Evaluation of the addition of bupivacaine to intrathecal morphine for intraoperative and postoperative pain management in open liver resections.

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal morphine is a popular and effective regional technique for pain control after open liver resection, but its delayed analgesic onset makes it less useful for the intraoperative period. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the analgesic efficacy and other secondary benefits of the addition of hyperbaric bupivacaine to intrathecal morphine ± fentanyl. We hypothesized that bupivacaine could serve as an analgesic "bridge" prior to the onset of intrathecal morphine/fentanyl thereby lowering opioid consumption and enhancing recovery. METHODS: Cumulative intraoperative and postoperative opioid consumption as well as other intra- and postoperative variables were collected and compared between groups receiving intrathecal morphine alone or intrathecal morphine ± hyperbaric bupivacaine. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients were selected for inclusion. Cumulative intraoperative morphine consumption was significantly reduced in the bupivacaine group while other intraoperative parameters such as intravenous fluids, blood loss, and vasopressors did not differ. There was a statistically significant improvement in time to first bowel movement in the experimental group. DISCUSSION: The intraoperative opioid sparing effects and improved time to bowel function with the addition of hyperbaric bupivacaine to intrathecal morphine may make this technique an easy and low risk method of enhancing recovery after open liver resection.

Health human resources for emergency medicine: a framework for the future.

In June of 2016, the Collaborative Working Group (CWG) on the Future of Emergency Medicine presented its final report at the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) annual meeting in Quebec City. The CWG report made a number of recommendations concerning physician Human Health Resource (HHR) shortfalls in emergency medicine, specific changes for both the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (FRCPC) and the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CCFP-EM) training programs, HHR needs in rural and remote hospitals, future collaboration of the CCFP-EM and FRCPC programs, and directions for future research. All recommendations were endorsed by CAEP, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC), and the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC). The CWG report was published in CJEM and has served as a basis for ongoing discussion in the emergency medicine community in Canada. The CWG identified an estimated shortfall of 478 emergency physicians in Canada in 2016, rising to 1071 by 2020 and 1518 by 2025 assuming no expansion of EM residency training capacity. In 2017, the CAEP board struck a new committee, The Future of Emergency Medicine in Canada (FEMC), to advocate with appropriate stakeholders to implement the CWG recommendations and to continue with this important work. FEMC led a workshop at CAEP 2018 in Calgary to develop a regional approach to HHR advocacy, recognizing different realities in each province and region. There was wide representation at this workshop and a rich and passionate discussion among those present. This paper represents the output of the workshop and will guide subsequent deliberations by FEMC. FEMC has set the following three goals as we work toward the overarching purpose to improve timely access to high quality emergency care: (1) to define and describe categories of emergency departments (EDs) in Canada, (2) define the full time equivalents required by category of ED in Canada, and (3) recommend the ideal combination of training and certification for emergency physicians in Canada. A fourth goal supports the other three goals: (4) urge further consideration and implementation of the CWG-EM recommendations related to coordination and optimization of the current two training programs. We believe that goals 1 and 2 can largely be accomplished by the CAEP annual meeting in 2020, and goal 3 by the CAEP annual meeting in 2021. Goal 4 is ongoing with both the RCPSC and the CFPC. We urge the EM community across Canada to engage with our committee to support improved access and EM care for all Canadians.

Comparing deep learning and concept extraction based methods for patient phenotyping from clinical narratives.

In secondary analysis of electronic health records, a crucial task consists in correctly identifying the patient cohort under investigation. In many cases, the most valuable and relevant information for an accurate classification of medical conditions exist only in clinical narratives. Therefore, it is necessary to use natural language processing (NLP) techniques to extract and evaluate these narratives. The most commonly used approach to this problem relies on extracting a number of clinician-defined medical concepts from text and using machine learning techniques to identify whether a particular patient has a certain condition. However, recent advances in deep learning and NLP enable models to learn a rich representation of (medical) language. Convolutional neural networks (CNN) for text classification can augment the existing techniques by leveraging the representation of language to learn which phrases in a text are relevant for a given medical condition. In this work, we compare concept extraction based methods with CNNs and other commonly used models in NLP in ten phenotyping tasks using 1,610 discharge summaries from the MIMIC-III database. We show that CNNs outperform concept extraction based methods in almost all of the tasks, with an improvement in F1-score of up to 26 and up to 7 percentage points in area under the ROC curve (AUC). We additionally assess the interpretability of both approaches by presenting and evaluating methods that calculate and extract the most salient phrases for a prediction. The results indicate that CNNs are a valid alternative to existing approaches in patient phenotyping and cohort identification, and should be further investigated. Moreover, the deep learning approach presented in this paper can be used to assist clinicians during chart review or support the extraction of billing codes from text by identifying and highlighting relevant phrases for various medical conditions.

An Environmental Scan of Academic Emergency Medicine at the 17 Canadian Medical Schools: Why Does this Matter to Emergency Physicians?

