Performance of a Norfentanyl Immunoassay in Specimens with Low Concentrations of Fentanyl and/or Norfentanyl

BACKGROUND

Many fentanyl immunoassays are limited in their ability to detect norfentanyl. Urine specimens collected from individuals who have been exposed to fentanyl frequently have detectable concentrations of norfentanyl (≥2 ng/mL) but low concentrations of fentanyl (<2 ng/mL) by LC-MS/MS. The Lin-Zhi Fentanyl II Immunoassay (Lin-Zhi) claims 100% cross-reactivity with norfentanyl and therefore may detect exposure missed by other assays.

METHODS

In addition to verifying the manufacturer's analytical sensitivity claims, we selected 92 urine specimens with low-positive Lin-Zhi results (1-99 absorbance units, lowest 10%) for analysis by the Immunalysis Health Equity Impact Assessment and ARK II fentanyl methods. The accuracy of the 3 immunoassays was compared to LC-MS/MS as the reference method.

RESULTS

Spiking studies using purified fentanyl and norfentanyl and a set of 100 consecutive specimens confirmed the manufacturer's claims of limit of detection for fentanyl (3.8 ng/mL) and norfentanyl (5.0 ng/mL). However, the 92 low-positive patient specimens demonstrated concentrations of norfentanyl and fentanyl below 2.0 ng/mL by LC-MS/MS, with 47 (51%) having only norfentanyl detected. When comparing Lin-Zhi to the Immunalysis and ARK II immunoassays, only 27 (29%) of the 92 specimens were concordant. Fifty-two (57%) of the specimens were positive by LC-MS/MS and Lin-Zhi but false negative by one or both other immunoassays. Seven specimens (8%) were positive by Lin-Zhi but negative by the other immunoassays and had undetectable concentrations (<2 ng/mL) of fentanyl and norfentanyl by LC-MS/MS.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical sensitivity of the Lin-Zhi exceeds the manufacturer's claims, providing results comparable to LC-MS/MS methods.

Evaluating Clinical Sequelae of the Carbapenem-Valproate Interaction: A Retrospective Analysis

Background

Previous studies identified a rapid decrease in valproate serum concentrations when coadministered with a carbapenem; however, the specific consequences and subsequent therapy adjustments are not well described. We aimed to investigate the clinical and therapeutic implications of the carbapenem-valproate drug-drug interaction.

Methods

This retrospective analysis included data from 2 large academic medical centers during January 2017 to June 2022. The primary outcome was incidence of seizures or behavioral events stratified by valproate indication. All adult patient encounters with concomitant administration of any carbapenem antimicrobial and valproate were included. Patients without prolonged exposure to valproate prior to hospitalization, without valproate levels pre- and post-carbapenem administration, with an admitting diagnosis of seizure, with exposure to other agents that decrease valproate concentrations, or who had a seizure during the hospitalization prior to carbapenem exposure were excluded.

Results

Two hundred fifty-eight episodes of concomitant use among 78 unique adult patients were included. Valproate was used for seizure control in 41 patients (52.6%) and for mood-related disorders in 37 (47.4%). In those prescribed valproate for its antiepileptic properties, seizures occurred following carbapenem administration in 46.3% of encounters. In those taking valproate for mood-related disorders, 50.8% met the primary endpoint of behavioral disturbance.

Conclusions

Our study demonstrates significant clinical implications of the carbapenem-valproate interaction. Clinicians should be aware of this interaction and consider alternative antimicrobial and/or antiepileptic agents whenever possible. Adding or increasing doses of antiepileptic agents and/or consultation with a neurologist prior to concomitant use should be considered when this combination cannot be avoided.

Analysis of a Medication Safety Intervention in the Pediatric Emergency Department

Importance

Strategies to reduce medication dosing errors are crucial for improving outcomes. The Medication Education for Dosing Safety (MEDS) intervention, consisting of a simplified handout, dosing syringe, dose demonstration and teach-back, was shown to be effective in the emergency department (ED), but optimal intervention strategies to move it into clinical practice remain to be described.

Objective

To describe implementation of MEDS in routine clinical practice and associated outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This mixed-methods interrupted time series study of MEDS was conducted April 2021 to December 2022 in an academic pediatric ED using a hybrid type 1 design. Parents and guardians of children aged 90 days to 11.9 years who were discharged with acetaminophen, ibuprofen, or both were eligible for inclusion in the quantitative portion. Clinicians from a diversity of role groups (attending physician, resident, and nurse) were eligible for the qualitative portion.

Exposures

The study was conducted in 5 stages (baseline, intervention 1, washout, intervention 2, and sustainability phases). The 2 intervention phases taught clinical staff the MEDS intervention using different implementation strategies. During the intervention 1 phase, in-depth interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached; results were analyzed using thematic analysis. Interviews informed intervention 2 phase interventions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was any error (defined as dosing or frequency error) at a 48- to 72-hour follow-up phone call.

Results

There were 256 participants (median [IQR] child age, 1.7 [3.0-7.0] years; median [IQR] parent and guardian age, 36.0 [31.0-41.0] years; 200 females among parents and guardians [78.1%]) who consented and completed follow-up. At baseline, 44 of 68 participants (64.7%) made an error compared with 34 of 65 participants (52.3%) during intervention 1, 31 of 63 participants (49.X%) during intervention 2, and 34 of 60 participants (57.X%) during sustainability. After adjustment for language and health literacy, the adjusted odds ratio for error during the combined intervention phases was 0.52 (95% CI, 0.28-0.97) compared with baseline.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that both MEDS intervention phases were associated with decreased risk of error and that some improvement was sustained without active intervention. These findings suggest that attempts to develop simplified, brief interventions may be associated with improved medication safety for children after discharge from the ED.

