Yes, not now, or never: an analysis of reasons for refusing or accepting emergency department-based take-home naloxone.

OBJECTIVE: Take-home naloxone (THN) reduces deaths from opioid overdose. To increase THN distribution to at-risk emergency department (ED) patients, we explored reasons for patients' refusing or accepting THN. METHODS: In an urban teaching hospital ED, we identified high opioid overdose risk patients according to pre-specified criteria. We offered eligible patients THN and participation in researcher-administered surveys, which inquired about reasons to refuse or accept THN and about THN dispensing location preferences. We analyzed refusal and acceptance reasons in open-ended responses, grouped reasons into categories (absolute versus conditional refusals,) then searched for associations between patient characteristics and reasons. RESULTS: Of 247 patients offered THN, 193 (78.1%) provided reasons for their decision. Of those included, 69 (35.2%) were female, 91 (47.2%) were under age 40, 61 (31.6%) were homeless, 144 (74.6%) reported injection drug use (IDU), and 131 (67.9%) accepted THN. Of 62 patients refusing THN, 19 (30.7%) felt "not at risk" for overdose, while 28 (45.2%) gave conditional refusal reasons: "too sick," "in a rush," or preference to get THN elsewhere. Non-IDU was associated with stating "not at risk," while IDU, homelessness, and age under 40 were associated with conditional refusals. Among acceptances, 86 (65.7%) mentioned saving others as a reason. Most respondents preferred other dispensing locations beside the ED, whether or not they accepted ED THN. CONCLUSION: ED patients refusing THN felt "not at risk" for overdose or felt their ED visit was not the right time or place for THN. Most accepting THN wanted to save others

Acute Management and Outcomes of Patients with Diabetes Mellitus Presenting to Canadian Emergency Departments with Hypoglycemia

Objectifs: Cette vérification rétrospective des dossiers a permis d\u27examiner les données démographiques, les examens, la prise en charge et les résultats des patients adultes souffrant de diabète sucré qui se sont présentés aux services des urgences (SU) au Canada. Méthodes: Tous les sites ont mené une recherche dans leurs dossiers médicaux électroniques à l\u27aide des codes de la Classification internationale des maladies, dixième révision, pour relever les visites aux SU entre 2008 et 2010 qui étaient liées à l\u27hypoglycémie. Les caractéristiques des patients, les données démographiques, la prise en charge aux SU, les ressources des SU et les résultats sont rapportés. Résultats: Un total de 1039 patients de plus de 17 ans ont été inclus dans l\u27étude; 347 (33,4 %) ont été classifiés comme étant des cas de diabète de type 1 et 692 (66,6 %) ont été classifiés comme étant des cas de diabète de type 2. Les patients souffrant du diabète de type 2 étaient beaucoup plus âgés (73 ans vs 49 ans; p\u3c0,0001) et avaient plus d\u27affections chroniques inscrites à leur dossier (tous p\u3c0,001). La plupart des sujets arrivaient par ambulance, et 39 % des cas montraient des scores de triage qui révélaient des tableaux cliniques graves. Les traitements contre l\u27hypoglycémie étaient fréquents (75,7 %) durant le transport préhospitalier; 38,5 % recevaient du glucose et 40,1 % recevaient du glucagon par voie intraveineuse. Les traitements administrés dans les SU contre l\u27hypoglycémie comprenaient le glucose par voie orale (76,8 %), le glucose par voie intraveineuse (29,6 %) et en perfusion continue (27,7 %). Les examens diagnostiques (81,9 %) comprenaient fréquemment les électrocardiogrammes (51,9 %), la radiographie thoracique (37,5 %) et la tomodensitométrie crânienne (14,5 %). La plupart des patients (73,5 %) recevaient leur congé. Cependant, plus de sujets souffrant du diabète de type 2 nécessitaient une admission (30,3 vs 8,8 %). Les instructions de congé étaient étayées chez seulement 55,5 % des patients, et l\u27orientation vers des services de diabète se rencontrait chez moins de 20 % des cas. Une variation considérable dans la prise en charge de l\u27hypoglycémie existait entre les SU. Conclusions: Les patients souffrant de diabète qui se présentaient à un SU en raison d\u27une hypoglycémie consomment considérablement de ressources en soins de santé, puis une variation est observée dans la pratique. Les SU devraient élaborer des protocoles de prise en charge de l\u27hypoglycémie en portant une attention à la planification du congé pour réduire la récurrence

Assay precision and risk of misclassification at rule-out cut-offs for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin

Clinical trials and guidelines support the use of very low high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) results to rule-out a myocardial infarction (MI) ( 1) ). The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Committee on Clinical Applications of Cardiac Biomarkers committee, through a modeling approach, suggests assays need to have a lower limit near 3 ng/L and an analytical variation of 10% below 7 ng/L if these low values are to perform consistently in practice ( 2) ). Our objectives for the present study were to assess: i) if any type of instrument or individual instrument could achieve a coefficient of variation (CV) of ≤10% at very low hs-cTn cut-offs (i.e., targets) recommended in clinical pathways; ii) the frequency of results at the hs-cTn target, above the target and below the target, with the latter group representing potential misclassification to the low risk group where the target level would in the intermediate risk range.<br/

