Characteristics of Real-Time, Non-Critical Incident Debriefing Practices in the Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: Benefits of post-simulation debriefings as an educational and feedback tool have been widely accepted for nearly a decade. Real-time, non-critical incident debriefing is similar to post-simulation debriefing; however, data on its practice in academic emergency departments (ED), is limited. Although tools such as TeamSTEPPS® (Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety) suggest debriefing after complicated medical situations, they do not teach debriefing skills suited to this purpose. Anecdotal evidence suggests that real-time debriefings (or non-critical incident debriefings) do in fact occur in academic EDs;, however, limited research has been performed on this subject. The objective of this study was to characterize real-time, non-critical incident debriefing practices in emergency medicine (EM). METHODS: We conducted this multicenter cross-sectional study of EM attendings and residents at four large, high-volume, academic EM residency programs in New York City. Questionnaire design was based on a Delphi panel and pilot testing with expert panel. We sought a convenience sample from a potential pool of approximately 300 physicians across the four sites with the goal of obtaining \u3e100 responses. The survey was sent electronically to the four residency list-serves with a total of six monthly completion reminder emails. We collected all data electronically and anonymously using SurveyMonkey.com; the data were then entered into and analyzed with Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: The data elucidate various characteristics of current real-time debriefing trends in EM, including its definition, perceived benefits and barriers, as well as the variety of formats of debriefings currently being conducted. CONCLUSION: This survey regarding the practice of real-time, non-critical incident debriefings in four major academic EM programs within New York City sheds light on three major, pertinent points: 1) real-time, non-critical incident debriefing definitely occurs in academic emergency practice; 2) in general, real-time debriefing is perceived to be of some value with respect to education, systems and performance improvement; 3) although it is practiced by clinicians, most report no formal training in actual debriefing techniques. Further study is needed to clarify actual benefits of real-time/non-critical incident debriefing as well as details on potential pitfalls of this practice and recommendations for best practices for use

Nasogastric Aspiration and Lavage in Emergency Department Patients with Hematochezia or Melena Without Hematemesis

Objectives:  The utility of nasogastric aspiration and lavage in the emergency management of patients with melena or hematochezia without hematemesis is controversial. This evidence-based emergency medicine review evaluates the following question: does nasogastric aspiration and lavage in patients with melena or hematochezia and no hematemesis differentiate an upper from lower source of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding? Methods:  MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and other databases were searched. Studies were selected for inclusion in the review if the authors had performed nasogastric aspiration (with or without lavage) in all patients with hematochezia or melena and performed esophagogastroduodenal endoscopy (EGD) in all patients. Studies were excluded if they enrolled patients with history of esophageal varices or included patients with hematemesis or coffee ground emesis (unless the data for patients without hematemesis or coffee ground emesis could be separated out). The outcome was identifying upper GI hemorrhage (active bleeding or high-risk lesions potentially responsible for hemorrhage) and the rate of complications associated with the nasogastric tube insertion. Quality of the included studies was assessed using standard criteria for diagnostic accuracy studies. Results:  Three retrospective studies met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. The prevalence of an upper GI source for patients with melena or hematochezia without hematemesis was 32% to 74%. According to the included studies, the diagnostic performance of the nasogastric aspiration and lavage for predicting upper GI bleeding is poor. The sensitivity of this test ranged from 42% to 84%, the specificity from 54% to 91%, and negative likelihood ratios from 0.62 to 0.20. Only one study reported the rate complications associated with nasogastric aspiration and lavage (1.6%). Conclusions:  Nasogastric aspiration, with or without lavage, has a low sensitivity and poor negative likelihood ratio, which limits its utility in ruling out an upper GI source of bleeding in patients with melena or hematochezia without hematemesis

Leukocytosis as Prognostic Indicator of Major Injury

Objective To test the diagnostic use of the triage white blood cell (WBC) count in differentiating major from minor injuries. Methods We conducted a retrospective study of a prospectively collected database of trauma patients 13 years of age or older at a Level I trauma center from January 2005 through December 2008. We excluded all patients with obvious life-threatening injuries requiring immediate surgery, isolated head trauma, transferred from another institution or dead on arrival. We recorded age, sex, injury mechanism, vital signs, WBC, base deficit (BD), lactate (LAC) and calculated injury severity scores (ISS). Major injury was defined as either a change in hematocrit \u3e10 points or blood transfused within 24 hours, or ISS \u3e15. Results 805 patients were included in the study with an average age of 38.6 years (Range 13–95 yrs) years. 75.3% of patients were male, 45.6% had blunt and 34.4% had penetrating trauma. For vital signs, blood pressure was not significantly different between major and minor injury patients. Major compared to minor injury patients had a statistically but not clinically significant higher heart rate. Major injury patients had significantly (p \u3c 0.0001) higher WBC count (10.53 K/μl, 95% CI: 9.7–11.3) compared to patients with minor injuries (8.92 K/μl, 95% CI: 8.7–9.2), but both were in the normal range. Patients with major compared to minor injury had significantly (p \u3c 0.0001) higher BD (−3.1 versus −0.027 mmol/L) and higher LAC (3.9 versus 2.48 mmol/L). Areas under the curve for WBC count (0.60, 95% CI: 0.54–0.66) are similar to BD (0.69, 95% CI: 0.63–0.74) and LAC (0.66, 95% CI: 0.60–0.71). Conclusion WBC count is not a useful addition as a diagnostic indicator of major trauma in our study population

A consensus parameter for the evaluation and management of angioedema in the emergency department

Despite its relatively common occurrence and life-threatening potential, the management of angioedema in the emergency department (ED) is lacking in terms of a structured approach. It is paramount to distinguish the different etiologies of angioedema from one another and more specifically differentiate histaminergic-mediated angioedema from bradykinin-mediated angioedema, especially in lieu of the more novel treatments that have recently become available for bradykinin-mediated angioedema. With this background in mind, this consensus parameter for the evaluation and management of angioedema attempts to provide a working framework for emergency physicians (EPs) in approaching the patient with angioedema in terms of diagnosis and management in the ED. This consensus parameter was developed from a collaborative effort among a group of EPs and leading allergists with expertise in angioedema. After rigorous debate, review of the literature, and expert opinion, the following consensus guideline document was created. The document has been endorsed by the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (ACAAI) and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM)

Hypoglycemia Revisited in the Acute Care Setting

Hypoglycemia is a common finding in both daily clinical practice and acute care settings. The causes of severe hypoglycemia (SH) are multi-factorial and the major etiologies are iatrogenic, infectious diseases with sepsis and tumor or autoimmune diseases. With the advent of aggressive lowering of HbA1c values to achieve optimal glycemic control, patients are at increased risk of hypoglycemic episodes. Iatrogenic hypoglycemia can cause recurrent morbidity, sometime irreversible neurologic complications and even death, and further preclude maintenance of euglycemia over a lifetime of diabetes. Recent studies have shown that hypoglycemia is associated with adverse outcomes in many acute illnesses. In addition, hypoglycemia is associated with increased mortality among elderly and non-diabetic hospitalized patients. Clinicians should have high clinical suspicion of subtle symptoms of hypoglycemia and provide prompt treatment. Clinicians should know that hypoglycemia is associated with considerable adverse outcomes in many acute critical illnesses. In order to reduce hypoglycemia-associated morbidity and mortality, timely health education programs and close monitoring should be applied to those diabetic patients presenting to the Emergency Department with SH. ED disposition strategies should be further validated and justified to achieve balance between the benefits of euglycemia and the risks of SH. We discuss relevant issues regarding hypoglycemia in emergency and critical care settings