Association entre les prescriptions d'isolement, d'oxygène ou de moniteur cardiaque et les durées de séjour chez les patients en attente d'admission dans un département d'urgence au Canada

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal

Investigating the incidence and magnitude of heterotopic ossification with and without joints involvement in patients with a limb fracture and mild traumatic brain injury

Objectives: This study seeks to evaluate the incidence rate of heterotopic ossification (HO) formation in patients afflicted by an isolated limb fracture (ILF) and a concomitant mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Methods: The current study is an observational study including ILF patients with or without a concomitant mTBI recruited from an orthopedic clinic of a Level 1 Trauma Hospital. Patients were diagnosed with a mTBI according to the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM) criteria. Radiographs taken on average 3 months post-trauma were analyzed separately by two distinct specialists for the presence of HO proximally to the fracture site (joints or extra joints). Both raters referred to Brooker's and Della's Valle's classification to establish signs of HO. First, analyses were conducted for the full sample. Secondly, a matched cohort was used in order to control for specific factors, namely age, sex, type of injury, and time elapsed between the accident and the analyzed radiograph. Results: The full sample included a total of 183 patients with an ILF (94 females; 47.5 years old), of which 50 had a concomitant mTBI and 133 without. Radiographic evidence of HO was significantly higher in patients with an ILF and a mTBI compared to ILF patients (X2 = 6.50; p = 0.01). The matched cohort consisted of 94 participants (i.e.; 47 patients from the ILF + mTBI group and 47 patients from the ILF group). Again, ILF + mTBI patients presented significantly higher rates of HO signs in comparison to ILF patients (X2 = 3.69; p = 0.04). Presence of HO was associated with prolonged delays to return to work (RTW) only in ILF + mTBI patients (F = 4.055; p = 0.05) but not in ILF patients (F = 0.823; p = 0.37). Conclusions: Study findings suggest that rates of HO are significantly higher proximally to fracture sites when ILF patients sustain a concomitant mTBI, even after controlling for factors known to influence HO. Moreover, results show that HO is associated with a prolonged RTW only in ILF patients with a concomitant mTBI but not in ILFonly patients. The impact of mTBI on HO formation warrants further attention to detect early signs of HO, to identify shared physiopathological mechanisms and, ultimately, to design targeted therapies

Painful Memories: Reliability of Pain Intensity Recall at 3 Months in Senior Patients

Background. Validity of pain recall is questioned in research. Objective. To evaluate the reliability of pain intensity recall for seniors in an emergency department (ED). Methods. This study was part of a prospective multicenter project for seniors (≥65 years old) treated in an ED for minor traumatic injury. Pain intensity (0–10 numerical rating scale) was evaluated at the initial ED visit, at one week (baseline), and 3 months. At three months, patients were asked to recall the pain intensity they had at baseline. Results. 482 patients were interviewed (mean age 76.6 years, SD ± 7.3) and 72.8% were female. Intraclass correlation coefficient between pain at baseline and its recall was 0.24 (95% CI: 0.14–0.33). Senior patients tended to overestimate their pain intensity by a mean of 1.2 (95% CI: 0.9–1.5) units. A stepwise multiple regression analysis showed that the variance of baseline pain recall at 3 months was explained by pain at ED visit (11%), pain at 3 months (7%), and pain at baseline (2%). Conclusion. The accuracy of pain intensity recall after three months is poor in seniors and seems to be influenced by the pain experienced at the time of injury

Relationship between acute pain trajectories after an emergency department visit and chronic pain: a Canadian prospective cohort study

Objectives Inadequate acute pain management can reduce the quality of life, cause unnecessary suffering and can often lead to the development of chronic pain. Using group-based trajectory modelling, we previously identified six distinct pain intensity trajectories for the first 14-day postemergency department (ED) discharge; two linear ones with moderate or severe pain during follow-up (~40% of the patients) and four cubic polynomial order trajectories with mild or no pain at the end of the 14 days (low final pain trajectories). We assessed if previously described acute pain intensity trajectories over 14 days after ED discharge are predictive of chronic pain 3 months later.Design Prospective cohort study.Setting Tertiary care trauma centre academic hospital.Participants This study included 18 years and older ED patients who consulted for acute (≤2 weeks) pain conditions that were discharged with an opioid prescription. Patients completed a 14-day diary in which they listed their daily pain intensity (0–10 numeric rating scale).Outcomes Three months after ED visit, participants were questioned by phone about their current pain intensity (0–10 numeric rating scale). Chronic pain was defined as patients with current pain intensity ≥4 at 3 months.Results A total of 305 participants remained in the study at 3 months, 49% were women and a mean age of 55±15 years. Twelve per cent (11.9; 95% CI 8.2 to 15.4) of patients had chronic pain at the 3-month follow-up. Controlling for age, sex and pain condition, patients with moderate or severe pain trajectories and those with only a severe pain trajectory were respectively 5.1 (95% CI 2.2 to 11.8) and 8.2 (95% CI 3.4 to 20.0) times more likely to develop chronic pain 3 months later compared with patients in the low final pain trajectories.Conclusion Specific acute pain trajectories following an ED visit are closely related to the development of chronic pain 3 months later.Trial registration number NCT02799004; Results