Implementation of an Electronic Alert to Improve Timeliness of Second Dose Antibiotics for Patients With Suspected Serious Infections in the Emergency Department: A Quasi-Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Delays in the second dose of antibiotics in the emergency department (ED) are associated with increased morbidity and mortality in patients with serious infections. We analyzed the influence of clinical decision support to prevent delays in second doses of broad-spectrum antibiotics in the ED.

METHODS

We allocated adult patients who received cefepime or piperacillin/tazobactam in 9 EDs within an integrated health care system to an electronic alert that reminded ED clinicians to reorder antibiotics at the appropriate interval vs usual care. The primary outcome was a median delay in antibiotic administration. Secondary outcomes were rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, hospital mortality, and hospital length of stay. We included a post hoc secondary outcome of frequency of major delay (>25% of expected interval for second antibiotic dose).

RESULTS

A total of 1,113 ED patients treated with cefepime or piperacillin/tazobactam were enrolled in the study, of whom 420 remained under ED care when their second dose was due and were included in the final analysis. The clinical decision support tool was associated with reduced antibiotic delays (median difference 35 minutes, 95% confidence interval [CI], 5 to 65). There were no differences in ICU transfers, inpatient mortality, or hospital length of stay. The clinical decision support tool was associated with decreased probability of major delay (absolute risk reduction 13%, 95% CI, 6 to 20).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a clinical decision support alert reminding clinicians to reorder second doses of antibiotics was associated with a reduction in the length and frequency of antibiotic delays in the ED. There was no effect on the rates of ICU transfers, inpatient mortality, or hospital length of stay.

Cannabis positivity rates in 17 emergency departments across the United States with varying degrees of marijuana legalization

BACKGROUND

Many states in the United States have progressed towards legalization of marijuana including decriminalization, medicinal and/or recreational use. We studied the impact of legalization on cannabis-related emergency department visits in states with varying degrees of legalization.

METHODS

Seventeen healthcare institutions in fifteen states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Washington) participated. Cannabinoid immunoassay results and cannabis-related International Classification of Diseases (ninth and tenth versions) codes were obtained for emergency department visits over a 3- to 8-year period during various stages of legalization: no state laws, decriminalized, medical approval before dispensaries, medical dispensaries available, recreational approval before dispensaries and recreational dispensaries available. Trends and monthly rates of cannabinoid immunoassay and cannabis-related International Classification of Diseases code positivity were determined during these legalization periods.

RESULTS

For most states, there was a significant increase in both cannabinoid immunoassay and International Classification of Diseases code positivity as legalization progressed; however, positivity rates differed. The availability of dispensaries may impact positivity in states with medical and/or recreational approval. In most states with no laws, there was a significant but smaller increase in cannabinoid immunoassay positivity rates.

CONCLUSIONS

States may experience an increase in cannabis-related emergency department visits with progression toward marijuana legalization. The differences between states, including those in which no impact was seen, are likely multifactorial and include cultural norms, attitudes of local law enforcement, differing patient populations, legalization in surrounding states, availability of dispensaries, various ordering protocols in the emergency department, and the prevalence of non-regulated cannabis products.

Safety and Tolerability of 23.4% Hypertonic Saline Administered Over 2 to 5 Minutes for the Treatment of Cerebral Herniation and Intracranial Pressure Elevation

BACKGROUND

Hyperosmolar therapy is the cornerstone of medical management of sustained elevated intracranial pressure from cerebral edema. Acute intracranial hypertension and herniation is a medical emergency that requires rapid treatment and stabilization to prevent secondary brain injury or death. Intravenous hypertonic sodium chloride (NaCl) 23.4% is an effective treatment modality commonly used in this setting. Because of its high osmolarity, use has historically been limited primarily to central venous line administration as an intermittent infusion due to concerns about thrombophlebitis, injection site pain, and tissue necrosis or injury with extravasation. The objective of this analysis was to prospectively evaluate the safety of administration of 23.4% NaCl as a rapid intravenous push over 2-5 min.

METHODS

A prospective analysis of patients admitted between April 2021 and December 2021 who received 23.4% NaCl intravenous push over 2-5 min in a central or peripheral line was performed. Safety end points included incidence of new onset hypotension [defined as systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 90 mm Hg or SBP decrease of at least 20 mm Hg], bradycardia (defined as heart rate < 50 beats per minute), and infusion site reactions documented within 1 h of administration. For secondary safety outcomes, highest and lowest SBP and lowest heart rates documented within 1 h before 23.4% NaCl administration were compared with values collected within 1 h post administration and evaluated by mixed-design analysis of variance test with adjustment for peripheral versus central line administration.

RESULTS

We identified 32 patients who received 79 administrations of 23.4% NaCl through a central line or peripheral line during the study period. An SBP decrease of at least 20 mm Hg was observed in 13% of patients, an SBP < 90 mm Hg occurred in 16% of patients, and bradycardia occurred in 3% of patients who received 23.4% NaCl. Injection site pain was reported by one patient without documented thrombophlebitis, cellulitis, or tissue damage. Pain was not reported during two subsequent administrations in the same patient. There was no documented occurrence of soft tissue injury or necrosis in any patient. Compared with baseline vital signs before 23.4% NaCl administration, no difference in vital signs post administration was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Central and peripheral administration of 23.4% NaCl over 2-5 min was well tolerated, and incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, or infusion site-related adverse events was rare.

