses was 3 ± 1.3. CONCLUSION: In our study, there was not a significant difference in analgesic effectiveness between morphine and fentanyl. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse effects between the two drugs. Our study suggests that either drug can be used safely with equivalent effectiveness.

The time dependence of antithrombin initiation in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: subgroup analysis from the ACUITY trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Antithrombins are among standard treatment agents for patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. We aimed to determine the association between time from emergency department (ED) presentation to treatment with an antithrombin and adverse cardiac events. METHODS: The study cohort was a subgroup of the Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy (ACUITY) trial, enrolled from March 1, 2005, to December 5, 2005. The ACUITY trial enrolled patients with moderate- and high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes and who were undergoing an early invasive strategy (<72 hours from randomization). All patients received an antithrombin (unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or bivalirudin), in addition to other agents. A formal ED case report form was introduced in March 2005. Time from presentation to antithrombin initiation was evaluated as a continuous variable in hours. The endpoints were defined as major ischemic events (death, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularization) or major bleeding within 30 days, or inhospital major bleeding. Logistic regression was used to adjust for demographics, severity of disease, comorbidities, and treatment differences. RESULTS: Of the 2,722 patients enrolled with an ED case report form, complete time data were available in 2,632 (96%). Median time to antithrombin administration was 4.87 hours (interquartile range 2.67 to 9.83). After multivariable analysis, there was no association of major ischemic events with log time (hours) to antithrombin treatment (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97 to 1.01). There was an increase in major bleeding at 30 days and inhospital major bleeding complications with longer log time (hours) to antithrombin initiation (adjusted OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.80; OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.83, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this study of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes who were undergoing an early invasive management strategy, we were unable to demonstrate an association between adverse ischemic outcomes with the timing of antithrombin administration. However, there was an increase in bleeding outcomes as time to antithrombin administration increased.

The Influence of Cardiac Risk Factor Burden on Cardiac Stress Test Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Chest pain is the most common admission diagnosis for observation unit patients. These patients often undergo cardiac stress testing to further risk stratify for coronary artery disease (CAD). The decision of whom to stress is currently based on clinical judgment. We sought to determine the influence of cardiac risk factor burden on cardiac stress test outcome for patients tested from an observation unit, inpatient or outpatient setting. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational cohort study for all patients undergoing stress testing in our institution from June 2006 through July 2007. Cardiac risk factors were collected at the time of stress testing. Risk factors were evaluated in a summative fashion using multivariate regression adjusting for age and known coronary artery disease. The model was tested for goodness of fit and collinearity and the c statistic was calculated using the receiver operating curve. RESULTS: A total of 4026 subjects were included for analysis of which 22% had known CAD. The rates of positive outcome were 89 (12.0%), 95 (12.6%), and 343 (16.9%) for the OU, outpatients, and hospitalized patients respectively. While the odds of a positive test outcome increased for additional cardiac risk factors, ROC curve analysis indicates that simply adding the number of risk factors does not add significant diagnostic value. Hospitalized patients were more likely to have a positive stress test, OR 1.41 (1.10 - 1.81). CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not support basing the decision to perform a stress test on the number of cardiac risk factors.

Ileus and small bowel obstruction in an emergency department observation unit: are there outcome predictors?

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of our study was to describe the evaluation and outcome of patients with ileus and bowel obstruction admitted to an emergency department (ED) observation unit (OU) and to identify predictors of successful management for such patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of 129 patients admitted to a university-affiliated, urban, tertiary hospital ED OU from January 1999 through November 2004. Inclusion criteria were all adult patients admitted to the OU with an ED diagnosis of ileus, partial small bowel obstruction, or small bowel obstruction, and electronic medical records available for review. The following variables were examined: ED diagnosis, history of similar admission, number of prior abdominal surgeries, surgery in the month before, administration of opioid analgesia at any time after presentation, radiographs demonstrating air-fluid levels or dilated loops of small bowel, hypokalemia, use of nasogastric decompression, and surgical consultation. RESULTS: Treatment failure, defined as hospital admission from the OU, occurred in 65 (50.4%) of 129 patients. Only the use of a nasogastric tube was associated with OU failure (21% discharged versus 79% requiring admission, P = 0.0004; odds ratio, 5.294; confidence interval, 1.982-14.14). CONCLUSION: Half of the patients admitted to our ED OU with ileus or varying degrees of small bowel obstruction required hospital admission. The requirement of a nasogastric tube in such patients was associated with a greater rate of observation unit failure.

