A multi-faceted approach to increase appropriate analgesia prescribing in the emergency department.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ratneswaran C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4693099 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivePrevious research has suggested caution about opioid analgesic usage in the emergency department (ED) setting and raised concerns about variations in prescription opioid analgesic usage, both across institutions and for whom they are prescribed. We examined opioid analgesic usage in ED patients with suspected urolithiasis across fifteen participating hospitals.MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of a clinical trial including adult ED patients with suspected urolithiasis. In multilevel models accounting for clustering by hospital, we assessed demographic, clinical, state-level, and hospital-level factors associated with opioid analgesic administration during the ED visit and prescription at discharge.ResultsOf 2352 participants, 67% received an opioid analgesic during the ED visit and 61% were prescribed one at discharge. Opioid analgesic usage varied greatly across hospitals, ranging from 46% to 88% (during visit) and 34% to 85% (at discharge). Hispanic patients were less likely than non-Hispanic white patients to receive opioid analgesics during the ED visit (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.94). Patients with higher education (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.05-1.59), health insurance coverage (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02-1.60), or receiving care in states with a prescription drug monitoring program (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.06-2.53) were more likely to receive an opioid analgesic prescription at ED discharge.ConclusionWe found marked hospital-level differences in opioid analgesic administration and prescribing, as well as associations with education, healthcare insurance, and race/ethnicity groups. These data might compel clinicians and hospitals to examine their opioid use practices to ensure it is congruent with accepted medical practice.
| S-EPMC7704692 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Antibiotics are some of the most commonly prescribed drugs in the Emergency Department (ED) and yet data describing the overall appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in the ED is scarce. Objectives:To describe the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in the ED. Methods:A retrospective, observational study of current practice. All patients who presented to the ED during the study period and were prescribed at least one antibiotic were included. Specialists from Infectious Disease, Microbiology and Emergency Medicine and a Senior Pharmacist assessed antibiotic appropriateness against evidence-based guidelines. Results:A total of 1019 (13.6%) of patient presentations involved the prescription of at least one antibiotic. Of these, 640 (62.8%) antibiotic prescriptions were assessed as appropriate, 333 (32.7%) were assessed as inappropriate and 46 (4.5%) were deemed to be not assessable. Adults were more likely to receive an inappropriate antibiotic prescription than children (36.9% versus 22.9%; difference 14.1%, 95% CI 7.2%-21.0%). Patients who met quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) criteria were more likely to be prescribed inappropriate antibiotics (56.7% versus 36.1%; difference 20.5%, 95% CI, 2.4%-38.7%). There was no difference in the incidence of appropriate antibiotic prescribing based on patient gender, disposition (admitted/discharged), reason for antibiotic administration (treatment/prophylaxis) or time of shift (day/night). Conclusions:Inappropriate administration of antibiotics can lead to unnecessary adverse events, treatment failure and antimicrobial resistance. With over one in three antibiotic prescriptions in the ED being assessed as inappropriate, there is a pressing need to develop initiatives to improve antibiotic prescribing to prevent antibiotic-associated patient and community harms.
| S-EPMC6337898 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about determinants of appropriate antibiotic use in the emergency department (ED). We measured appropriateness of antibiotic use for seven quality indicators (QIs) and studied patient-related factors that determine their variation.Patients and methodsA retrospective analysis of 948 patients presumptively diagnosed as having an infection needing empirical antibiotic treatment in the ED was performed. Outcomes of seven previously validated QIs were calculated using computerized algorithms. We used logistic regression analysis to identify patient-related factors of QI performance and evaluated whether more appropriate antibiotic use in the ED results in better patient outcomes (length-of-stay, in-hospital mortality, 30 day readmission).ResultsQI performance ranged from 57.3% for guideline-adherent empirical therapy to 97.3% for appropriate route of administration in patients with sepsis. QI performance was positively associated with patients' disease severity on admission (presence of fever, tachycardia and hypotension). Overall, the clinical diagnosis and thus the guidelines followed influenced QI performance. The difference in complexity between the guidelines was a possible explanation for the variation in QI performance. A QI performance sum score of 100% was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality. QI performance was not associated with readmission rates.ConclusionsWe gained insights into factors that determine quality of antibiotic prescription in the ED. Adherence to the full bundle of QIs was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality. These findings suggest that future stewardship interventions in the ED should focus on the entire process of antibiotic prescribing in the ED and not on a single metric only.