Exploring how to enhance care and pathways between the emergency department and integrated youth services for young people with mental health and substance use concerns

Background Integrated youth services (IYS) provide multidisciplinary care (including mental, physical, and social) prioritizing the needs of young people and their families. Despite a significant rise in emergency department (ED) visits by young Canadians with mental health and substance use (MHSU) concerns over the last decade, there remains a profound disconnect between EDs and MHSU integrated youth services. The first objective of this study was to better understand the assessment, treatment, and referral of young people (ages 12–24 years) presenting to the ED with MHSU concerns. The second objective was to explore how to improve the transition from the ED to IYS for young people with MHSU concerns. Methods We conducted semi-structured one-on-one video and phone interviews with stakeholders in British Columbia, Canada in the summer of 2020. Snowball sampling was utilized, and participants (n = 26) were reached, including ED physicians (n = 6), social workers (n = 4), nurses (n = 2), an occupational therapist (n = 1); a counselor (n = 1); staff/leadership in IYS organizations (n = 4); mental health/family workers (n = 3); peer support workers (n = 2), and parents (n = 3). A thematic analysis (TA) was conducted using a deductive and inductive approach conceptually guided by the Social Ecological Model. Results We identified three overarching themes, and factors to consider at all levels of the Social Ecological Model. At the interpersonal level inadequate communication between ED staff and young people affected overall care and contributed to negative experiences. At the organizational level, we identified considerations for assessments and the ED and the hospital (wait times, staffing issues, and the physical space). At the community level, the environment of IYS and other community services were important including wait times and hours of operation. Policy level factors identified include inadequate communication between services (e.g., different charting systems and documentation). Conclusions This study provides insight into important long-term systemic issues and more immediate factors that need to be addressed to improve the delivery of care for young people with MHSU challenges. This research supports intervention development and implementation in the ED for young people with MHSU concerns.Medicine, Faculty ofOther UBCEmergency Medicine, Department ofOccupational Science and Occupational Therapy, Department ofPsychiatry, Department ofReviewedFacultyResearche

Factors Associated With Participation in an Emergency Department-Based Take-Home Naloxone Program for At-Risk Opioid Users.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Although the World Health Organization recommends take-home naloxone to address the increasing global burden of opioid-related deaths, few emergency departments (EDs) offer a take-home naloxone program. We seek to determine the take-home naloxone acceptance rate among ED patients at high risk of opioid overdose and to examine factors associated with acceptance. METHODS: At a single urban ED, consecutive eligible patients at risk of opioid overdose were invited to complete a survey about opioid use, overdose experience, and take-home naloxone awareness, and then offered take-home naloxone. The primary outcome was acceptance of take-home naloxone, including the kit and standardized patient training. Univariate and multivariable logistic analyses were used to evaluate factors associated with acceptance. RESULTS: Of 241 eligible patients approached, 201 (83.4%) completed the questionnaire. Three-quarters of respondents used injection drugs, 37% were women, and 26% identified as "Indigenous." Of 201 respondents, 137 (68.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 61.7% to 74.7%) accepted take-home naloxone. Multivariable analysis revealed that factors associated with take-home naloxone acceptance included witnessing overdose in others (odds ratio [OR] 4.77; 95% CI 2.25 to 10.09), concern about own overdose death (OR 3.71; 95% CI 1.34 to 10.23), female sex (OR 2.50; 95% CI 1.21 to 5.17), and injection drug use (OR 2.22; 95% CI 1.06 to 4.67). CONCLUSION: A two-thirds ED take-home naloxone acceptance rate in patients using opioids should encourage all EDs to dispense take-home naloxone. ED-based take-home naloxone programs have the potential to improve access to take-home naloxone and awareness in individuals most vulnerable to overdoses

Rapid agitation control with ketamine in the emergency department (RACKED): a randomized controlled trial protocol

Background: The rapid control of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with psychomotor agitation and violent behavior is paramount for the safety of patients and ED staff. The use of intramuscular (IM) ketamine in the pre-hospital and ED settings has demonstrated promising preliminary results to provide rapid and safe behavioral control. A prospective, randomized controlled trial is required to measure the potential superiority of IM ketamine compared to current standard care (IM benzodiazepines plus antipsychotics). Methods: This will be a parallel, prospective, randomized, controlled trial of 5 mg/kg IM ketamine compared to a combination of 5 mg IM midazolam and 5 mg IM haloperidol. The study will enroll approximately 184 patients, randomized equally to two study arms. There will be one study visit during which study medication will be administered and assessments will be completed. A follow-up safety visit will occur on day 3. The primary objective of this study is to compare IM ketamine to a combination of IM midazolam and haloperidol with regards to the time required for adequate behavioral control, in minutes, in patients presenting to the ED with psychomotor agitation and violent behavior, as measured by the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS). Discussion: We present a novel study to determine whether ketamine is a rapid and safe option, compared to a combination of midazolam and haloperidol for the sedation of patients presenting to the ED with psychomotor agitation and violent behavior. To our knowledge, this study is the first randomized controlled trial to compare ketamine to current standard care for this indication. We have attempted to address numerous logistical issues with the design of this study including a waiver of consent, ensuring adequate blinding of outcome assessors, patient enrolment, and data monitoring. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03375671 . Registered on 18 December 2017.Medicine, Faculty ofOther UBCEmergency Medicine, Department ofOccupational Science and Occupational Therapy, Department ofPopulation and Public Health (SPPH), School ofPsychiatry, Department ofReviewedFacult

