Search

Objective:Approximately 75% of prescription opioid abusers obtain the drug from an acquaintance, which may be a consequence of improper opioid storage, use, disposal, and lack of patient education. We aimed to determine the opioid storage, use, and disposal patterns in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) of a comprehensive cancer center.Method:We surveyed 113 patients receiving opioids for at least 2 months upon presenting to the ED and collected information regarding opioid use, storage, and disposal. Unsafe storage was defined as storing opioids in plain sight, and unsafe use was defined as sharing or losing opioids.Results:The median age was 53 years, 55% were female, 64% were white, and 86% had advanced cancer. Of those surveyed, 36% stored opioids in plain sight, 53% kept them hidden but unlocked, and only 15% locked their opioids. However, 73% agreed that they would use a lockbox if given one. Patients who reported that others had asked them for their pain medications (p= 0.004) and those who would use a lockbox if given one (p= 0.019) were more likely to keep them locked. Some 13 patients (12%) used opioids unsafely by either sharing (5%) or losing (8%) them. Patients who reported being prescribed more pain pills than required (p= 0.032) were more likely to practice unsafe use. Most (78%) were unaware of proper opioid disposal methods, 6% believed they were prescribed more medication than required, and 67% had unused opioids at home. Only 13% previously received education about safe disposal of opioids. Overall, 77% (87) of patients reported unsafe storage, unsafe use, or possessed unused opioids at home.Significance of Results:Many cancer patients presenting to the ED improperly and unsafely store, use, or dispose of opioids, thus highlighting a need to investigate the impact of patient education on such practices.

Although visiting the emergency departments (EDs) is considered poor quality of cancer care, there are indications these visits are increasing. Similarly, there is growing interest in providing palliative care (PC) to cancer patients in EDs. However, this integration is not without major challenges. In this article, we review the literature on why cancer patients visit EDs, the rates of hospitalization and mortality for these patients, and the models for integrating PC in EDs. We discuss opportunities such integration will bring to the quality of cancer care, and resource utilization of resources. We also discuss barriers faced by this integration. We found that the most common reasons for ED visits by cancer patients are pain, fever, shortness of breath, and gastrointestinal symptoms. The majority of the patients are admitted to hospitals, about 13% of the admitted patients die during hospitalization, and some patients die in ED. Patients who receive PC at an ED have shorter hospitalization and lower resource utilization. Models based solely on increasing PC provision in EDs by PC specialists have had modest success, while very limited ED-based PC provision has had slightly higher impact. However, details of these programs are lacking, and coordination between ED based PC and hospital-wide PC is not clear. In some studies, the objectives were to improve care in the communities and reduce ED visits and hospitalizations. We conclude that as more patients receive cancer therapy late in their disease trajectory, more cancer patients will visit EDs. Integration of PC with emergency medicine will require active participation of ED physicians in providing PC to cancer patients. PC specialist should play an active role in educating ED physicians about PC, and provide timely consultations. The impact of integrating PC in EDs on quality and cost of cancer care should be studied.

Objectives. We have described national trends for the 5 leading external causes of injury mortality. Methods. We used negative binomial regression and annual underlying cause-of-death data for US residents for 2000 through 2009. Results. Mortality rates for unintentional poisoning, unintentional falls, and suicide increased by 128%, 71%, and 15%, respectively. The unintentional motor vehicle traffic crash mortality rate declined 25%. Suicide ranked first as a cause of injury mortality, followed by motor vehicle traffic crashes, poisoning, falls, and homicide. Females had a lower injury mortality rate than did males. The adjusted fall mortality rate displayed a positive age gradient. Blacks and Hispanics had lower adjusted motor vehicle traffic crash and suicide mortality rates and higher adjusted homicide rates than did Whites, and a lower unadjusted total injury mortality rate. Conclusions. Mortality rates for suicide, poisoning, and falls rose substantially over the past decade. Suicide has surpassed motor vehicle traffic crashes as the leading cause of injury mortality. Comprehensive traffic safety measures have successfully reduced the national motor vehicle traffic crash mortality rate. Similar efforts will be required to diminish the burden of other injury.