High risk and low prevalence diseases: Acute chest syndrome in sickle cell disease

INTRODUCTION

Acute chest syndrome (ACS) in sickle cell disease (SCD) is a serious condition that carries with it a high rate of morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

This review highlights the pearls and pitfalls of ACS in SCD, including diagnosis and management in the emergency department (ED) based on current evidence.

DISCUSSION

ACS is defined by respiratory symptoms and/or fever and a new radiodensity on chest imaging in a patient with SCD. There are a variety of inciting causes, including infectious and non-infectious etiologies. Although ACS is more common in those with homozygous SCD, clinicians should consider ACS in all SCD patients, as ACS is a leading cause of death in SCD. Patients typically present with or develop respiratory symptoms including fever, cough, chest pain, and shortness of breath, which can progress to respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation in 20% of adult patients. However, the initial presentation can vary. While the first line imaging modality is classically chest radiograph, lung ultrasound has demonstrated promise. Further imaging to include computed tomography may be necessary. Management focuses on analgesia, oxygen supplementation, incentive spirometry, bronchodilators, rehydration, antibiotics, consideration for transfusion, and specialist consultation. Empiric antibiotics that cover atypical pathogens are necessary along with measures to increase oxygen-carrying capacity in those with hypoxemia such as simple transfusion or exchange transfusion.

CONCLUSIONS

An understanding of ACS can assist emergency clinicians in diagnosing and managing this potentially deadly disease.

A retrospective review of implementation of an inhaled epoprostenol protocol in the emergency department

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled epoprostenol is a selective pulmonary vasodilator that has shown a potentially broad number of applications in the management of critically ill patients. To date, the vast majority of the literature with regard to efficacy, indications for use, and adverse effects of inhaled epoprostenol is focused on use of this agent in critical care settings, with relatively little literature describing use of inhaled epoprostenol in the Emergency Department. This retrospective review sought to examine instances in which inhaled epoprostenol was administered in the Emergency Department of a tertiary-care, Level I trauma center following implementation of a clinical pathway for administration of this medication for cases of refractory hypoxemia, RV dysfunction, and refractory hypoxemia. Primary outcomes were monitoring for adverse effects (i.e. hypotension), trend in FiO2 requirement over time, and clinical indication for initiation of inhaled epoprostenol.

METHODS

An automated review was performed to query cases in which inhaled epoprostenol had been initiated in the Emergency Department following adoption of the inhaled epoprostenol clinical pathway. Cases were excluded if the medication was initiated in the prehospital setting, ordered but not administered, or administered for a period of <1 h. Vital signs and co-administration of vasopressors were followed before and following epoprostenol administration to assess for change over time. Clinical indication of epoprostenol administration was assessed via manual chart review.

RESULTS

Inhaled epoprostenol was administered in 20 instances, with 15 cases ultimately meeting inclusion criteria. There were no cases of clinically significant hypotension (MAP <65) in any of the cases in which inhaled epoprostenol was administered in the Emergency Department, and mean vasopressor requirement did not increase over time. A majority of patients saw a reduction in FiO2 requirement following administration of inhaled epoprostenol. The most common indication for initiation of inhaled epoprostenol based on manual chart review was pulmonary embolism.

DISCUSSION

In this review of cases in which inhaled epoprostenol was administered following adoption of a clinical pathway for medication administration, there were no cases of hypotension or other adverse effects that appear to be attributable to medication administration. Pulmonary embolism and refractory hypoxemia were the most common noted indications for administration of inhaled epoprostenol. Further research is warranted regarding development of clinical protocols for administration of inhaled pulmonary vasodilators in the Emergency Department setting.

Effects of a pharmacy-driven medication history program on patient outcomes

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

Obtaining an accurate medication history is a vital component of medication reconciliation upon admission to the hospital. Despite the importance of this task, medication histories are often inaccurate and/or incomplete. We evaluated the association of a pharmacy-driven medication history initiative on clinical outcomes of patients admitted to the general medicine service of an academic medical center.

METHODS

Comparing patients who received a pharmacy-driven medication history to those who did not, a retrospective stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting propensity score analysis was used to estimate the average treatment effect of the intervention on general medical patients. Fifty-two patient baseline characteristics including demographic, operational, and clinical variables were controlled in the propensity score model. Hospital length of stay, 7-day and 30-day unplanned readmissions, and in-hospital mortality were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 11,576 eligible general medical patients, 2,234 (19.30%) received a pharmacy-driven medication history and 9,342 (80.70%) patients did not. The estimated average treatment effect of receiving a pharmacy-driven medication history was a shorter length of stay (mean, 5.88 days vs 6.53 days; P = 0.0002) and a lower in-hospital mortality rate (2.34% vs 3.72%, P = 0.001), after adjustment for differences in patient baseline characteristics. No significant difference was found for 7-day or 30-day all-cause readmission rates.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacy-driven medication histories reduced length of stay and in-hospital mortality in patients admitted to the general medical service at an academic medical center but did not change 7-day and 30-day all-cause readmission rates. Further research via a large, multisite randomized controlled trial is needed to confirm our findings.

Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine and Referral to Follow-up Addiction Care: A Program Description

INTRODUCTION

Emergency department (ED) initiated opioid use disorder (OUD) care is effective; however, real-world predictors of patient engagement are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

This program evaluation examined predictors of ED-based OUD treatment and subsequent engagement.