| S-EPMC8210121 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Delays to adequate analgesia result in worse patient care, decreased patient and provider satisfaction and increased patient complaints. The leading presenting symptom to emergency departments (EDs) is pain, with approximately 34 000 such patients per year in our academic hospital ED and 3300 visits specific for musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries. Our aim was to reduce the time-to-analgesia (TTA; time from patient triage to receipt of analgesia) for patients with MSK pain in our ED by 55% (to under 60 min) in 9 months' time (May 2018). Our outcome measures included mean TTA and ED length of stay (LOS). Process measures included rates of analgesia administration and of use of medical directives. We obtained weekly data capture for Statistical Process Control (SPC) charts, as well as Mann-Whitney U tests for before-and-after evaluation. We performed wide stakeholder engagement, root cause analyses and created a Pareto Diagram to inform Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles, which included: (1) nurse-initiated analgesia at triage; (2) a new triage documentation aid for medication administration; (3) a quick reference medical directive badge for nurses; and (4) weekly targeted feedback of the project's progress at clinical team huddle. TTA decreased from 129 min (n=153) to 100 min (22.5%; n=87, p<0.05). Special cause variation was identified on the ED LOS SPC chart with nine values below the midline after the first PDSA. The number of patients that received any analgesia increased from 42% (n=372) to 47% (n=192; p=0.13) and those that received them via medical directives increased from 22% (n=154) to 44% (n=87; p<0.001). We achieved a significant reduction of TTA and an increased use of medical directives through front-line focused improvements.
| S-EPMC7011892 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Clinical pharmacist interventions have been shown to have positive effect on occurrence of drug-related issues as well as on clinical outcomes. However, evidence about which patients benefiting most from the interventions is limited. We aimed to explore whether pharmacist intervention is equally effective in preventing emergency department (ED) visits in patients with few or many prescribed drugs and in those with different levels of inappropriate prescribing. METHODS:Patient and outcome data from a randomized controlled trial exploring the clinical effects of a ward-based pharmacist intervention in patients, 80 years and older, were used. The patients were divided into subgroups according to the number of prescribed drugs (<5 or ?5 drugs) and the level of inappropriate prescribing [using the Screening Tool Of Older People's potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) and the Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START) with a score of ?2 (STOPP) and ?1 (START) as cutoff points]. The effect of the intervention on the number of times the different subgroups visited the ED was analyzed. RESULTS:The pharmacist intervention was more effective with respect to the number of subsequent ED visits in patients taking <5 drugs on admission than in those taking ?5 drugs. The rate ratio (RR) for a subsequent ED visit was 0.22 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09-0.52] for <5 drugs and 0.70 (95% CI 0.47-1.04) for ?5 drugs (p?=?0.02 for the interaction). The effect of intervention did not differ between patients with high or low STOPP or START scores. CONCLUSION:In this exploratory study, the pharmacist intervention appeared to be more effective in preventing visits to the ED for patients who were taking fewer drugs before the intervention. Our analysis of STOPP and START scores indicated that the level of inappropriate prescribing on admission had no effect on the outcomes of intervention with respect to ED visits.
| S-EPMC4218816 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Around 42,000 children suffer from severe sepsis each year in the US alone, resulting in significant morbidity, mortality and billion dollar expenditures in the US healthcare system. Sepsis recognition is a clinical challenge in children. Biomarkers are needed to tailor appropriate antimicrobial therapies and improve risk stratification. The goal of this study was to determine if gene expression profiles from peripheral blood were associated with pathogen type and sepsis severity in children treated for suspected sepsis.