The effect of emergency department (ED) crowding on equitable care is the least studied of the domains of quality as defined by the Institute of Medicine (IOM). Inequities in access and treatment throughout the health care system are well documented in all fields of medicine. While there is little evidence demonstrating that inequity is worsened by crowding, theory and evidence from social science disciplines, as well as known barriers to care for vulnerable populations, would suggest that crowding will worsen inequities. To design successful interventions, however, it is important to first understand how crowding can result in disparities and base interventions on these mechanisms. A research agenda is proposed to understand mechanisms that may threaten equity during periods of crowding and design and test potential interventions that may ensure the equitable aspect of quality of care.

ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:848–858 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Abstract Objectives: A decision support tool may guide emergency clinicians in recognizing assessment, analgesic and overall management, and health service delivery needs for patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) in the emergency department (ED). We aimed to identify data and process elements important in making decisions regarding evaluation and management of adult patients in the ED with painful episodes of SCD. Methods: Qualitative methods using a series of focus groups and grounded theory were used. Eligible participants included adult clients with SCD and emergency physicians and nurses with a minimum of 1 year of experience providing care to patients with SCD in the ED. Patients were recruited in conjunction with annual SCD meetings, and providers included clinicians who were and were not affiliated with sickle cell centers. Groups were conducted until saturation was reached and included a total of two patient groups, three physician groups, and two nurse groups. Focus groups were held in New York, Durham, Chicago, New Orleans, and Denver. Clinician participants were asked the following three questions to guide the discussion: 1) what information would be important to know about patients with SCD in the ED setting to effectively care for them and help you identify patient analgesic, treatment, and referral needs? 2) What treatment decisions would you make with this information? and 3) What characteristics would a decision support tool need to have to make it meaningful and useful? Client participants were asked the same questions with rewording to reflect what they believed providers should know to provide the best care and what they should do with the information. All focus groups were audiotaped and transcribed. The constant comparative method was used to analyze the data. Two coders independently coded participant responses and identified focal themes based on the key questions. An investigator and assistant independently reviewed the transcripts and met until the final coding structure was determined. Results: Forty-seven individuals participated (14 persons with SCD, 16 physicians, and 17 nurses) in a total of seven different groups. Two major themes emerged: acute management and health care utilization. Major subthemes included the following: physiologic findings, diagnostics, assessment and treatment of acute painful episodes, and disposition. The most common minor subthemes that emerged included past medical history, presence of a medical home (physician or clinic), individualized analgesic treatment plan for treatment of painful episodes, history of present illness, medical home follow-up available, patient-reported analgesic treatment that works, and availability of analgesic prescription at discharge. Additional important elements in treatment of acute pain episodes included the use of a standard analgesic protocol, need for fluids and nonpharmacologic interventions, and the assessment of typicality of pain presentation. The patients’ interpretation of the need for hospital admission also ranked high. Conclusions: Participants identified several areas that are important in the assessment, management, and disposition decisions that may help guide best practices for SCD patients in the ED setting.

This study investigated the association between effectiveness of ED pain treatment and race of patients, race of providers, and the concordance of patient and provider race, with a prospective, multicenter study of patients presenting to 1 of 20 US and Canadian EDs with moderate to severe pain. Primary outcome is a 2-point or greater reduction in pain intensity, measured with an 11-point verbal scale, considered the minimum clinically important reduction in pain intensity. A total of 776 patients were enrolled. The sample included 57% female, 44% white, 26% black, and 26% Hispanic. The physician was white in 85% of encounters. Arrival pain score (adjusted odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI 1.06, 1.24), receipt of any ED analgesia (1.59; 95% CI 1.17, 2.17), and physician nonwhite race (1.68; 95% CI 1.10, 2.55) were significant predictors of clinically significant reduction in pain intensity in multivariate analysis. Nonwhite physicians achieved better pain control without using more analgesics. Future research should explore the determinants of this difference in patient response to pain treatment related to provider race including provider characteristics and training that were not measured in this study. This study provided no evidence supporting an effect of racial concordance on the primary outcome. Perspective This article presents analysis of predictors of clinically important reduction in pain intensity among emergency department patients, finding nonwhite physicians achieving better pain relief with less analgesia. This finding should encourage researchers to investigate elements of the therapeutic relationship that may be enhanced to achieve better pain relief for patients.