Levalbuterol versuss levalbuterol plus ipratropium in the treatment of severe acute asthma.

BACKGROUND: The National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) Expert Panel Report 3 guidelines advise the addition of ipratropium bromide to short-acting ß-agonist therapy for the treatment of patients with severe acute asthma exacerbation. METHODS: This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled study involving 141 adults, presenting to two EDs with acute severe asthma exacerbation. Patients were treated using a standardized pathway with levalbuterol plus ipratropium or levalbuterol alone. Primary outcomes were changes from baseline in the percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) at 30 minutes and 60 minutes after completion of treatment. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization and relapse rates. Occurrence of adverse events was recorded. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients in the levalbuterol plus ipratropium group and 74 patients in the levalbuterol group completed the study. Overall, there was no significant difference in the improvement in percent predicted FEV1 between the two groups at 30 minutes [difference in change between study groups at 30 minutes: 1% (95% CI: ?3 to 2%) or at 60 minutes: 3% (95% CI: 1-6%)] No difference was noted in hospitalization rates between the treatment groups [combination therapy group, 33%; single therapy group, 47%, difference: -14% (95% CI: -30 to 20%)]. Post-hoc analysis revealed that patients receiving ipratropium in addition to levalbuterol were 1.5 times more likely to experience side effects (palpitations) than patients treated with levalbuterol alone (RR 1.5; 95% CI: 1.2-1.9) No differences in relapse rates were noted between the groups. Post-hoc analysis revealed more side effects in patients receiving levalbuterol plus ipratropium. CONCLUSION: We were unable to demonstrate superiority of adding ipratropium to levalbuterol in alleviating obstruction as measured by FEV1 or in decreasing the need for hospitalization among adult patients presenting to the ED with acute severe asthma exacerbation.

Platelet aspirin resistance in ED patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Platelet aspirin resistance is reported to be as high as 45%. The prevalence of emergency department (ED) platelet aspirin resistance in suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is not described. Our purpose was to determine the prevalence of platelet aspirin resistance. METHODS: We determined platelet aspirin resistance in a convenience sample of ED suspected ACS patients. Eligible patients had longer than 10 minutes of chest pain or an ischemic equivalent. Two hours after receiving 325 mg of aspirin, blood was assessed for platelet function (Accumetrics, San Diego, CA). Definitions are as follows: aspirin resistance, at least 550 aspirin reaction units; positive troponin T, greater than 0.1 ng/mL; significant coronary lesion, at least 70% stenosis. The composite end point was prospectively defined as a 30-day revisit, positive cardiac catheterization, or hospital length of stay (LOS) longer than 3 days. RESULTS: Of 200 patients, 50.5% were male, 50.0% were black, troponin T was positive in 7.5%, cardiac catheterization was done in 10.5%, and 33.3% had a significant stenosis. Final diagnoses were noncardiac in 83.4%, stable angina in 8.0%, and unstable angina in 8.5%. Overall, 6.5% were resistant to aspirin; and high-risk patients trended to more aspirin resistance than non-high-risk patients (23.1% [3] vs 9.1% [17]; P value 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.0929 to 0.373). One-month follow-up found ED revisits in 12.5% of aspirin-resistant vs 4.9% of non-aspirin-resistant patients (95% CI, -0.114 to 0.182) and rehospitalization in 12.5% of resistant patients vs 4.3% of nonresistant patients (P value 95% CI, -0.108 to 0.187). Although LOS was similar at index admission, if rehospitalized, LOS was 6.5 for aspirin-resistant patients vs 3.2 days in nonresistant patients (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: This first report of platelet aspirin resistance in patients presenting to the ED with suggested ACS finds that it is present in 6.5% of patients.

Observation unit management of acute decompensated heart failure.

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is a common illness presenting to the emergency department (ED) that is amenable to observation unit (OU) treatment. As the number of baby boomers continues to grow and the incidence of heart failure increases, the financial implications of ADHF treatment will become more prominent. Obtaining institutional support and developing a good working relationship with cardiology colleagues is vital to creating workable ADHF protocols for whichever type of OU an institution decides to use.

