Red flags in headache care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pohl H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9303246 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveIn this study, we aimed to evaluate the frequency of the main red flags in patients with headache who do have Covid-19.BackgroundHeadache is one of the most frequent neurologic symptoms of Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Diagnosis of secondary headache disorders is still based on the presence of red flags.Design and methodsCross-sectional study of hospitalized patients with confirmed Covid-19 disease. We interrogated every patient about the presence of headache and if so, a headache expert conducted a structured interview assessing the presence and type of the main red flags. We evaluated the presence of laboratory abnormalities on admission.ResultsWe screened 576 consecutive patients, 130/576 (22.6%) described headache, and 104 were included in the study. Mean age of patients was 56.7 (standard deviation: 11.2) and 66/104 (63.4%) were female. Red flags concerning prior medical history were present in 79/104 (76.0%) cases, and those related to the headache itself were observed in 99/104 (95.2%) patients. All patients 104/104 (100%) described systemic symptoms and 86/104 (82.7%) some neurologic symptoms. Laboratory results were abnormal in 98/104 (94.2%) cases. The most frequent red flags were fever, in 93/104 (89.4%) patients, cough, in 89/104 (85.6% cases), and increased C-reactive protein in 84/100 (84.0%) cases.ConclusionIn patients with Covid-19 that described the headache red flags were present in most cases. There was not any universal red flag, being necessary the comprehensive evaluation of all of them.
| S-EPMC7436570 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The diagnosis of pure neural leprosy is more challenging because patients share characteristics with other common pathologies, such as ulnar compression, which should be taken into consideration for differential diagnosis. In this study, we identify ulnar nerve conduction characteristics to aid in the differential diagnosis of ulnar neuropathy (UN) in leprosy and that of non-leprosy etiology. In addition, we include putative markers to better understand the inflammatory process that may occur in the nerve. Data were extracted from a database of people affected by leprosy (leprosy group) diagnosed with UN at leprosy diagnosis. A non-leprosy group of patients diagnosed with mechanical neuropathy (compressive, traumatic) was also included. Both groups were submitted to clinical, neurological, neurophysiological and immunological studies. Nerve enlargement and sensory impairment were significantly higher in leprosy patients than in patients with compressive UN. Bilateral impairment was significantly higher in the leprosy group than in the non-leprosy group. Leprosy reactions were associated to focal demyelinating lesions at the elbow and to temporal dispersion (TD). Clinical signs such as sensory impairment, nerve enlargement and bilateral ulnar nerve injury associated with eletrodiagnostic criteria such as demyelinating finds, specifically temporal dispersion, could be tools to help us decided on the best conduct in patients with elbow ulnar neuropathy and specifically decide if we should perform a nerve biopsy for diagnosis of pure neural leprosy.
| S-EPMC8604365 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The presence of inflammation and demyelination in a central nervous system (CNS) biopsy points towards a limited, yet heterogeneous group of pathologies, of which multiple sclerosis (MS) represents one of the principal considerations. Inflammatory demyelination has also been reported in patients with clinically suspected primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL), especially when steroids had been administered prior to biopsy acquisition. The histopathological changes induced by corticosteroid treatment can range from mild reduction to complete disappearance of lymphoma cells. It has been proposed that in the absence of neoplastic B cells, these biopsies are indistinguishable from MS, yet despite the clinical relevance, no histological studies have specifically compared the two entities. In this work, we analyzed CNS biopsies from eight patients with inflammatory demyelination in whom PCNSL was later histologically confirmed, and compared them with nine well defined early active multiple sclerosis lesions. In the patients with steroid-treated PCNSL (ST-PCNSL) the interval between first and second biopsy ranged from 3 to 32 weeks; all of the patients had received corticosteroids before the first, but not the second biopsy. ST-PCNSL patients were older than MS patients (mean age: ST-PCNSL: 62 ± 4 years, MS: 30 ± 2 years), and histological analysis revealed numerous apoptoses, patchy and incomplete rather than confluent and complete demyelination and a fuzzy lesion edge. The loss of Luxol fast blue histochemistry was more profound than that of myelin proteins in immunohistochemistry, and T cell infiltration in ST-PCNSL exceeded that in MS by around fivefold (P = 0.005). Our data indicate that in the presence of extensive inflammation and incomplete, inhomogeneous demyelination, the neuropathologist should refrain from primarily considering autoimmune inflammatory demyelination and, even in the absence of lymphoma cells, instigate close clinical follow-up of the patient to detect recurrent lymphoma.