Impact of Age, Sex and Route of Administration on Adverse Events after Opioid Treatment in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of opioids for acute pain relief in the emergency department (ED) is well recognized, but treatment with opioids is associated with adverse events ranging from minor discomforts to life-threatening events

Estimation of pain intensity in emergency medicine: a validation study

International audienceThis study was designed to estimate the validity of an 11-point verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS) and a 100 Unit (U) plasticized visual analogue scale (VASp) using a 100mm paper visual analogue scale (VAS) as a gold standard, to recommend the best method of reporting the intensity of acute pain in an emergency department (ED). A convenience sample of 1176 patients with acute pain were recruited in the ED of a teaching hospital. Patients >18 years and able to use the different scales were included. Scales were presented randomly. Results were converted to a 0-100 U scale and validity was quantified using the Bland-Altman method and the intra-class correlation (ICC). The limits of acceptability were previously set for the limits of agreement at +/-20 U, with a constant bias. The Bland-Altman method revealed a small bias of -4 U for the VNRS and +1 U for VASp. However, the bias of the VNRS varied with the intensity of pain from -10 to +1 U. The limits of agreement between the VNRS&VAS and the VASp&VAS were -25; +17 U and -17; +18 U, respectively. The ICC was excellent between the VNRS&VAS (0.88) and the VASp&VAS (0.92). In conclusion, the VASp has a small bias, acceptable limits of agreement and an excellent intra-class correlation. It is probably a valid tool to estimate acute pain in the ED. However, the VNRS is less valid in that context because of its wide limits of agreement and variable bias (mainly in lower scores)

Selective REM Sleep Deprivation Improves Expectation-Related Placebo Analgesia

<p><b>Concurrent pain A) intensity and B) unpleasantness measured in the morning at control and placebo sites for REMSDs and Controls.</b> Statistical analyses revealed a group effect for concurrent pain intensity and unpleasantness (REMSDs vs. Controls, p = 0.028 and 0.030), a stimulation site effect (control vs. placebo sites: p < 0.001 and p < 0.001), and an interaction (*: p = 0.006 and 0.030). <b>Analysis of concurrent pain intensity (C) and unpleasantness (D) between placebo and control sites</b> revealed a significant between-group difference (p = 0.006 and p = 0.030) (mean ± standard error of the mean). 1 to 5 depict stimulations 1 to 5. Subjective assessments of pain intensity and unpleasantness were obtained by visual analog scale (VAS, 0–100).</p

Selective REM Sleep Deprivation Improves Expectation-Related Placebo Analgesia

<div><p>The placebo effect is a neurobiological and psychophysiological process known to influence perceived pain relief. Optimization of placebo analgesia may contribute to the clinical efficacy and effectiveness of medication for acute and chronic pain management. We know that the placebo effect operates through two main mechanisms, expectations and learning, which is also influenced by sleep. Moreover, a recent study suggested that rapid eye movement (REM) sleep is associated with modulation of expectation-mediated placebo analgesia. We examined placebo analgesia following pharmacological REM sleep deprivation and we tested the hypothesis that relief expectations and placebo analgesia would be improved by experimental REM sleep deprivation in healthy volunteers. Following an adaptive night in a sleep laboratory, 26 healthy volunteers underwent classical experimental placebo analgesic conditioning in the evening combined with pharmacological REM sleep deprivation (clonidine: 13 volunteers or inert control pill: 13 volunteers). Medication was administered in a double-blind manner at bedtime, and placebo analgesia was tested in the morning. Results revealed that 1) placebo analgesia improved with REM sleep deprivation; 2) pain relief expectations did not differ between REM sleep deprivation and control groups; and 3) REM sleep moderated the relationship between pain relief expectations and placebo analgesia. These results support the putative role of REM sleep in modulating placebo analgesia. The mechanisms involved in these improvements in placebo analgesia and pain relief following selective REM sleep deprivation should be further investigated.</p></div