2020-01-01 | GSE119217 | GEO
Project description:We assess the effectiveness of patient-controlled analgesia in the emergency department (ED). We hypothesized that decline in pain intensity from 30 to 120 minutes after initial intravenous opioid administration is greater in patients receiving morphine by patient-controlled analgesia compared with usual care and would differ by a clinically significant amount.This was a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of patient-controlled analgesia and usual care (opioid and dose at physician's discretion) in 4 EDs. Entry criteria included age 18 to 65 years and acute pain requiring intravenous opioids. The primary outcome was decline in numeric rating scale pain score 30 to 120 minutes postbaseline. Secondary outcomes included satisfaction, time to analgesia, adverse events, and patient-controlled analgesia pump-related problems. We used a mixed-effects linear model to compare rate of decline in pain (slope) between groups. A clinically significant difference between groups was defined as a difference in slopes equivalent to 1.3 numeric rating scale units.Six hundred thirty-six patients were enrolled. The rate of decline in pain from 30 to 120 minutes was greater for patients receiving patient-controlled analgesia than usual care (difference=1.0 numeric rating scale unit; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.6 to 1.5; P<.001) but did not reach the threshold for clinical significance. More patients receiving patient-controlled analgesia were satisfied with pain management (difference=9.3%; 95% CI 3.3% to 15.1%). Median time to initial analgesia was 15 minutes longer for patient-controlled analgesia than usual care (95% CI 11.4 to 18.6 minutes). There were 7 adverse events in the patient-controlled analgesia group and 1 in the usual care group (difference=2.0%; 95% CI 0.04% to 3.9%), and 11 pump-programming errors.The findings of this study do not favor patient-controlled analgesia over usual ED care for acute pain management.
| S-EPMC5698131 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Procedural sedation and analgesia outside the operating theater have become standard care in managing pain and anxiety in children undergoing diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The objectives of this study are to describe the current pediatric procedural sedation and analgesia practice patterns in European emergency departments, to perform a needs assessment-like analysis, and to identify barriers to implementation. A survey study of European emergency departments treating children was conducted. Through a lead research coordinator identified through the Research in European Pediatric Emergency Medicine (REPEM) network for each of the participating countries, a 30-question questionnaire was sent, targeting senior physicians at each site. Descriptive statistics were performed. One hundred and seventy-one sites participated, treating approximately 5 million children/year and representing 19 countries, with a response rate of 89%. Of the procedural sedation and analgesia medications, midazolam (100%) and ketamine (91%) were available to most children, whereas propofol (67%), nitrous oxide (56%), intranasal fentanyl (47%), and chloral hydrate (42%) were less frequent. Children were sedated by general pediatricians in 82% of cases. Safety and monitoring guidelines were common (74%), but pre-procedural checklists (51%) and capnography (46%) less available. In 37% of the sites, the entire staff performing procedural sedation and analgesia were certified in pediatric advanced life support. Pediatric emergency medicine was a board-certified specialty in 3/19 countries. Physician (73%) and nursing (72%) shortages and lack of physical space (69%) were commonly reported as barriers to procedural sedation and analgesia. Nurse-directed triage protocols were in place in 52% of the sites, mostly for paracetamol (99%) and ibuprofen (91%). Tissue adhesive for laceration repair was available to 91% of children, while topical anesthetics for intravenous catheterization was available to 55%. Access to child life specialists (13%) and hypnosis (12%) was rare.Conclusion: Procedural sedation and analgesia are prevalent in European emergency departments, but some sedation agents and topical anesthetics are not widely available. Guidelines are common but further safety nets, nurse-directed triage analgesia, and nonpharmacologic support to procedural sedation and analgesia are lacking. Barriers to implementation include availability of sedation agents, staff shortage, and lack of space. What is Known: • Effective and prompt analgesia, anxiolysis, and sedation (PSA) outside the operating theatre have become standard in managing pain and anxiety in children undergoing painful or anxiogenic diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. • We searched PubMed up to September 15, 2020, without any date limits or language restrictions, using different combinations of the MeSH terms "pediatrics," "hypnotics and sedatives," "conscious sedation," and "ambulatory surgical procedures" and the non-MeSH term "procedural sedation" and found no reports describing the current practice of pediatric PSA in Europe. What is New: • This study is, to the best of our knowledge, the first to shed light on the pediatric PSA practice in European EDs and uncovers important gaps in several domains, notably availability of sedation medications and topical anesthetics, safety aspects such as PSA provider training, availability of nonpharmacologic support to PSA, and high impact interventions such as nurse-directed triage analgesia. • Other identified barriers to PSA implementation include staff shortage, control of sedation medications by specialists outside the emergency department, and lack of space.