| S-EPMC8028373 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A minority of headache patients have a secondary headache disorder. The medical literature presents and promotes red flags to increase the likelihood of identifying a secondary etiology. In this review, we aim to discuss the incidence and prevalence of secondary headaches as well as the data on sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of red flags for secondary headaches. We review the following red flags: (1) systemic symptoms including fever; (2) neoplasm history; (3) neurologic deficit (including decreased consciousness); (4) sudden or abrupt onset; (5) older age (onset after 65 years); (6) pattern change or recent onset of new headache; (7) positional headache; (8) precipitated by sneezing, coughing, or exercise; (9) papilledema; (10) progressive headache and atypical presentations; (11) pregnancy or puerperium; (12) painful eye with autonomic features; (13) posttraumatic onset of headache; (14) pathology of the immune system such as HIV; (15) painkiller overuse or new drug at onset of headache. Using the systematic SNNOOP10 list to screen new headache patients will presumably increase the likelihood of detecting a secondary cause. The lack of prospective epidemiologic studies on red flags and the low incidence of many secondary headaches leave many questions unanswered and call for large prospective studies. A validated screening tool could reduce unneeded neuroimaging and costs.
| S-EPMC6340385 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEmergency medicine (EM) applicants consider many factors when selecting residency programs. Prior studies have demonstrated that applicants consider geography as well as modifiable/nonmodifiable program factors. Less attention, however, has been paid to underrepresented groups. Additionally, the prevalence and characteristics of "red flags," or factors that may lead an applicant to lower a program's rank or not rank it at all, remain unknown in EM. Our objective was to describe the factors that influence current EM-bound medical students' residency selection focusing on underrepresented applicants and red flags encountered during the recruitment process.MethodsWe conducted a mixed-methods survey study of EM-bound graduates from U.S. medical schools in the 2020 application cycle. Quantitative analysis included descriptive statistics, measures of central tendency, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), nonparametric tests for ordinal data, and logistic regression. For the qualitative portion of the study, two independent reviewers performed a thematic analysis of the red flag free-text responses. Discrepancies were addressed via consensus with third-party oversight.ResultsOur survey response rate was 49%, and most applicants considered both geographic and program factors. Underrepresented applicants prioritized program diversity, program commitment to the underserved, neighborhood/community, and patient population. Of all respondents, 71% reported red flags. Women had a significantly higher odds of encountering red flags (odds ratio = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.25 to 2.18). Red flags included seven key themes: violations of regulatory standards, program characteristics, interview day experience, program culture, interpersonal interactions, lack of fit, and quality of life; subthemes included lack of diversity and racism.ConclusionsModifiable/nonmodifiable program factors and geography continue to influence EM-bound applicants' residency choices. Underrepresented applicants place a higher value on diversity, community, and patients served. Residency programs should consider modifiable factors and self-assess for red flags to successfully recruit the next generation of EM physicians.
| S-EPMC8393195 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A growing number of progressive heredodegenerative conditions mimic the presentation of Huntington's disease (HD). Differentiating among these HD-like syndromes is necessary when a patient with a combination of movement disorders, cognitive decline, behavioural abnormalities and progressive disease course proves negative to the genetic testing for HD causative mutations, that is, IT15 gene trinucleotide-repeat expansion. The differential diagnosis of HD-like syndromes is complex and may lead to unnecessary and costly investigations. We propose here a guide to this differential diagnosis focusing on a limited number of clinical features ('red flags') that can be identified through accurate clinical examination, collection of historical data and a few routine ancillary investigations. These features include the ethnic background of the patient, the involvement of the facio-bucco-lingual and cervical district by the movement disorder, the co-occurrence of cerebellar features and seizures, the presence of peculiar gait patterns and eye movement abnormalities, and an atypical progression of illness. Additional help may derive from the cognitive-behavioural presentation of the patient, as well as by a restricted number of ancillary investigations, mainly MRI and routine blood tests. These red flags should be constantly updated as the phenotypic characterisation and identification of more reliable diagnostic markers for HD-like syndromes progress over the following years.
| S-EPMC3646286 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite its widespread use in North America and many other parts of the world, the safety of etomidate as an induction agent for rapid sequence intubation in septic patients is still debated. In this article, we evaluate the current literature on etomidate, review its clinical history, and discuss the controversy regarding its use, especially in sepsis. We address eight questions: (i) When did concern over the safety of etomidate first arise? (ii) What is the mechanism by which etomidate is thought to affect the adrenal axis? (iii) How has adrenal insufficiency in relation to etomidate use been defined or identified in the literature? (iv) What is the evidence that single dose etomidate is associated with subsequent adrenal-cortisol dysfunction? (v) What is the clinical significance of adrenal insufficiency or dysfunction associated with single dose etomidate, and where are the data that support or refute the contention that single-dose etomidate is associated with increased mortality or important post emergency department (ED) clinical outcomes? (vi) How should etomidate's effects in septic patients best be measured? (vii) What are alternative induction agents and what are the advantages and disadvantages of these agents relative to etomidate? (viii) What future work is needed to further clarify the characteristics of etomidate as it is currently used in patients with sepsis? We conclude that the observational nature of almost all available data suggesting adverse outcomes from etomidate does not support abandoning its use for rapid sequence induction. However, because we see a need to balance theoretical harms and benefits in the presence of data supporting the non-inferiority of alternative agents without similar theoretical risks associated with them, we suggest that the burden of proof to support continued widespread use may rest with the proponents of etomidate. We further suggest that practitioners become familiar with the use of more than one agent while awaiting further definitive data.
