Search

IntroductionRecent evidence has shown that vitamin C has some analgesic properties in addition to its antioxidant effect and can, therefore, reduce opioid use during recovery time. Vitamin C analgesic effect has been explored mostly during short-term postoperative context or in disease-specific chronic pain prevention, but never after acute musculoskeletal injuries, which are often seen in the emergency department (ED). The protocol’s primary aim is to compare the total morphine 5 mg pills consumed during a 2-week follow-up between patients receiving vitamin C or a placebo after ED discharge for an acute musculoskeletal pain complaint.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a two-centre double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial with 464 participants distributed in two arms, one group receiving 1000 mg of vitamin C two times a day for 14 days and another one receiving a placebo. Participants will be ≥18 years of age, treated in ED for acute musculoskeletal pain present for less than 2 weeks and discharged with an opioid prescription for home pain management. Total morphine 5 mg pills consumed during the 2-week follow-up will be assessed via an electronic (or paper) diary. In addition, patients will report their daily pain intensity, pain relief, side effects and other types of pain medication or other non-pharmacological approach used. Three months after the injury, participants will also be contacted to evaluate chronic pain development. We hypothesised that vitamin C, compared with a placebo, will reduce opioid consumption during a 14-day follow-up for ED discharged patients treated for acute musculoskeletal pain.Ethics and disseminationThis study has received approval from the Ethics Review Committee from the ‘Comité d'éthique de la recherche du CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal (No 2023–2442)’. Findings will be disseminated through scientific conferences and peer-reviewed journal publication. The data sets generated during the study will be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.Trial registration numberNCT05555576ClinicalTrials.Gov PRS.

ObjectivesInadequate acute pain management can reduce the quality of life, cause unnecessary suffering and can often lead to the development of chronic pain. Using group-based trajectory modelling, we previously identified six distinct pain intensity trajectories for the first 14-day postemergency department (ED) discharge; two linear ones with moderate or severe pain during follow-up (~40% of the patients) and four cubic polynomial order trajectories with mild or no pain at the end of the 14 days (low final pain trajectories). We assessed if previously described acute pain intensity trajectories over 14 days after ED discharge are predictive of chronic pain 3 months later.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingTertiary care trauma centre academic hospital.ParticipantsThis study included 18 years and older ED patients who consulted for acute (≤2 weeks) pain conditions that were discharged with an opioid prescription. Patients completed a 14-day diary in which they listed their daily pain intensity (0–10 numeric rating scale).OutcomesThree months after ED visit, participants were questioned by phone about their current pain intensity (0–10 numeric rating scale). Chronic pain was defined as patients with current pain intensity ≥4 at 3 months.ResultsA total of 305 participants remained in the study at 3 months, 49% were women and a mean age of 55±15 years. Twelve per cent (11.9; 95% CI 8.2 to 15.4) of patients had chronic pain at the 3-month follow-up. Controlling for age, sex and pain condition, patients with moderate or severe pain trajectories and those with only a severe pain trajectory were respectively 5.1 (95% CI 2.2 to 11.8) and 8.2 (95% CI 3.4 to 20.0) times more likely to develop chronic pain 3 months later compared with patients in the low final pain trajectories.ConclusionSpecific acute pain trajectories following an ED visit are closely related to the development of chronic pain 3 months later.Trial registration numberNCT02799004; Results.

ObjectivesPrescription opioid diversion is a significant contributor to the opioid misuse epidemic. We examined the quantity of opioids consumed by emergency department (ED) discharged patients after treatment for an acute pain condition (musculoskeletal, fracture, renal colic, abdominal pain and other), and the percentage of unused opioids available for potential misuse.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingTertiary care trauma centre academic hospital.ParticipantsA convenience sample of patients ≥18 years who visited the ED for an acute pain condition (≤2 weeks) and were discharged with an opioid prescription. Patients completed a 14-day paper diary of daily pain medication use. To reduce lost to follow-up, participants also responded to standardised phone interview questions about their previous 14-day pain medication use.OutcomesQuantity of morphine 5 mg tablets (or equivalent) prescribed, consumed and unused during a 14-day follow-up. Quantity of opioids to adequately supply 80% of patients for 2 weeks and 95% of patients for the first 3 days was also calculated.ResultsResults for 627 patients were analysed (mean age ±SD: 51±16 years, 48% women). Patients consumed a median of seven tablets of morphine 5 mg (32% of the total prescribed opioids). The quantity of opioids to adequately supply 80% of patients for 2 weeks was 20 tablets of morphine 5 mg for musculoskeletal pain, 30 for fracture, 15 for renal colic or abdominal pain and 20 for other pain conditions. The quantity to adequately supply 95% of patients for the first 3 days was 15 tablets of morphine 5 mg.ConclusionsPatients discharged from the ED with an acute pain condition consumed a median of fewer than 10 tablets of morphine 5 mg (or equivalent). ED physicians should consider prescribing a smaller quantity of opioids and asking the pharmacist to dispense them in portions to minimise unused opioids.Trial registration numberNCT02799004; Results.