| S-EPMC8105204 | biostudies-literature
Project description:STUDY OBJECTIVE:We assess whether an automated prescription drug monitoring program intervention in emergency department (ED) settings is associated with reductions in opioid prescribing and quantities. METHODS:We performed a retrospective cohort study of ED visits by Medicaid beneficiaries. We assessed the staggered implementation (pre-post) of automated prescription drug monitoring program queries at 86 EDs in Washington State from January 1, 2013, to September 30, 2015. The outcomes included any opioid prescribed within 1 day of the index ED visit and total dispensed morphine milligram equivalents. The exposure was the automated prescription drug monitoring program query intervention. We assessed program effects stratified by previous high-risk opioid use. We performed multiple sensitivity analyses, including restriction to pain-related visits, restriction to visits with a confirmed prescription drug monitoring program query, and assessment of 6 specific opioid high-risk indicators. RESULTS:The study included 1,187,237 qualifying ED visits (898,162 preintervention; 289,075 postintervention). Compared with the preintervention period, automated prescription drug monitoring program queries were not significantly associated with reductions in the proportion of visits with opioid prescribing (5.8 per 1,000 encounters; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.11 to 11.8) or the amount of prescribed morphine milligram equivalents (difference 2.66; 95% CI -0.15 to 5.48). There was no evidence of selective reduction in patients with previous high-risk opioid use (1.2 per 1,000 encounters, 95% CI -9.5 to 12.0; morphine milligram equivalents 1.22, 95% CI -3.39 to 5.82). The lack of a selective reduction in high-risk patients was robust to all sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION:An automated prescription drug monitoring program query intervention was not associated with reductions in ED opioid prescribing or quantities, even in patients with previous high-risk opioid use.
| S-EPMC5820164 | biostudies-literature
Project description:National guidelines suggest that most skin abscesses do not require antibiotics, and that cellulitis antibiotics should target streptococci, not community-associated MRSA (CA-MRSA). The objective of this study is to describe antimicrobial treatment of skin infections in U.S. emergency departments (EDs) and analyze potential quality measures.The National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) is a 4-stage probability sample of all non-federal U.S. ED visits. In 2007 NHAMCS started recording whether incision and drainage was performed at ED visits. We conducted a retrospective analysis, pooling 2007-2010 data, identified skin infections using diagnostic codes, and identified abscesses by performance of incision and drainage. We generated national estimates and 95% confidence intervals using weighted analyses; quantified frequencies and proportions; and evaluated antibiotic prescribing practices. We evaluated 4 parameters that might serve as quality measures of antibiotic stewardship, and present 2 of them as potentially robust enough for implementation.Of all ED visits, 3.2% (95% confidence interval 3.1-3.4%) were for skin infection, and 2.7% (2.6-2.9%) were first visits for skin infection, with no increase over time (p=0.80). However, anti-CA-MRSA antibiotic use increased, from 61% (56-66%) to 74% (71-78%) of antibiotic regimens (p<0.001). Twenty-two percent of visits were for abscess, with a non-significant increase (p=0.06). Potential quality measures: Among discharged abscess patients, 87% were prescribed antibiotics (84-90%, overuse). Among antibiotic regimens for abscess patients, 84% included anti-CA-MRSA agents (81-89%, underuse).From 2007-2010, use of anti-CA-MRSA agents for skin infections increased significantly, despite stable visit frequencies. Antibiotics were over-used for discharged abscess cases, and CA-MRSA-active antibiotics were underused among regimens when antibiotics were used for abscess. [West J Emerg Med. 2014;15(3):282-289.].
| S-EPMC4025524 | biostudies-literature