The Effect of Early Severe Hyperoxia in Adults Intubated in the Prehosptial Setting or Emergency Department: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: The detrimental effects of hyperoxia exposure have been well-described in patients admitted to intensive care units. However, data evaluating the effects of short-term, early hyperoxia exposure in patients intubated in the prehospital setting or emergency department (ED) have not been systematically reviewed. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to quantify and describe the existing literature examining the clinical outcomes in ED patients exposed to hyperoxia within the first 24 h of mechanical ventilation. METHODS: This review was performed in concordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for scoping reviews. Two rounds of review using Rayyan QCRI software were performed for title and abstract screening and full-text search. Of the 2739 articles, 27 articles were retrieved after initial screening, of which 5 articles were excluded during the full-text screening, leaving 22 articles for final review and data extraction. RESULTS: Of 22 selected publications, 9 described patients with traumatic brain injury, 6 with cardiac arrest, 3 with multisystem trauma, 1 with stroke, 2 with septic shock, and 1 was heterogeneous. Three studies were randomized controlled trials. The available data have widely heterogeneous definitions of hyperoxia exposure, outcomes, and included populations, limiting conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of data that examined the effects of severe hyperoxia exposure in the acute, post-intubation phase of the prehospital and ED settings. Further research with standardized definitions is needed to provide more detailed guidance regarding early oxygen titration in intubated patients.

Preliminary Assessment of a Telehealth Approach to Evaluating, Treating, and Discharging Low-Acuity Patients With Suspected COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine is uniquely positioned to address challenges posed to emergency departments (EDs) by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. By reducing in-person contact, it should decrease provider risk of infection and preserve personal protective equipment (PPE). OBJECTIVES: To describe and assess the early results of a novel telehealth workflow in which remote providers collaborate with in-person nursing to evaluate and discharge well-appearing, low-risk ED patients with suspected COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Retrospective chart review was completed 3 weeks after implementation. Metrics include the number of patients evaluated, number of patients discharged without in-person contact, telehealth wait time and duration, collection of testing, ED length of stay (ED-LOS), 72-h return, number of in-person health care provider contacts, and associated PPE use. RESULTS: Among 302 patients evaluated by telehealth, 153 patients were evaluated and discharged by a telehealth provider with reductions in ED-LOS, PPE use, and close contact with health care personnel. These patients had a 62.5% shorter ED-LOS compared with other Emergency Severity Index level 4 patients seen over the same time period. Telehealth use for these 153 patients saved 413 sets of PPE. We observed a 3.9% 72-h revisit rate. One patient discharged after telehealth evaluation was hospitalized on a return visit 9 days later. CONCLUSION: Telehealth can be safely and efficiently used to evaluate, treat, test, and discharge ED patients suspected to have COVID-19. This workflow reduces infection risks to health care providers, PPE use, and ED-LOS. Additionally, it allows quarantined but otherwise well clinicians to continue working.

Is It the pH That Matters? Challenging the Pathophysiology of Acidemia in a Case of Severe Hypercapnia Secondary to Intraoperative CO2 Insufflation.

BACKGROUND: Acidemia has been long thought to lead to hemodynamic compromise. While some literature to date challenges this idea, there is no consensus on this topic. CASE SUMMARY: To our knowledge, this is the most severe case of hypercapnia and acidosis due to carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation during laparoscopy reported in the literature. Remarkably, this patient remained hemodynamically normal despite having a blood pH below 6.81. This prompts a wider discussion about the effects of blood pH on human physiology. Most patients who present acidotic are critically ill and have confounding underlying metabolic or respiratory pathophysiology driving their illness. In this case, the patient experienced no respiratory insult leading to an increase in blood CO2 but rather had CO2 iatrogenically introduced into the circulatory system, effectively detaching the deleterious effects of CO2 from the respiratory pathologies that so often cause its accumulation. CONCLUSION: This raises the question, in patients with severe acidosis and hemodynamic compromise, is acidosis a symptom of the underlying process, or is the acidosis itself causing harm?