| S-EPMC2908652 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo replicate the previously published finding that the absence of a history of trauma in a child with obvious traumatic head injuries demonstrates high specificity and high positive predictive value (PPV) for abusive head trauma.Study designThis was a secondary analysis of a deidentified, cross-sectional dataset containing prospective data on 346 young children with acute head injury hospitalized for intensive care across 18 sites between 2010 and 2013, to estimate the diagnostic relevance of a caregiver's specific denial of any trauma, changing history of accidental trauma, or history of accidental trauma inconsistent with the child's gross motor skills. Cases were categorized as definite or not definite abusive head trauma based solely on patients' clinical and radiologic findings. For each presumptive historical "red flag," we calculated sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratio (LR) with 95% CI for definite abusive head trauma in all patients and also in cohorts with normal, abnormal, or persistent abnormal neurologic status.ResultsA caregiver's specific denial of any trauma demonstrated a specificity of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.84-0.94), PPV of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71-0.88), and a positive LR (LR+) of 4.83 (95% CI, 3.07-7.61) for definite abusive head trauma in all patients. Specificity and LR+ were lowest-not highest-in patients with persistent neurologic abnormalities. The 2 other historical red flags showed similar trends.ConclusionsA caregiver's specific denial of any trauma, changing history of accidental trauma, or history of accidental trauma that is developmentally inconsistent are each highly specific (>0.90) but may provide weaker support than previously reported for a diagnosis of abusive head trauma in patients with persistent neurologic abnormalities.
| S-EPMC7042052 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the specificity and sensitivity of two red flag protocols in detecting ear diseases associated with changes in hearing. DESIGN:The presence of red-flag symptoms was determined in a chart review of 307 adult patients from the Mayo Clinic Florida Departments of Otorhinolaryngology and Audiology. Participants formed a convenience sample recruited for a separate study. Neurotologist diagnosis was the criterion for comparisons. RESULTS:Of the 251 patient files retained for analysis, 191 had one or more targeted diseases and 60 had age- or noise-related hearing loss. Food and Drug Administration red flags sensitivity was 91% (confidence interval [CI], 86 to 95%) and specificity was 72% (CI, 59 to 83%). American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery red flags sensitivity was 98% (CI, 95 to 99%) and specificity was 20% (CI, 11 to 32%). CONCLUSIONS:Stakeholders must determine which diseases are meaningful contraindications for hearing aid use and whether these red-flag protocols have acceptable levels of sensitivity and specificity. As direct-to-consumer models of hearing devices increase, a disease detection method that does not require provider intercession would be useful.
| S-EPMC6105532 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo review the evidence on diagnostic accuracy of red flag signs and symptoms to screen for fracture or malignancy in patients presenting with low back pain to primary, secondary, or tertiary care.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesMedline, OldMedline, Embase, and CINAHL from earliest available up to 1 October 2013.Inclusion criteriaPrimary diagnostic studies comparing red flags for fracture or malignancy to an acceptable reference standard, published in any language.Review methodsAssessment of study quality and extraction of data was conducted by three independent assessors. Diagnostic accuracy statistics and post-test probabilities were generated for each red flag.ResultsWe included 14 studies (eight from primary care, two from secondary care, four from tertiary care) evaluating 53 red flags; only five studies evaluated combinations of red flags. Pooling of data was not possible because of index test heterogeneity. Many red flags in current guidelines provide virtually no change in probability of fracture or malignancy or have untested diagnostic accuracy. The red flags with the highest post-test probability for detection of fracture were older age (9%, 95% confidence interval 3% to 25%), prolonged use of corticosteroid drugs (33%, 10% to 67%), severe trauma (11%, 8% to 16%), and presence of a contusion or abrasion (62%, 49% to 74%). Probability of spinal fracture was higher when multiple red flags were present (90%, 34% to 99%). The red flag with the highest post-test probability for detection of spinal malignancy was history of malignancy (33%, 22% to 46%).ConclusionsWhile several red flags are endorsed in guidelines to screen for fracture or malignancy, only a small subset of these have evidence that they are indeed informative. These findings suggest a need for revision of many current guidelines.
| S-EPMC3898572 | biostudies-literature