The Basics of Alcohol Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment in the Emergency Department

Nearly eight million emergency department (ED) visits are attributed to alcohol every year in the United States. A substantial proportion is due to trauma. In 2005, 16,885 people were killed as a result of alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes. Patients with alcohol-use problems (AUPs) are not only more likely to drive after drinking but are also at greater risk for serious alcohol-related illness and injury. Emergency departments have an important and unique opportunity to identify these patients and intervene during the “teachable moment” of an ED visit. The American College of Emergency Physicians, Emergency Nurses Association, American College of Surgeons-Committee on Trauma, American Public Health Association, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, have identified Alcohol Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) as a pivotal injury- and illness-prevention strategy to improve the health and well-being of ED patients. We provide a general overview of the basis and need for integrating SBIRT into EDs. Models of SBIRT, as well as benefits and challenges to its implementation, are also discussed

Pedestrian Injuries: Emergency Care Considerations

Traffic-related pedestrian injuries are a growing public health threat worldwide. The global economic burden of motor vehicle collisions and pedestrian injuries totals $500 billion.1 In 2004, there were 4,641 pedestrian deaths and over 70,000 injuries in the United States.2 Injury patterns vary depending on the age, gender and socioeconomic status of the individual. Children, older adults, and those of lower socioeconomic status are most affected. The burden of injury upon the individual, families and society is frequently overwhelming. Although pedestrian injuries and deaths are relatively on the decline in the United States, this is not universally true throughout the world. It requires particular attention by emergency medicine physicians, public health experts and policy makers

Need for Injury-Prevention Education in Medical School Curriculum

Injury is the leading cause of death and disability among the U.S. population aged 1 to 44 years. In 2006 more than 179,000 fatalities were attributed to injury. Despite increasing awareness of the global epidemic of injury and violence, a considerable gap remains between advances in injury-prevention research and prevention knowledge that is taught to medical students. This article discusses the growing need for U.S medical schools to train future physicians in the fundamentals of injury prevention and control. Teaching medical students to implement injury prevention in their future practice should help reduce injury morbidity and mortality. Deliberate efforts should be made to integrate injury-prevention education into existing curriculum. Key resources are available to do this. Emergency physicians can be essential advocates in establishing injury prevention training because of their clinical expertise in treating injury. Increasing the number of physicians with injury- and violence- prevention knowledge and skills is ultimately an important strategy to reduce the national and global burden of injury

Quality and Publication of Emergency Medicine Trials Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov

Introduction: Promoting emergency medicine (EM) clinical trials research remains a priority. To characterize the status of clinical EM research, this study assessed trial quality, funding source, and publication of EM clinical trials and compared EM and non-EM trials on these key metrics. We also examined the volume of EM trials and their subspecialty areas.Methods: We abstracted data from ClinicalTrials.gov (February 2000 - September 2013) and used individual study National Clinical Trial numbers to identify published trials (January 2007 - September 2016). We used descriptive statistics and chi-square tests to examine study characteristics by EM and non-EM status, and Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests to compare time to publication of completed EM and non-EM studies.Results: We found 638 interventional EM trials and 59,512 non-EM interventional trials conducted in the United States between February 2000 and September 2013, registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. EM studies were significantly less likely than non-EM studies to be National Institutes of Health-funded or to evaluate a drug or biologic. However, EM studies had significantly larger sample sizes, and were significantly more likely to use randomization and blinding. Overall, 34.3% of EM and 26.0% of non-EM studies were published in peer-reviewed journals. By subspecialty, more EM trials concerned medical/surgical and psychiatric/neurological conditions than trauma.Conclusion: Although EM studies were less likely to have received federal or industry funding, and the EM portfolio consisted of only 638 trials over the 14-year study period, the quality of EM trials surpassed that of non-EM trials, based on indices such as randomization and blinding. This novel finding bodes well for the future of clinical EM research, as does the higher proportion of published EM than non-EM trials. Our study also revealed that trauma studies were under-represented among EM studies. Periodic assessment of EM trials with the metrics used here could provide an informative and valuable longitudinal view of progress in clinical EM research

Gender‐specific Issues in Traumatic Injury and Resuscitation: Consensus‐based Recommendations for Future Research

Traumatic injury remains an unacceptably high contributor to morbidity and mortality rates across the United States. Gender‐specific research in trauma and emergency resuscitation has become a rising priority. In concert with the 2014 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference “Gender‐specific Research in Emergency Care: Investigate, Understand, and Translate How Gender Affects Patient Outcomes,” a consensus‐building group consisting of experts in emergency medicine, critical care, traumatology, anesthesiology, and public health convened to generate research recommendations and priority questions to be answered and thus move the field forward. Nominal group technique was used for the consensus‐building process and a combination of face‐to‐face meetings, monthly conference calls, e‐mail discussions, and preconference surveys were used to refine the research questions. The resulting research agenda focuses on opportunities to improve patient outcomes by expanding research in sex‐ and gender‐specific emergency care in the field of traumatic injury and resuscitation.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/110065/1/acem12536.pd