METHOD

Program evaluation in Boston, MA. Adult patients who met criteria for OUD during an ED visit in 2019 were included. Patients were included if a diagnosis of OUD or opioid-related overdose was associated with the ED visit or if they met previously validated criteria for OUD within the previous 12 months. We assessed predictors of ED-OUD treatment receipt and subsequent engagement, using Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set definition of initial encounter within 14 days of discharge and either 2 subsequent encounters or a subsequent buprenorphine prescription within 34 days of the initial encounter. We used generalized estimating equations for panel data.

RESULTS

During 2019, 1946 patients met criteria for OUD. Referrals to Bridge Clinic were made for 207 (11%), buprenorphine initiated for 106 (5%), and home induction buprenorphine kits given to 56 (3%). Following ED discharge, 237 patients (12%) had a visit within 14 days, 122 (6%) had ≥2 additional visits, and 207 (11%) received a subsequent buprenorphine prescription. Young, White, male patients were most likely to receive ED-OUD care. Patients who received ED-OUD care were more likely to have subsequent treatment engagement (adjusted rate ratio: 2.30, 95% confidence intervals: 1.62-3.27). Referrals were made less often than predicted for Black (-49%) or Hispanic/Latinx (-25%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiating treatment for OUD in the ED was associated with increased engagement in outpatient addiction care.

Intoxication related to substances use in patients presenting to Ain Shams University Poisoning Treatment Center, Cairo, Egypt (2015-2019)

INTRODUCTION

Illicit drug use may result in several emergencies. Hospital emergency data can help to detect new patterns of substance use and high-risk trends of drug use. This epidemiological study aimed to investigate the pattern and outcome of cases with substance use intoxication who presented to Ain Shams University Poisoning Treatment Centre, Cairo, Egypt.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all cases of acute intoxication due to use/misuse of substances who presented to the centre during the period (2015-2019).

RESULTS

The study included 11 281 cases; young adults (aged 20-40 years) represented the greatest proportion of cases (6519, 57.8%). Males were the predominant gender in all age groups (representing 79.2% of the cases). Tramadol was the most common substance of exposure in all age groups except for children and adolescents where cannabis was the most common one. There were 162 fatalities (1.4% of all cases) and opioids had the greatest case fatality rate.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Tramadol was the most used drug that resulted in acute intoxication, followed by cannabis. A total of 43.6% of the cases of acute intoxications were due to recreational use/misuse of prescription drugs.

Perineural Dexamethasone as a Peripheral Nerve Block Adjuvant in the Emergency Department: A Case Series

BACKGROUND

Acute pain is one of the most common complaints encountered in the emergency department (ED). Single-injection peripheral nerve blocks are a safe and effective pain management tool when performed in the ED. Dexamethasone has been explored as an adjuvant to prolong duration of analgesia from peripheral nerve blocks in peri- and postoperative settings; however, data surrounding the use of dexamethasone for ED-performed nerve blocks are lacking.

CASE SERIES

In this case series we discuss our experience with adjunctive perineural dexamethasone in ED-performed regional anesthesia. Why Should an Emergency Physician be Aware of This?: Nerve blocks performed with adjuvant perineural dexamethasone may be a safe additive to provide analgesia beyond the expected half-life of local anesthetic alone. Prospective studies exploring the role of adjuvant perineural dexamethasone in ED-performed nerve blocks are needed. © 2021 Elsevier Inc.

Use of antipsychotic and sedative medications in older patients in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotics and sedatives are used to treat agitation in the emergency department (ED) but carry significant risk in older adults. Our objective was to determine factors associated with their administration to older ED patients.

METHODS

This was an observational study using data from the 2014-2017 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. We identified ED visits for patients aged ≥65 years and determined whether an antipsychotic or sedative was administered. Visits related to substance use/withdrawal, other psychiatric complaints, and intubation were excluded. We performed multivariable logistic regression to identify risk factors for antipsychotic or sedative administration.

RESULTS

Of the 78.7 million ED visits that met inclusion criteria, 3.5% involved at least one dose of antipsychotic or sedative medication; 13% involved an antipsychotic and 92% a sedative. Factors associated with antipsychotic administration included nursing home residence (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.67; 95% CI: 1.05-6.80), dementia (aOR: 5.62; 95% CI: 2.44-12.94), and delirium (aOR: 7.33; 95% CI: 2.21-24.32). Sedative administration was positively associated with CT or MR imaging (aOR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.42-2.43), urbanicity of ED (aOR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.02-2.08), and female gender (aOR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.08-1.99) and negatively associated with older age (age: 75-84; aOR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.49-0.91; age: 85+; aOR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.45-0.88; reference age: 65-74 years). Antipsychotic and sedative administration were associated with prolonged ED lengths of stay and hospital admission.

CONCLUSION

We identified patient- and facility-level factors associated with sedative and antipsychotic administration in older ED patients. Antipsychotic and sedative administration were associated with prolonged ED lengths of stay and hospital admission.

Continuation of outpatient buprenorphine therapy after dispensing Buprenorphine-Naloxone from the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) are frequently seen in the ED for opioid-related reasons, which creates an opportunity for ED providers to discuss medications for OUD with their patients. Buprenorphine is a partial mu-opioid agonist that is FDA approved to treat OUD and may be initiated in the ED. Traditionally, buprenorphine therapy was initiated under healthcare provider observation; however, other strategies such as at-home induction have also emerged.

METHODS

This was a retrospective descriptive analysis of patients aged 18 years or older who received a take-home supply of buprenorphine-naloxone from an urban, academic ED between March 2018 and March 2020. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who filled a prescription for buprenorphine at three months after index ED visit. The proportion of patients that filled a prescription for buprenorphine at six months was also evaluated. The primary safety endpoint was the proportion of patients with return ED visit within six months related to opioid overdose.