Impact of intravenous loop diuretics on outcomes of patients hospitalized with acute decompensated heart failure: insights from the ADHERE registry.

The optimal use of diuretics in decompensated heart failure remains uncertain. We analyzed data from the ADHERE registry to look at the impact of diuretic dosing. 62,866 patients receiving <160 mg and 19,674 patients > or =160 mg of furosemide were analyzed. The patients receiving the lower doses had a lower risk for in-hospital mortality, ICU stay, prolonged hospitalization, or adverse renal effects. These findings suggest that future studies should evaluate strategies for minimizing exposure to high doses of diuretics.

Health care-associated pneumonia: identification and initial management in the ED.

Traditionally, pneumonia is categorized by epidemiologic factors into community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Microbiologic studies have shown that the organisms which cause infections in HAP and VAP differ from CAP in epidemiology and resistance patterns. Patients with HAP or VAP are at higher risk for harboring resistant organisms. Other historical features that potentially place patients at a higher risk for being infected with resistant pathogens and organisms not commonly associated with CAP include history of recent admission to a health care facility, residence in a long-term care or nursing home facility, attendance at a dialysis clinic, history of recent intravenous antibiotic therapy, chemotherapy, and wound care. Because these "risk factors" have health care exposure as a common feature, patients presenting with pneumonia having these historical features have been more recently categorized as having health care-associated pneumonia (HCAP). This publication was prepared by the HCAP Working Group, which is comprised of nationally recognized experts in emergency medicine, infectious diseases, and pulmonary and critical care medicine. The aim of this article is to create awareness of the entity known as HCAP and to provide knowledge of its identification and initial management in the emergency department.

Noninvasive ventilation outcomes in 2,430 acute decompensated heart failure patients: an ADHERE Registry Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Continuous or bilevel positive airway pressure ventilation, called noninvasive ventilation (NIV), is a controversial therapy for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). While NIV is considered safe and effective in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), clinical trial data that have addressed safety in ADHF patients are limited, with some suggestion of increased mortality. The objective of this study was to assess mortality outcomes associated with NIV and to determine if a failed trial of NIV followed by endotracheal intubation (ETI) (NIV failure) is associated with worse outcomes, compared to immediate ETI. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry (ADHERE), which enrolls patients with treatment for, or with a primary discharge diagnosis of, ADHF. The authors compared characteristics and outcomes in four groups: no ventilation, NIV success, NIV failure, and ETI. One-way analysis of variance or Wilcoxon testing was performed for continuous data, and chi-square tests were used for categorical data. In addition, multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust mortality comparisons for risk factors. RESULTS: Entry criteria were met by 37,372 patients, of which 2,430 had ventilation assistance. Of the ventilation group, 1,688 (69.5%) were deemed NIV success, 72 (3.0%) were NIV failures, and 670 (27.6%) required ETI. The NIV failure group had the lowest O(2) saturation (SaO(2)) (84 +/- 16%), compared to either NIV success (89.6 +/- 10%) or ETI (88 +/- 13%; p = 0.017). ETI patients were more likely to receive vasoactive medications (p < 0.001) than the NIV success cohort. When comparing NIV failures to ETI, there were no differences in treatment during hospitalization (p > 0.05); other than that the NIV failure group more often received vasodilators (68.1% vs. 54.3%; p = 0.026). In-hospital mortality was 7.9% with NIV, 13.9% with NIV failure, and 15.4% with ETI. After risk adjustment, the mortality odds ratio for NIV failure versus ETI increased to 1.43, although this endpoint was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of ADHF patients receiving NIV to date, patients placed on NIV for ADHF fared better than patients requiring immediate ETI. Patients who failed NIV and required ETI still experienced lower mortality than those initially placed on ETI. Thus, while the ETI group may be more severely ill, starting therapy with NIV instead of immediate ETI will likely not harm the patient. When ETI is required, mortality and length of stay may be adversely affected. Since a successful trial of NIV is associated with improved outcomes in patients with ADHF, application of this therapy may be a reasonable treatment option.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized heart failure patients.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a concerning problem for hospitalized heart failure (HF) patients. Current recommendations are that all hospitalized New York Heart Association Class III or IV HF patients should receive VTE prophylaxis. Our purpose was to describe the rate of use and the characteristics of patients receiving VTE prophylaxis in the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry (ADHERE). METHODS AND RESULTS: HF hospitalization episodes in ADHERE were analyzed. Patients were excluded from analysis if they were receiving Coumadin or intravenous heparin, had elevated troponin levels, underwent cardiac catheterization or dialysis before or during hospitalization, or were initially admitted to the intensive care unit. VTE prophylaxis was defined as low-molecular-weight or subcutaneous unfractionated heparin administered at any time during hospitalization and intravenous vasoactive therapy was defined as any inotrope, inodilator, or vasodilator. Chi-square, analysis of variance, and Wilcoxon tests were used for univariate and multivariate analyses. Logistic regression was used to evaluate outcomes. A total of 155,073 entries were evaluated, with 71,376 eligible for VTE prophylaxis; 21,847 (31%) received VTE prophylaxis. VTE prophylaxis patients were more often African American (28% versus 21%) or admitted from the emergency department (84% versus 79%), compared with those who did not receive VTE prophylaxis (both P < .0001). Medical history and initial presentation characteristics were similar, except edema, which was more likely in VTE prophylaxis patients (71% versus 66%, P < .0001). Patients receiving VTE prophylaxis more often received an intravenous vasoactive agent (23% versus 18%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (61% versus 54%), or beta-blocker (63% versus 58%) during their hospitalization and were more likely discharged on an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (53% versus 49%) or beta-blocker (57% versus 54%) than non-VTE prophylaxis patients, all P < .0001. VTE prophylaxis patients were more often admitted to the intensive care unit (4.8% versus 2.5%, P < .0001) and had longer median hospital stays (4.2 versus 3.8 days, P < .0001). Mortality was similar between cohorts (3.0% versus 2.9%, P = .69). CONCLUSIONS: Despite recommendations that all hospitalized New York Heart Association III and IV CHF patients receive venous thromboembolic disease prophylaxis, less than one third of eligible patients receive this guideline recommended therapy.