Methods for evaluating adverse drug event preventability in emergency department patients

Background: There is a high degree of variability in assessing the preventability of adverse drug events, limiting the ability to compare rates of preventable adverse drug events across different studies. We compared three methods for determining preventability of adverse drug events in emergency department patients and explored their strengths and weaknesses. Methods: This mixed-methods study enrolled emergency department patients diagnosed with at least one adverse drug event from three prior prospective studies. A clinical pharmacist and physician reviewed the medical and research records of all patients, and independently rated each event’s preventability using a “best practice-based” approach, an “error-based” approach, and an “algorithm-based” approach. Raters discussed discordant ratings until reaching consensus. We assessed the inter-rater agreement between clinicians using the same assessment method, and between different assessment methods using Cohen’s kappa with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Qualitative researchers observed discussions, took field notes, and reviewed free text comments made by clinicians in a “comment” box in the data collection form. We developed a coding structure and iteratively analyzed qualitative data for emerging themes regarding the application of each preventability assessment method using NVivo. Results: Among 1356 adverse drug events, a best practice-based approach rated 64.1% (95% CI: 61.5–66.6%) of events as preventable, an error-based approach rated 64.3% (95% CI: 61.8–66.9%) of events as preventable, and an algorithm-based approach rated 68.8% (95% CI: 66.1–71.1%) of events as preventable. When applying the same method, the inter-rater agreement between clinicians was 0.53 (95% CI: 0.48–0.59), 0.55 (95%CI: 0.50–0.60) and 0.55 (95% CI: 0.49–0.55) for the best practice-, error-, and algorithm-based approaches, respectively. The inter-rater agreement between different assessment methods using consensus ratings for each ranged between 0.88 (95% CI 0.85–0.91) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.98–1.00). Compared to a best practice-based assessment, clinicians believed the algorithm-based assessment was too rigid. It did not account for the complexities of and variations in clinical practice, and frequently was too definitive when assigning preventability ratings. Conclusion: There was good agreement between all three methods of determining the preventability of adverse drug events. However, clinicians found the algorithmic approach constraining, and preferred a best practice-based assessment method.Medicine, Faculty ofNon UBCEmergency Medicine, Department ofPopulation and Public Health (SPPH), School ofOther UBCReviewedFacult

The association of extreme environmental heat with incidence and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in British Columbia: A time series analysis

Background: The impact of extreme heat on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) incidence and outcomes is under-studied. We investigated OHCA incidence and outcomes over increasing temperatures. Methods: We included non-traumatic EMS (Emergency Medical Services)-assessed OHCAs in British Columbia during the warm seasons of 2020–2021. We fit a time-series quasi-Poisson generalized linear model to estimate the association between temperature and incidence of both EMS-assessed, EMS-treated, and EMS-untreated OHCAs. Second, we employed a logistic regression model to estimate the association between “heatwave” periods (defined as a daily mean temperature > 99th percentile for ≥ 2 consecutive days, plus 3 lag days) with survival and favourable neurological outcomes (cerebral performance category ≤ 2) at hospital discharge. Results: Of 5478 EMS-assessed OHCAs, 2833 were EMS-treated. OHCA incidence increased with increasing temperatures, especially exceeding a daily mean temperature of 25 °C Compared to the median daily mean temperature (16.9 °C), the risk of EMS-assessed (relative risk [RR] 3.7; 95%CI 3.0–4.6), EMS-treated (RR 2.9; 95%CI 2.2–3.9), and EMS-untreated (RR 4.3; 95%CI 3.2–5.7) OHCA incidence were higher during days with a temperature over the 99th percentile. Of EMS-treated OHCAs, during the heatwave (n = 179) and non-heatwave (n = 2654) periods, 4 (2.2%) and 270 (10%) survived and 4 (2.2%) and 241 (9.2%) had favourable neurological outcomes, respectively. Heatwave period OHCAs had decreased odds of survival (adjusted OR 0.28; 95%CI 0.10–0.79) and favourable neurological outcome (adjusted OR 0.31; 95%CI 0.11–0.89) at hospital discharge, compared to other periods. Conclusion: Extreme heat was associated with a higher incidence of OHCA, and lower odds of survival and favourable neurological status at hospital discharge