RESULTS

There were 242 patient records reviewed with 155 patients included in final analysis. Seventy (45.2%) patients filled buprenorphine prescriptions at three months, with 64 (41.3%) who filled buprenorphine prescriptions at six months. Seventeen (11%) patients had a return ED visit related to opioid overdose within six months.

CONCLUSION

Dispensing buprenorphine take-home kits from the ED resulted in continuation of outpatient buprenorphine in almost 50% of patients. Further studies are warranted to define the role of ED-dispensed buprenorphine.

Sedation - Effects of disorders of abuse on therapeutic efficacy (SEDATE): A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The impact of alcohol or opioid use disorders on medication dosing for procedural sedation in the emergency department (ED) is unclear, as most of the literature is from gastrointestinal endoscopy. Exploring how these patient factors affect sedative and analgesic medications may inform more nuanced sedation strategies in the emergency department.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart-review cohort study across five EDs from 2015 to 2020. Included were adult patients who underwent procedural sedation in the ED, categorized into three a priori groups: alcohol use disorder (AUD), opioid use disorder (OUD), and individuals with neither (non-SUD). Wilcoxon test was used to compare the time-averaged dose of agents between groups. Logistic regression was used to model multi-agent sedations. The propofol time-averaged dose was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included other agents, sedation duration, and switching to other agents.

RESULTS

2725 sedations were included in the analysis. 59 patients had a history of AUD, and 40 had a history of OUD. Time-averaged doses of medications did not differ significantly between AUD and non-SUD patients. Likewise, patients with OUD did not receive different doses of medications compared to non-SUD. The propofol doses for non-SUD, AUD, and OUD were 0.033 IQR 0.04; 0.042 IQR 0.05; and 0.058 IQR 0.04 mg/kg*min, respectively. Sedation duration was not different across groups. Having AUD or OUD is not associated with increased odds of requiring multiple sedative agents.

CONCLUSION

Although sedation in patients with AUD or OUD may be associated with significant case bias, these patient factors did not significantly alter outcomes compared to the general population. This study suggests there is no evidence to proactively adjust medication strategy in ED patients with AUD or OUD.

Initiation of a fixed-dose four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate protocol

Patients who require urgent warfarin reversal often receive four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC), which is traditionally dosed according to weight and initial INR. Our institution implemented a fixed-dose 4F-PCC strategy, using an initial dose of 1500 units. We evaluated the frequency with which the initial fixed dose 4F-PCC was inadequate, as defined by need for supplemental dosing. As part of the protocol, if the initial fixed-dose 4F-PCC is administered and does not achieve INR goal, then the remainder of the standard weight- and INR-based dosing can be given. During the study period, 63 patients on warfarin received 4F-PCC using the fixed-dose protocol. Based on the INR following 4F-PCC administration, 11 patients (17%) were eligible to receive a supplemental dose based on failure to achieve their specified INR goal. Two of the 11 patients eligible for supplemental 4F-PCC dosing received the second dose, both with initial supratherapeutic INRs > 3.5. We found that most patients given an initial fixed-dose 4F-PCC achieved their INR goals, and of those who did not, most did not receive supplemental dosing, suggesting that clinical providers felt that adequate hemostasis had been achieved. In addition, fixed-dose 4F-PCC was able to be given rapidly, with few dosing errors, suggesting that this is a reasonable option for 4F-PCC delivery.

1482. Local validation of the drug resistance in pneumonia clinical prediction score at a large academic medical center and a community hospital

Background

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is responsible for ~1 million emergency department (ED) visits yearly and the leading cause of infection-related deaths. Given that increasing antibiotic resistance rates complicate appropriate empiric antibiotic selection, clinicians may benefit from tools to help identify patients at risk for drug-resistant pathogens (DRPs). Limitations of traditional tools, such as healthcare-associated pneumonia criteria (HCAP), have led to development of novel scoring tools such as the drug resistance in pneumonia (DRIP) score. Webb et al. showed the DRIP score was more predictive of CAP caused by DRPs than HCAP criteria. The objective of this study was to validate the DRIP score in a local population of hospitalized patients at an academic and a community medical center.

Methods

Patients who presented to the ED between May 2017 and May 2019 were included in this retrospective review. Patients were included if they were ≥ 18 years diagnosed with CAP by radiographic evidence with respiratory culture positivity and susceptibility results. Exclusion criteria were: presence of non-bacterial non-respiratory pathogens, patients with cystic fibrosis, lung transplant or systemic co-infections. The primary outcome was validation of the DRIP score by comparing the sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values (NPV/PPV) to the derivation and validation study by Webb et al. Secondary outcomes were the percentage of CAP cases with DRPs and the predictability of DRP using the DRIP score versus HCAP criteria.

Results

A total of 164 patients were included; 60.4% were male with a median age of 70 years. The primary outcome shown in Table 1 demonstrated similar sensitivity, specificity, NPV, and PPV of the DRIP score to those in the study by Webb et al. Staphylococcus aureus (32.9%) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (27.4%) were the most commonly isolated pathogens and CAP due to DRPs occurred in 30.5% of patients. The DRIP score also demonstrated improved performance in predicting DRPs in CAP compared to the HCAP Criteria as shown in Table 2.

