Academic Emergency Medicine最新文献

Background: In patients with a high clinical probability of pulmonary embolism (PE), the high prevalence can lower the D-dimer negative predictive value and increase the risk of diagnostic failure. It is therefore recommended that these high-risk patients should undergo chest imaging without D-dimer testing although no evidence supports this recommendation.

Objective: The objective was to evaluate the safety of ruling out PE based on D-dimer testing among patients with a high clinical probability of PE.

Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of three European studies (PROPER, MODIGLIANI, and TRYSPEED). Patients were included if they presented a high clinical probability of PE (according to either the Wells or the revised Geneva score) and underwent D-dimer testing. The D-dimer-based strategy ruled out PE if the D-dimer level was below the age-adjusted threshold (i.e., <500 ng/mL in patients aged less than 50 and age × 10 ng/mL in patients older than 50). The primary endpoint was a thromboembolic event in patients with negative D-dimer either at index visit or at 3-month follow-up. A Bayesian approach estimated the probability that the failure rate of the D-dimer-based strategy was below 2% given observed data.

Results: Among the 12,300 patients included in the PROPER, MODIGLIANI, and TRYSPEED studies, 651 patients (median age 68 years, 60% female) had D-dimer testing and a high clinical probability of PE and were included in the study. PE prevalence was 31.3%. Seventy patients had D-dimer levels under the age-adjusted threshold, and none of them had a PE after follow-up (failure rate 0.0% [95% CI 0.0%-6.5%]). Bayesian analysis reported a credible interval of 0.0%-4.1%, with a 76.2% posterior probability of a failure rate below 2%.

Conclusions: In this study, ruling out PE in high-risk patients based on D-dimer below the age-adjusted threshold was safe, with no missed PE. However, the large CI of the primary endpoint precludes a definitive conclusion.

Background: Various prognosticative approaches to assist in recognizing clinical deterioration have been proposed. To date, early warning scores (EWSs) have been evaluated in hospital with limited research investigating their suitability in the prehospital setting. This study evaluated the predictive ability of established EWSs and other clinical factors for prehospital clinical deterioration.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study investigating adult patients of all etiologies attended by Queensland Ambulance Service paramedics between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020, was conducted. With logistic regression, several models were developed to predict adverse event outcomes. The National Early Warning Score (NEWS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), Queensland Adult Deterioration Detection System (Q-ADDS), and shock index were calculated from vital signs taken by paramedics.

Results: A total of 1,422,046 incidents met the inclusion criteria. NEWS, MEWS, and Q-ADDS were found to have comparably high predictive ability with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) between 70% and 90%, whereas shock index had relatively low AUC-ROC. Sensitivity was lower than specificity for all models. Although established EWSs performed well when predicting adverse events, these scores require complex calculations requiring multiple vital signs that may not be suitable for the prehospital setting.

Conclusions: This study found NEWS, MEWS, and Q-ADDS all performed well in the prehospital setting. Although a simple shock index is easier for paramedics to use in the prehospital environment, it did not perform comparably to established EWSs. Further research is required to develop suitably performing parsimonious solutions until established EWSs are integrated into technological solutions to be used by prehospital clinicians in real time.

Objectives: Bupropion toxicity can lead to adverse cardiovascular events (ACVE), but delayed onset of toxicity makes risk stratification difficult. This study aimed to validate previously defined predictors of ACVE and identify novel predictors among patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) after bupropion overdose.

Methods: This secondary analysis of prospective data from the Toxicology Investigators Consortium Core Registry analyzed adult acute or acute-on-chronic bupropion exposures from 2015 to 2018. The primary outcome was ACVE (any of the following: myocardial injury, shock, ventricular dysrhythmia, or cardiac arrest). Potential predictors of ACVE included previously derived predictors in the overall drug overdose population (prior cardiac disease, initial serum bicarbonate < 20 mEq/L, and initial QTc ≥ 500 ms), exposure circumstances, and initial serum lactate value. Candidate predictors were evaluated using univariate analysis and multivariable regression modeling. Receiver operator characteristic curves were used to derive optimal cutoff points for novel predictors, and prognostic test characteristics were calculated.

Results: Of 355 patients analyzed, ACVE occurred in 34 (9.6%) patients. Initial serum bicarbonate < 20 mEq/L (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.94-10.0) and initial QTc ≥ 500 ms (aOR 2.52, 95% CI 1.01-6.09) independently predicted ACVE. Exposure circumstances did not predict ACVE. Initial serum lactate > 5.2 mmol/L independently predicted ACVE (aOR 12.2, 95% CI 2.50-75.2) and was 90.7% specific with 80.3% negative predictive value.

Conclusions: Metabolic acidosis and QTc prolongation were validated as predictors of ACVE in ED patients with bupropion overdose. Serum lactate elevation was strongly predictive of ACVE in this study and warrants further investigation.

Background: Precision health is a burgeoning scientific discipline that aims to incorporate individual variability in biological, behavioral, and social factors to develop personalized health solutions. To date, emergency medicine has not deeply engaged in the precision health movement. However, rapid advances in health technology, data science, and medical informatics offer new opportunities for emergency medicine to realize the promises of precision health.

Methods: In this article, we conceptualize precision emergency medicine as an emerging paradigm and identify key drivers of its implementation into current and future clinical practice. We acknowledge important obstacles to the specialty-wide adoption of precision emergency medicine and offer solutions that conceive a successful path forward.

Results: Precision emergency medicine is defined as the use of information and technology to deliver acute care effectively, efficiently, and authentically to individual patients and their communities. Key drivers and opportunities include leveraging human data, capitalizing on technology and digital tools, providing deliberate access to care, advancing population health, and reimagining provider education and roles. Overcoming challenges in equity, privacy, and cost is essential for success. We close with a call to action to proactively incorporate precision health into the clinical practice of emergency medicine, the training of future emergency physicians, and the research agenda of the specialty.

Conclusions: Precision emergency medicine leverages new technology and data-driven artificial intelligence to advance diagnostic testing, individualize patient care plans and therapeutics, and strategically refine the convergence of the health system and the community.

Background: This study aimed to identify communication barriers between health care workers (HCWs) and deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) patients. Both perspectives are offered to provide a comprehensive understanding.

Methods: Two consecutive studies were conducted from 2018 to 2021. Study 1 comprised mixed methods, employing a cross-sectional survey (n = 288) and in-depth interviews (n = 9) with DHH participants, utilizing accessible tools including sign language. Study 2 involved a cross-sectional survey of health care emergency workers without hearing loss (N = 391).

Results: The perceived self-efficacy of DHH patients, and not their hearing loss, was linked with their ability to communicate independently with HCWs. No significant differences in successful communication with these providers were found vis-à-vis mode of communication utilized (sign language, writing, interpreter, etc.). In the qualitative findings, DHH patients noted two urgent care barriers: HCWs' communication unfamiliarity and patients' communication accessibility issues. Quantitative findings indicated a main barrier: difficulties in communicating with HCWs in general (57%) and specifically in the emergency room (ER; 65%). Only 28.8% reported being able to independently communicate with ER staff. Health care providers were not familiar with effective communication strategies when treating these patients. Respondents indicating that communication was not a barrier to care were mainly administrative staff (54.55%), compared to nurses (32.74%) and physicians (22.58%).

Conclusions: Communication solutions are needed to improve access to health services, especially in emergencies. Providing medical staff training on effective communication strategies with these patients could simplify interactions and reduce the reliance on hearing family members, potentially improving medical care. Implementing a communication policy for frontline staff, along with the use of visual aids, is crucial. Health care professionals may not realize that small changes can greatly improve communication with DHH patients.