Emergency department poisoning visits in children younger than 6 years: comparing referrals by a regional poison control center to referrals by other sources.

OBJECTIVE: The study purpose was to compare medical appropriateness and costs of regional poison control center (RPCC) versus non-RPCC referrals to children's hospital emergency department (ED) for acute poison exposure. METHODS: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of children (<6 years) during an 8-month period, who presented for poison exposure. Demographic and clinical patient characteristics were abstracted onto a uniform data form. Medical appropriateness was determined by presence of 1 of 4 criteria by 3 independent reviewers blinded to the patients' race, source of referral, charges, and disposition. RESULTS: Determination of medical appropriateness was matched by all 3 reviewers in 187 patients who make up the study population. There were 92 RPCC-referred cases and 95 non-RPCC-referred controls. Groups were comparable by age, sex, toxin, and symptoms. For RPCC referrals, 84 were self-transported, and 8 were transported by emergency medical services. For non-RPCC referrals, 60 were self-referred/transported, 26 were transported by emergency medical services, and 9 were physician referred. Regional poison control center referrals had a 39.1% higher rate of medical appropriateness than did non-RPCC referrals (odds ratio, 13.0; 95% confidence interval, 3.6-36.1). For this sample, mean charges for inappropriate ED poison exposure visits were $313.42, and the cost per RPCC call was $25, thus giving a potential return on investment of 12.54 to 1 favoring RPCC triage. CONCLUSIONS: When compared with other referral sources, RPCC triage results in fewer unnecessary ED visits in this age group. Increasing prehospital use of poison centers would likely decrease unnecessary ED referrals and related costs.

Effects on a Poison Center's (PC) triage and follow-up after implementing the no Ipecac use policy.

For years, The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) had supported home use of syrup of Ipecac. However, due to mounting evidence that Ipecac use did not improve outcome nor reduce Emergency Department (ED) referrals, the AAP in November of 2003 issued a statement that Ipecac not be used for the home management of poison ingestion. To determine if the cessation of the use of Ipecac for home ingestions is associated with an increased number of follow-up calls, an increased time of observation at home and an increase in the number of ED referrals for care by poison center staff were administered. Fifty randomly selected pediatric (<6 years) cases that received Ipecac ("Ipecac" group) from January 1, 2003 to October 31, 2003 were selected for study. Up to two controls ("no Ipecac" group) were matched by age, amount ingested, and by toxin. Controls were selected from the 2004-2006 time period (Ipecac no longer in use). Fifty "Ipecac" cases and 84 "no Ipecac" controls were analyzed. The groups had no significant differences with respect to percent symptomatic, median time post-ingestion, mean age, and distribution of toxin categories (e.g., antidepressants, beta blockers, etc.). The "no Ipecac" group had nearly ten times the odds of ED referral compared to the "Ipecac" group, (OR = 9.9, 95%CI 3.3-32.2). The mean total hours of follow-up was not significantly different between the groups (diff = -1.1, t = -1.8, p = 0.07). The mean number of follow-up calls was significantly less in the "no Ipecac" group (diff = -1.4 calls, t = -6.8, p < 0.001). Toxicology consults were greater in the "no Ipecac" group (chi (2 )= 4.05, p = 0.04); however, consults were not associated with ED referral. For the time period from 2004 to 2006, the "no Ipecac" policy resulted in an increase in ED referrals at our center. While prior studies have shown that not using Ipecac did not affect clinical outcome, our research suggested that it may have initially influenced triaging outcome. Since the use of Ipecac by centers was once a commonly used home remedy for some ingestions (albeit without rigorously established efficacy), poison center personnel had to transition to the "no Ipecac" policy. Although our referrals increased during a transitional period of time, referral rates have since stabilized and returned to baseline.

Descriptive epidemiology of infant ingestion calls to a regional poison control center.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to describe the epidemiology of ingestions in infants 6 months of age or younger. METHODS: A retrospective chart review from a convenience sample of poison center cases in infants younger than 6 months of age from December 28, 2002, to December 28, 2003, was reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 358 cases were reviewed. Incorrectly measured dose, repeated dosing by different caregivers, incorrect dosing interval, and incorrect route accounted for 41% [95% CI, (36%, 46%)] of caregiver dosing misadventures. Ten cases (3%) were due to pharmacy error, and the wrong medication was given in 32 (9%) cases. The total therapeutic misadventure proportion was 53%. Eight percent were 10-fold dosing errors. Thirty-nine (11%) infants were evaluated in an emergency department and 9 (3%) infants were admitted to a health care facility. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic misadventures caused by dosing errors in infants younger than 6 months of age were prevalent. Most errors occurred with inaccurate measurement of the medication, repeated dosing by caregivers, incorrect dosing interval, and incorrect route. Healthcare providers could increase prevention of therapeutic misadventures by educating caregivers on proper administration of medications and by demonstrating the use of appropriate measuring devices.