Table 1. DRIP Score Validation

Conclusion

Our results further validate the DRIP score derived by Webb et al. in predicting DRPs in CAP. These results encourage a local prospective evaluation of the DRIP score as an antimicrobial stewardship tool.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures

Beyond Buprenorphine: Models of Follow-up Care for Opioid Use Disorder in the Emergeny Department

Recent evidence shows that emergency physicians (EP) can help patients obtain evidence-based treatment for Opioid Use Disorder by starting medication for addiction treatment (MAT) directly in the Emergency Department (ED). Many EDs struggle to provide options for maintenance treatment once patients are discharged from the ED. Health systems around the country are in need of a care delivery structure to link ED patients with OUD to care following initiation of buprenorphine. This paper reviews the three most common approaches to form effective partnerships between EDs and primary care/addiction medicine services: the Project Alcohol and Substance Abuse Services and Referral to Treatment (ASSERT) model, Bridge model, and ED-Bridge model.

The ASSERT Model is characterized by peer educators or community workers in the ED directly referring patients suffering from OUD in the ED to local addiction treatment services. The Bridge model encourages prescribing physicians in an ED to screen patients for OUD, provide a short-term prescription for buprenorphine, and then refer the patient directly to an outpatient Bridge Clinic that is co-located in the same hospital but is a separate from the ED. This Bridge Clinic is staffed by addiction trained physicians and mid-level clinicians. The ED-Bridge model employs physicians trained in both emergency medicine and addiction medicine to serve within the ED as well as in the follow up addiction clinic.

Distinct from the Bridge Clinic model above, EPs in the ED-Bridge model are both able to screen at-risk patients in the ED, often starting treatment, and to longitudinally follow patients in a regularly scheduled addiction clinic. This paper provides examples of these three models as well as implementation and logistical details to support a health system to better address OUD in their communities.

Medication Education for Dosing Safety: A Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This study sought to determine whether a brief intervention at the time of emergency department (ED) discharge can improve safe dosing of liquid acetaminophen and ibuprofen by parents or guardians.

METHODS

We performed a randomized controlled trial in the ED of parents and guardians of children 90 days to 11.9 years of age who were discharged with acetaminophen or ibuprofen, or both. Families were randomized to standard care or a teaching intervention combining lay language, simplified handouts, provision of an unmarked dosing syringe, and teach-back to confirm correct dosing. Participants were called 48 to 72 hours and 5 to 7 days after ED discharge to assess understanding of correct dosing. The primary outcome was defined as parent or guardian report of safe dosing at the time of first follow-up call. Our primary hypothesis was that the intervention would decrease the rate of error from 30% to 10% at 48- to 72-hour follow-up.

RESULTS

We enrolled 149 of 259 (58%) eligible subjects; 97 of 149 (65%) were reached at first follow-up call, of whom 35 of 97 (36%) received the intervention. Among those participants receiving the intervention, 25 of 35 (71%) were able to identify a safe dose for their child at the time of the first call compared with 28 of 62 (45%) of those in the control arm. The difference in proportions was 26% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7% to 46%). There was a 58% increase in reporting safe dosing in the intervention group compared with the control roup (relative risk 1.58; 95% CI 1.12 to 2.24), and it remained significant after adjustment for health literacy and language (adjusted relative risk 1.50; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.13).

CONCLUSIONS

A multifaceted intervention at the time of ED discharge-consisting of a simplified dosing handout, a teaching session, teach-back, and provision of a standardized dosing device-can improve parents' knowledge of safe dosing of liquid medications at 48 to 72 hours.

COVID-19: Therapeutics and Their Toxicities

SARS-CoV-2 is a novel coronavirus that emerged in 2019 and is causing the COVID-19 pandemic. There is no current standard of care. Clinicians need to be mindful of the toxicity of a wide variety of possibly unfamiliar substances being tested or repurposed to treat COVID-19. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has provided emergency authorization for the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine. These two medications may precipitate ventricular dysrhythmias, necessitating cardiac and electrolyte monitoring, and in severe cases, treatment with epinephrine and high-doses of diazepam. Recombinant protein therapeutics may cause serum sickness or immune complex deposition. Nucleic acid vaccines may introduce mutations into the human genome. ACE inhibitors and ibuprofen have been suggested to exacerbate the pathogenesis of COVID-19. Here, we review the use, mechanism of action, and toxicity of proposed COVID-19 therapeutics.

Intentional Hydroxychloroquine Overdose Treated with High-Dose Diazepam: an Increasing Concern in the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

Recent attention on the possible use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine to treat COVID-19 disease has potentially triggered a number of overdoses from hydroxychloroquine. Toxicity from hydroxychloroquine manifests with cardiac conduction abnormalities, seizure activity, and muscle weakness. Recognizing this toxidrome and unique management of this toxicity is important in the COVID-19 pandemic.

CASE REPORT

A 27-year-old man with a history of rheumatoid arthritis presented to the emergency department 7 hours after an intentional overdose of hydroxychloroquine. Initial presentation demonstrated proximal muscle weakness. The patient was found to have a QRS complex of 134 ms and QTc of 710 ms. He was treated with early orotracheal intubation and intravenous diazepam boluses. Due to difficulties formulating continuous diazepam infusions, we opted to utilize an intermitted intravenous bolus strategy that achieved similar effects that a continuous infusion would. The patient recovered without residual side effects.

DISCUSSION

Hydroxychloroquine toxicity is rare but projected to increase in frequency given its selection as a potential modality to treat COVID-19 disease. It is important for clinicians to recognize the unique effects of hydroxychloroquine poisoning and initiate appropriate emergency maneuvers to improve the outcomes in these patients.