Risk stratification in women enrolled in the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry Emergency Module (ADHERE-EM).

OBJECTIVES: It has been reported that the mortality risk for heart failure differs between men and women. It has been postulated that this is due to differences in comorbid features. Variation in risk profiles by gender may limit the performance of stratification algorithms available for heart failure in women. This analysis examined the ability of a published risk stratification model to predict outcomes in women. METHODS: The Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry Emergency Module (ADHERE-EM) database was used. Characteristics, treatments, and outcomes for men and women were compared. The ADHERE registry classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was used for the risk stratification evaluation. RESULTS: Of 10,984 ADHERE-EM patients, 5,736 (52.2%) were women. In-hospital mortality was similar between men and women (p = 0.727). Significant differences (p < 0.0002) were noted by gender in all three variables in the CART model (blood urea nitrogen [BUN] > or = 43 mg/dL, systolic blood pressure < 115 mm Hg, and serum creatinine > or = 2.75 mg/dL). However, the CART model effectively stratified both genders into distinct risk groups with no significant difference in mortality by gender within stratified groups. CONCLUSIONS: The ADHERE Registry CART tool is effective at predicting risk in ED patients, regardless of gender.

Effect of hip abduction and external rotation on femoral vein exposure for possible cannulation.

Femoral vein access is often required during resuscitation efforts and when other routes of intravenous access are difficult. This study evaluated by ultrasound the effect of abduction/external rotation of the hip on venous accessibility. This was a prospective repeated measurement study. The common femoral veins of 25 volunteers were scanned transversely inferior to the inguinal ligament with the leg straight and in external rotation/abduction. The diameter of the vein and percent accessible (not posterior to the femoral artery) were determined. Data were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of variance. The mean percentage of the femoral vein accessible with the leg in external rotation/abduction was greater than with the leg straight (82.6 +/- 20.3 vs. 70.4 +/- 26.3, respectively); p < 0.03. External rotation/abduction of the hip may improve the success rate of femoral vein cannulation by increasing the percentage of the femoral vein accessible.