OBJECTIVE: We sought to conduct a major objective of the CAEP Academic Section, an environmental scan of the academic emergency medicine programs across the 17 Canadian medical schools. METHODS: We developed an 84-question questionnaire, which was distributed to academic heads. The responses were validated by phone by the lead author to ensure that the questions were answered completely and consistently. Details of pediatric emergency medicine units were excluded from the scan. RESULTS: At eight of 17 universities, emergency medicine has full departmental status and at two it has no official academic status. Canadian academic emergency medicine is practiced at 46 major teaching hospitals and 13 specialized pediatric hospitals. Another 69 Canadian hospital EDs regularly take clinical clerks and emergency medicine residents. There are 31 full professors of emergency medicine in Canada. Teaching programs are strong with clerkships offered at 16/17 universities, CCFP(EM) programs at 17/17, and RCPSC residency programs at 14/17. Fourteen sites have at least one physician with a Master's degree in education. There are 55 clinical researchers with salary support at 13 universities. Sixteen sites have published peer-reviewed papers in the past five years, ranging from four to 235 per site. Annual budgets range from $200,000 to $5,900,000. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive review of academic activities in emergency medicine across Canada identifies areas of strengths as well as opportunities for improvement. CAEP and the Academic Section hope we can ultimately improve ED patient care by sharing best academic practices and becoming better teachers, educators, and researchers.

Outpatient management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax in the emergency department of a community hospital using a small-bore catheter and a Heimlich valve.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to assess the effectiveness of a small-bore catheter (8F) connected to a one-way Heimlich valve in the emergency department (ED)-based outpatient management of primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP). METHODS: The authors conducted a structured chart audit in a retrospective case series of patients with PSP who were treated with a small-bore (8F) catheter and a Heimlich valve who were seen in the ED of a community hospital between April 2000 and March 2005. To be eligible, patients had to be available for a telephone interview. Main outcomes were success of treatment (sustained, complete lung reexpansion), admission, and surgical intervention rates. Secondary outcomes included number of chest x-rays (CXRs), number of visits to the ED, treatment duration, complications, and recurrence rates. RESULTS: The authors identified 62 discrete episodes of PSP in 50 patients, with a mean (+/-standard deviation [SD]) age of 25.5 +/- 10.5 years (range = 14-53 years). In 50 of 62 episodes (81%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 70.8% to 90.5%), patients were discharged directly from the ED. Patients were admitted to the hospital at some point for treatment in 27/62 episodes (43.5%, 95% CI = 31.2% to 55.9%). Surgery was performed for acute treatment failure in 17 episodes. Ultimately, 19 patients, who accounted for 21 of 62 episodes (33.9%, 95% CI = 22.1% to 45.6%), had surgery at some point in the study. Mean (+/-SD) time to admission for those patients initially discharged from the ED was 2.9 (+/-2.01) days (95% CI = 1.9 to 3.8 days). There were no serious complications from treatment; the minor complication rate (misplacement or dislodging of the chest tube) was 22.6% (95% CI = 12.2% to 33.0%). No association was found between the size of pneumothorax and treatment failure. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the initial management of PSP with a small-bore catheter and Heimlich valve can easily be performed by emergency physicians in the community hospital setting and appears safe. A larger study systematically comparing this approach with alternative therapies is needed.

Faculty perceptions and practice impact of a faculty development workshop on emergency medicine teaching.

BACKGROUND: Faculty development initiatives to improve emergency department (ED) teaching are compromised by the paucity of information about what behaviours and characteristics are desirable in an emergency medicine (EM) teacher. OBJECTIVES: To design and evaluate a learner-centred, interactive faculty development workshop based on original ED teaching research. METHODS: Registrants for a university-based faculty development workshop on ED teaching completed a needs assessment and pre-workshop self-reflection exercise. Responses were grouped into 3 themes derived from the ambulatory teaching literature and a recent survey of expert clinical EM teachers and learners. Participants underwent a half-day workshop consisting of 1 large group interactive session and 3 small group sessions using role playing, practice reflection, real time review of hard copy resources, and brainstorming. Evaluation included a post-event ordinal scale questionnaire and a 4-month follow-up short answer survey, both measuring participants' perceptions of workshop effectiveness. RESULTS: Fifteen faculty participated. The needs assessment identified "Common mistakes," "Teaching efficiently" and "Dealing with the difficult learner" as themes. All 15 completed evaluations, rating the workshop as relevant (4.6/5), specific to their needs (4.4/5) and useful (4.5/5). At 4 months, 10 out of 10 respondents reported success at implementing new techniques and 8 reported greater confidence in teaching. The most common new techniques were: setting better learning objectives, giving better feedback, actively seeking teaching opportunities, and identifying a teaching point. CONCLUSIONS: Learner-centred faculty development meets perceived needs of faculty and can result in participants trying new teaching strategies.

Sterile versus nonsterile gloves for repair of uncomplicated lacerations in the emergency department: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Although sterile technique for laceration management continues to be recommended, studies supporting this practice are lacking. Using clean nonsterile gloves rather than individually packaged sterile gloves for uncomplicated wound repair in the emergency department may result in cost and time savings. This study is designed to determine whether the rate of infection after repair of uncomplicated lacerations in immunocompetent patients is comparable using clean nonsterile gloves versus sterile gloves. METHODS: A prospective multicenter trial enrolled 816 individuals who were randomized to have their wounds repaired by using sterile or clean nonsterile gloves. The attending physician or resident completed a checklist describing patient, wound, and management characteristics. The patients were provided with a questionnaire to be completed by the physician who removed their sutures at the prescribed time and indicated the presence or absence of infection. When follow-up forms were not returned, a telephone call was made to the patient to determine whether he or she had experienced any wound complications. RESULTS: Follow-up was obtained for 98% of the sterile gloves group and 96.6% of the clean gloves group. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of infection between the 2 groups. The infection rate in the sterile gloves group was 6.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.8% to 8.4%) and was 4.4% in the clean gloves group (95% CI 2.4% to 6.4%). The relative risk of infection was 1.37 (95% CI 0.75 to 2.52). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that there is no clinically important difference in infection rates between using clean nonsterile gloves and sterile gloves during the repair of uncomplicated traumatic lacerations.