Evaluation of andexanet alfa and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for reversal of rivaroxaban- and apixaban-associated intracranial hemorrhages

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Before approval of andexanet alfa, off-label treatment with 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) was often utilized for the management of life-threatening hemorrhages associated with oral factor Xa inhibitors. We evaluated the operational processes and outcomes of patients with oral factor Xa inhibitor-associated intracranial hemorrhages (ICH) treated with andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective, single-center case series of rivaroxaban or apixaban-associated ICH between 2016-2019 treated with andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC. Good or excellent hemostatic effectiveness, good functional outcome (Glasgow Outcome Score [GOS]> 3) at hospital discharge, and incidence of thrombosis within 30 days were reported.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were included in the andexanet alfa cohort and 11 in the 4F-PCC cohort. Excellent or good hemostasis occurred in 88.9% of andexanet alfa-treated patients and 60% of 4F-PCC-treated patients. Good functional outcome on discharge occurred in 55.6% of andexanet alfa-treated patients and 9.1% of 4F-PCC-treated patients. Thrombotic complications occurred in 16.7% of andexanet alfa-treated patients and 9.1% of 4F-PCC-treated patients. Median order-to-administration time was 1.1 hours [0.8-1.4] versus 0.5 hours [0.1-0.8] in the andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC group, respectively. The median cost of therapy was $29970/patient versus $6925/patient in the andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed higher rates of occurrence of good or excellent hemostasis and GOS > 3 on hospital discharge and increased incidence of thrombosis in patients who received andexanet alfa compared to 4F-PCC for oral factor Xa inhibitor reversal. However, patients receiving 4F-PCC had lower pre-reversal Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS)score and larger pre-reversal ICH volume.

Evaluation of esmolol for heart rate control in patients with acute aortic dissection

PURPOSE

Acute aortic dissection is a serious and life-threatening condition that requires prompt, effective management. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of esmolol for heart rate control in patients with acute aortic dissection in the Emergency Department (ED).

METHODS

This was a retrospective, descriptive analysis of patients treated for type A or type B acute aortic dissection in the ED at an academic medical center. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving strict (≤60 bpm) or lenient (≤80 bpm) heart rate control within the first 60 min of therapy at the study site. The primary safety endpoint was the incidence of hypotension, defined as a systolic blood pressure of <90 mmHg or a mean arterial pressure of ≤60 mmHg.

RESULTS

Of 266 patients screened, 40 patients met inclusion criteria. Thirty-three patients (82.5%) attained lenient rate control within the first 60 min of esmolol therapy. Eleven patients (27.5%) achieved a strict heart rate goal within the first 60 min of esmolol therapy. Five patients (12.5%) experienced an episode of hypotension during the first 3 h of esmolol therapy.

CONCLUSION

In patients treated with esmolol infusion for acute aortic dissection, a lenient HR goal was achieved in most patients. In contrast, esmolol was not associated with attainment of strict HR control in most patients included in this sample. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the exact role of esmolol in acute aortic dissection in a larger patient population.

Beta-lactam antibiotic test doses in the emergency department

Background

Facilitating beta-lactam antibiotic use in patients reporting beta-lactam allergies in acute care settings is important to individual patient outcomes and public health; however, few initiatives have targeted the Emergency Department (ED) setting.

Methods

We implemented pathways for patients reporting prior penicillin and/or cephalosporin hypersensitivity as part of a hospital guideline in the ED of a large academic medical center in the United States. We described beta-lactam test doses, pathway compliance, hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs), and allergy record updating associated with ED-administered beta-lactam test doses from October 2016 to June 2018.

Results

310 beta-lactam antibiotic test doses were administered to patients with penicillin and/or cephalosporin allergy histories in the study period (average volume 15/month [standard deviation 4]). Test doses were to cephalosporins (85%), penicillins (12%), and carbapenems (4%). 219 (71%) of test doses were compliant with the pathways. Ten patients (3.2%; 95% CI 1.6%-5.9%) had HSRs; five HSR patients (50%) had beta-lactams administered that were not pathway compliant. The allergy record was updated in 146 (47%) of patients, with improvement over the study period (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Inpatient approaches to prescribing beta-lactams in patients reporting beta-lactam allergies can be operationalized in the ED. Additional efforts are required to ensure guideline compliance and appropriate allergy documentation.

Agreement between self-reported psychoactive substance use and urine toxicology results for adults with opioid use disorder admitted to hospital

Hospitals often perform urine drug screens (UDS) upon inpatient admission to confirm self-reported psychoactive substance use for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). We sought to evaluate the agreement between UDS and patient self-report for psychoactive substances detected with UDS for adults with OUD admitted to hospital. For 11 substance categories, we evaluated agreement between the UDS and the documented history over a 5-year period for consecutive adults admitted to one academic center with a history of OUD. Among the 153 patients, overall agreement across the 1683 different history/UDS pairs (i.e. either history+/UDS + or history-/UDS-) was high (81.3%) but varied (from lowest to highest) by substance [opiates (56.9%), benzodiazepines (66.0%), 6-acetylmorphine (67.3%), cocaine (81.0%), cannabinoids (81.0%), methadone (83.7%), buprenorphine (85.0%), amphetamine (94.8%), barbiturates (95.4%), and phencyclidine (98.7%)]. History+/UDS- pair mismatches were most frequent for 6-acetylmorphine (32.7%), methadone (14.3%) and oxycodone (12.4%); history-/UDS + pair mismatches were most frequent for opiates (43.1%), benzodiazepines (24.8%) and cannabinoids (18.3%). The change in agreement over time of self-reported heroin use may reflect an increasing number of patients unknowingly using illicit fentanyl products. Among hospitalized patients with OUD, agreement between reported psychoactive substance use history and UDS results is strong with the exception of opiates, heroin, and benzodiazepines.

