Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
-
The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI) was implemented in 2013 and was associated with a 25% relative decrease in the dispensing of opioids. Although emergency department (ED) providers play a role in the initiation and continuation of opioids, the incumbent OSI did not target EDs. ⋯ Due to the high volume of patients and the vital role the ED plays in patient treatment and hospital admissions, it is evident that the ED is an important site for QI programs as well as the implementation of opioid safety measures. Given the findings of this pilot, we believe that implementation of a national Veterans Affairs ED OSI implementation is feasible practice.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Randomized Clinical Trial of IV Acetaminophen as an Adjunct to IV Hydromorphone for Acute Severe Pain in Emergency Department Patients.
A fundamental challenge for emergency department (ED) clinicians is to relieve severe, acute pain while simultaneously avoiding adverse events associated with opioid analgesics. Because there is evidence that intravenous (IV) acetaminophen is an effective adjuvant analgesic in postoperative settings, we examined whether it also has a role in the ED. ⋯ The addition of 1 g of IV acetaminophen to 1 mg of IV hydromorphone provided neither clinically meaningful nor statistically superior analgesia than hydromorphone alone.
-
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged as a global pandemic in early 2020 with rapidly evolving approaches to diagnosing the clinical illness called coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The primary objective of this scoping review is to synthesize current research of the diagnostic accuracy of history, physical examination, routine laboratory tests, real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR), immunology tests, and computed tomography (CT) for the emergency department (ED) diagnosis of COVID-19. Secondary objectives included a synopsis of diagnostic biases likely with current COVID-19 research as well as corresponding implications of false-negative and false-positive results for clinicians and investigators. ⋯ With the exception of fever and disorders of smell/taste, history and physical examination findings are unhelpful to distinguish COVID-19 from other infectious conditions that mimic SARS-CoV-2 like influenza. Routine laboratory tests are also nondiagnostic, although lymphopenia is a common finding and other abnormalities may predict severe disease. Although rRT-PCR is the current criterion standard, more inclusive consensus-based criteria will likely emerge because of the high false-negative rate of PCR tests. The role of serology and CT in ED assessments remains undefined.