Crash Injury Prediction and Vehicle Damage Reporting by Paramedics

Objective: The accuracy of pre-hospital crash scene details and crash victim assessment has important implications for initial trauma care assessment and management. Similarly, it is known to influence physician perception of crash victim injury severity. The goal of this feasibility study was to examine paramedic accuracy in predicting crash victim injury profile, disability outcome at hospital discharge, and reporting vehicle damage with other crash variables.Methods: This prospective case series study was undertaken at a Southern California, Level I trauma center certified by the American College of Surgeons. Paramedics transporting crash injured motor vehicle occupants to our emergency department (ED)/trauma center were surveyed. We abstracted ED and in-patient records of injured vehicle occupants. Vehicle and crash scene data were obtained from a professional crash reconstruction, which included the assessment of deformation, crash forces, change in velocity, and the source of each injury.Results: We used survey, injury, and crash reconstruction data from 22 collision cases in the final analysis. The median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was five (range 1-24). No enrolled patients died, and none were severely disabled at the time of discharge from the hospital. The paramedic crash injury severity predictions were sensitive for an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) of 2-4. Paramedics often agreed with the crash reconstruction on restraint use, ejection, and other fatalities at the scene, and had lower levels of agreement for front airbag deployment, steering wheel damage, and window/windshield impact. Paramedics had 80% accuracy in predicting any disability at the time of hospital discharge.Conclusion: Paramedic prediction of injury profile was sensitive, and prediction of disability outcome at discharge was accurate when compared to discharge diagnosis. Their reporting of vehicle specific crash variables was less accurate. Further study should be undertaken to assess the benefits of crash biomechanics education for paramedics and other pre-hospital care providers. [WestJEM. 2009;10:62-67.

Factors Associated with Complications in Older Adults with Isolated Blunt Chest Trauma

Objective: To determine the prevalence of adverse events in elderly trauma patients with isolated blunt thoracic trauma, and to identify variables associated with these adverse events.Methods: We performed a chart review of 160 trauma patients age 65 and older with significant blunt thoracic trauma, drawn from an American College of Surgeons Level I Trauma Center registry. Patients with serious injury to other body areas were excluded to prevent confounding the cause of adverse events. Adverse events were defined as acute respiratory distress syndrome or pneumonia, unanticipated intubation, transfer to the intensive care unit for hypoxemia, or death. Data collected included history, physical examination, radiographic findings, length of hospital stay, and clinical outcomes.Results: Ninety-nine patients had isolated chest injury, while 61 others had other organ systems injured and were excluded. Sixteen patients developed adverse events [16.2% 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.5-24.9%], including two deaths. Adverse events were experienced by 19.2%, 6.1%, and 28.6% of those patients 65-74, 75-84, and >85 years old, respectively. The mean length of stay was 14.6 days in patients with an adverse event and 5.8 days in patients without. Post hoc analysis revealed that all 16 patients with an adverse event had one or more of the following: age ≥85, initial systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg, hemothorax, pneumothorax, three or more unilateral rib fractures, or pulmonary contusion (sensitivity 100%, CI 79.4-100%; specificity 38.6%, CI 28.1-49.9%).Conclusion: Adverse events from isolated thoracic trauma in elderly patients complicate 16% of our sample. These criteria were 100% sensitive and 38.5% specific for these adverse events. This study is a first step to identifying variables that might aid in identifying patients at high risk for serious adverse events. [WestJEM. 2009;10:79-84.

Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drugs: Future Directions for Screening and Intervention in the Emergency Department

This article is a product of a breakout session on injury prevention from the 2009 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference on “Public Health in the ED: Screening, Surveillance, and Intervention.” The emergency department (ED) is an important entry portal into the medical care system. Given the epidemiology of substance use among ED patients, the delivery of effective brief interventions (BIs) for alcohol, drug, and tobacco use in the ED has the potential to have a large public health impact. To date, the results of randomized controlled trials of interventional studies in the ED setting for substance use have been mixed in regard to alcohol and understudied in the area of tobacco and other drugs. As a result, there are more questions remaining than answered. The work group developed the following research recommendations that are essential for the field of screening and BI for alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs in the ED. 1) Screening—develop and validate brief and practical screening instruments for ED patients and determine the optimal method for the administration of screening instruments. 2) Key components and delivery methods for intervention—conduct research on the effectiveness of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) in the ED on outcomes (e.g., consumption, associated risk behaviors, and medical psychosocial consequences) including minimum dose needed, key components, optimal delivery method, interventions focused on multiple risk behaviors and tailored based on assessment, and strategies for addressing polysubstance use. 3) Effectiveness among patient subgroups—conduct research to determine which patients are most likely to benefit from a BI for substance use, including research on moderators and mediators of intervention effectiveness, and examine special populations using culturally and developmentally appropriate interventions. 4) Referral strategies—a) promote prospective effectiveness trials to test best strategies to facilitate referrals and access from the ED to preventive services, community resources, and substance abuse and mental health treatment; b) examine impact of available community services; c) examine the role of stigma of referral and follow-up; and d) examine alternatives to specialized treatment referral. 5) Translation—conduct translational and cost-effectiveness research of proven efficacious interventions, with attention to fidelity, to move ED SBIRT from research to practice.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78664/1/j.1553-2712.2009.00552.x.pd

Injury Due to Mechanical Falls: Future Directions in Gender-specific Surveillance, Screening, and Interventions in Emergency Department Patients.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that among older adults (≥65 years), falls are the leading cause of injury-related death. Fall-related fractures among older women are more than twice as frequent as those for men. Gender-specific evidence-based fall prevention strategy and intervention studies show that improved patient-centered outcomes are elusive. There is a paucity of emergency medicine literature on the topic. As part of the 2014 Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) consensus conference on Gender-Specific Research in Emergency Care: Investigate, Understand, and Translate How Gender Affects Patient Outcomes, a breakout group convened to generate a research agenda on priority questions to be answered on this topic. The consensus-based priority research agenda is presented in this article