Acute and delayed toxicity from co-ingestion of methylene chloride and methanol

Methylene chloride is a volatile, chlorinated hydrocarbon and colorless solvent found in multiple industrial products including paint strippers, metal cleaners, automotive products, pesticides and aerosol containers. Occupational exposure to methylene chloride is reported in automotive technicians, painters, and other industrial workers with adverse health effects including gastrointestinal, neurological, as well as hepato-renal injuries. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies methylene chloride as a 2 A carcinogen. Through a series of reactions catalyzed by cytochrome P450 2E1 (CYP2E1), metabolism of methylene chloride leads to the formation of formyl chloride, and ultimately carbon monoxide (CO). Most reports of methylene chloride toxicity are due to dermal and inhalational exposure in occupational settings. Ingestion of methylene chloride is uncommon, yet can lead to significant toxicity and prolonged CO toxicity. Methylene chloride is frequently formulated with methanol; individuals who intentionally ingest methylene chloride can experience concomitant methanol toxicity. We present a case of acute ingestion of paint stripper containing methanol and methylene chloride. We discuss the clinical presentation, key management decisions, relevant pathophysiology and biochemistry, as well as the clinical course and management.

Calculated Decisions: tPA (Tissue Plasminogen Activator) Dosing for Stroke Calculator

The tPA dosing for stroke calculator indicates the weight-based dose of tPA for stroke patients.

Thromboembolic Risk of 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate versus Fresh Frozen Plasma for Urgent Warfarin Reversal in the Emergency Department

Introduction

Warfarin is a potent anticoagulant used for the prevention and treatment of venous and arterial thrombosis. Occasionally, patients require emergent warfarin reversal due to active bleeding, supratherapeutic international normalized ratio, or emergent diagnostic or therapeutic interventions. Various agents can be used for emergent warfarin reversal, including fresh frozen plasma (FFP) and 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC). Both FFP and 4F-PCC are generally considered safe; however, both agents contain coagulation factors and have the potential to provoke a thromboembolic event. Although clinical trials have compared the efficacy and safety of FFP and 4F-PCC, data are limited comparing the risk of thromboembolism between the two agents.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed at a single, urban, academic medical center comparing the incidence of thromboembolism with FFP or 4F-PCC for warfarin reversal during a three-year period in the emergency department (ED) at Massachusetts General Hospital. Patients were included in the study if they were at least 18 years of age and were on warfarin per electronic health records. Patients were excluded if they had received both FFP and 4F-PCC during the same visit. The primary outcome was the frequency of thromboembolism within 30 days of 4F-PCC or FFP. Secondary outcomes included time to thromboembolic event and in-hospital mortality.

Results

Three hundred and thirty-six patients met the inclusion criteria. Thromboembolic events within 30 days of therapy occurred in seven patients (2.7%) in the FFP group and 14 patients (17.7%) in the 4F-PCC group (p=<0.001). Death occurred in 39 patients (15.2%) who received FFP and 18 patients (22.8%) who received 4F-PCC (p=0.115). Since the 4F-PCC group was treated disproportionately for central nervous system (CNS) bleeding, a subgroup analysis was performed including patients requiring reversal due to CNS bleeds that received vitamin K. The primary outcome remained statistically significant, occurring in four patients (4.1%) in the FFP group and nine patients (14.1%) in the 4F-PCC group (p=0.02).

Conclusion

Our study found a significantly higher risk of thromboembolic events in patients receiving 4F-PCC compared to FFP for urgent warfarin reversal. This difference remained statistically significant when controlled for CNS bleeds and administration of vitamin K.

Impact of a Pharmacist-Driven Prothrombin Complex Concentrate Protocol on Time to Administration in Patients with Warfarin-associated Intracranial Hemorrhage

Introduction

Advancements in the treatment of warfarin-associated intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) include the use of four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC), which has demonstrated more rapid reversal of the international normalized ratio (INR) when compared with fresh frozen plasma. A pharmacist-driven protocol for 4F-PCC was implemented within our institution, which allows for pharmacist approval of 4F-PCC in patients diagnosed with warfarin-associated ICH and an INR ≥2. The pharmacist is responsible for determining the appropriate dose of 4F-PCC, preparation, bedside delivery, and order entry into the electronic medical record. Prior to implementation of the new protocol, the blood bank was responsible for 4F-PCC approval, dosing, product preparation, and arranging delivery with emergency department (ED) staff. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a pharmacist-driven protocol on time to 4F-PCC administration in warfarin-associated ICH.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of consecutive patients who received 4F-PCC in a single ED from September 2015 through February 2017. Patients ≥18 years old were eligible for inclusion based on three criteria: confirmed diagnosis of ICH; confirmed warfarin use; and INR ≥2. Secondary outcomes included dose of 4F-PCC in concordance with INR and weight-based dosing recommendations and hospital protocol, as well as concomitant intravenous vitamin K administration.

Results

A total of 48 patients met inclusion criteria for the study with 24 patients in each protocol group. The median time to administration of 4F-PCC in the pharmacist-driven protocol group was 35 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] [25–62]; range, 11–133) compared with 70 minutes (IQR [34–89]; range, 14–244) in the pre-protocol group (p=0.034). We saw no differences for appropriate 4F-PCC dosing based on INR and patient weight between the two groups.

Conclusion

Implementation of a pharmacist-driven protocol for 4F-PCC in the ED at our institution significantly reduced time to administration in patients presenting with warfarin-associated ICH.