Introduction Emergency departments are important safety nets for people who live in rural areas. Moreover, a serious problem in access to healthcare services has emerged in these regions. The challenges of providing access to quality rural emergency care include recruitment and retention issues, lack of advanced imagery technology, lack of specialist support and the heavy reliance on ambulance transport over great distances. The Quebec Ministry of Health and Social Services published a new version of the Emergency Department Management Guide, a document designed to improve the emergency department management and to humanise emergency department care and services. In particular, the Guide recommends solutions to problems that plague rural emergency departments. Unfortunately, no studies have evaluated the implementation of the proposed recommendations. Methods and analysis To develop a comprehensive portrait of all rural emergency departments in Quebec, data will be gathered from databases at the Quebec Ministry of Health and Social Services, the Quebec Trauma Registry and from emergency departments and ambulance services managers. Statistics Canada data will be used to describe populations and rural regions. To evaluate the use of the 2006 Emergency Department Management Guide and the implementation of its various recommendations, an online survey and a phone interview will be administered to emergency department managers. Two online surveys will evaluate quality of work life among physicians and nurses working at rural emergency departments. Quality-of-care indicators will be collected from databases and patient medical files. Data will be analysed using statistical (descriptive and inferential) procedures. Ethics and dissemination This protocol has been approved by the CSSS Alphonse–Desjardins research ethics committee (Project MP-HDL-1213-011). The results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at one or more scientific conferences.

Introduction Trauma remains the primary cause of death in individuals under 40 years of age in Canada. In Quebec, the Trauma Care Continuum (TCC) has been demonstrated to be effective in decreasing the mortality rate among trauma victims. Although rural citizens are at greater risk for trauma and trauma death, no empirical data concerning the effectiveness of the TCC for the rural population in Quebec are available. The emergency departments (EDs) are important safety nets for rural citizens. However, our data indicate that access to diagnostic support services, such as intensive care units and CT is limited in rural areas. The objectives are to (1) draw a portrait of trauma services in rural EDs; (2) explore geographical variations in trauma care in Quebec; (3) identify adaptable factors that could reduce variation; and (4) establish consensus solutions for improving the quality of care. Methods and analysis The study will take place from November 2015 to November 2018. A mixed methodology (qualitative and quantitative) will be used. We will include data (2009–2013) from all trauma victims treated in the 26 rural EDs and tertiary/secondary care centres in Quebec. To meet objectives 1 and 2, data will be gathered from the Ministry9s Database of the Quebec Trauma Registry Information System. For objectives 3 and 4, the project will use the Delphi method to develop consensus solutions for improving the quality of trauma care in rural areas. Data will be analysed using a Poisson regression to compare mortality rate during hospital stay or death on ED arrival (objectives 1 and 2). Average scores and 95% CI will be calculated for the Delphi questionnaire (objectives 3 and 4). Ethics and dissemination This protocol has been approved by CSSS Alphonse-Desjardins research ethics committee (Project MP-HDL-2016-003). The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

Objectives Evaluate the association of adequate analgesia and time to analgesia with emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS). Setting and Design Post hoc analysis of real-time archived data. Participants We included all consecutive ED patients ≥18 years with pain intensity >6 (verbal numerical scale from 0 to 10), assigned to an ED bed, and whose pain was re-evaluated less than 1 h after receiving analgesic treatment. Outcome measures The main outcome was ED-LOS in patients who had adequate pain relief (AR=↓50% pain intensity) compared with those who did not have such relief (NR). Results A total of 2033 patients (mean age 49.5 years; 51% men) met our inclusion criteria; 58.3% were discharged, and 41.7% were admitted. Among patients discharged or admitted, there was no significant difference in ED-LOS between those with AR (median (25th–75th centile): 9.6 h (6.3–14.8) and 18.2 h (11.6–25.7), respectively) and NR (median (25th–75th centile): 9.6 h (6.6–16.0) and 17.4 h (11.3–26.5), respectively). After controlling for confounding factors, rapid time to analgesia (not AR) was associated with shorter ED-LOS of discharged and admitted patients (p90 min for discharged and by 2.3 h (95% CI 0.17 to 4.4) for admitted patients. Conclusions In our study, AR was not linked with short ED-LOS. However, rapid administration of analgesia was associated with short ED-LOS.