Objective Persons with chronic or recurrent pain frequently visit the emergency department (ED), yet little research examines this experience. We conducted this national survey to assess patients’ ED experiences. Methods We developed and conducted a ten-minute telephone survey using random digit dial methodology. We included adults with chronic or recurrent pain reporting an ED visit within two years. Results We interviewed 500 adults. Sixty percent were female, their median age was 54, two-thirds were under a physician’s care, and 14% were uninsured. They reported an average of 4.2 ED visits within the past two years. Almost one-half reported “complete” or “a great deal” of pain relief during the ED visit, while 78% endorsed as “somewhat or definitely true” that “the ED staff understood how to treat my pain.” Although over three-fourths of patients felt that receiving additional information on pain management or referrals to specialists was “extremely” or “very” important, only one-half reported receiving such referrals or information. A significant minority (11%) reported that the “ED staff made me feel like I was just seeking drugs.” The majority (76%) were “somewhat” to “completely satisfied” with their treatment while 24% were “neutral” to “completely dissatisfied”. In multivariate models, age, recurrent pain, waiting time, imaging, receiving analgesics and pain relief predicted patient satisfaction. Conclusion Although those with chronic or recurrent pain report relatively high satisfaction with the ED, our findings suggests that specific areas, such as unmet needs for information and specialty referral, might be targeted to improve care.

Objective. Pain is a complex experience influenced by factors such as age, race, and ethnicity. We conducted a multicenter study to better understand emergency department (ED) pain management practices and examined the influence of patient and provider gender on analgesic administration. Design. Prospective, multicenter, observational study. Setting. Consecutive patients, ≥8-years-old, presenting with complaints of moderate to severe pain (pain numerical rating scale [NRS] > 3) at 16 U.S. and three Canadian hospitals. Outcomes Measures. Receipt of any ED analgesic, receipt of opioids, and adequate pain relief in the ED. Results. Eight hundred forty-two patients participated including 56% women. Baseline pain scores were similar in both genders. Analgesic administration rates were not significantly different for female and male patients (63% vs 57%, P = 0.08), although females presenting with severe pain (NRS ≥8) were more likely to receive analgesics (74% vs 64%, P = 0.02). Female physicians were more likely to administer analgesics than male physicians (66% vs 57%, P = 0.009). In logistic regression models, predictors of ED analgesic administration were male physician (odds ratio [OR] = 0.7), arrival pain (OR = 1.3), number of pain assessments (OR = 1.83), and charted follow-up plans (OR = 2.16). With regard to opioid administration, female physicians were more likely to prescribe opioids to females ( P = 0.006) while male physicians were more likely to prescribe to males ( P = 0.05). In logistic regression models, predictors of opioids administration included male patient gender (OR = 0.58), male patient–physician interaction (OR = 2.58), arrival pain score (OR = 1.28), average pain score (OR = 1.10), and number of pain assessments (OR = 1.5). Pain relief was not impacted by gender. Conclusion. Provider gender as opposed to patient gender appears to influence pain management decisions in the ED.

INTRODUCTION In what has become a near-weekly ritual, one of us (K.H.T.) receives an emotionally laden call about the plight of a loved one, colleague, or acquaintance with cancer who needs our help to navigate the labyrinth of emergency care. The patient may receive care at our comprehensive cancer center but become “stranded” in an emergency department (ED) outside the often rigid borders between our center and other health care systems. They may be only a few blocks away, or in another town, state, or country. Usually, after a flurry of calls or e-mails, the patient is accepted into one of our clinics. At times, the patient must sign out against medical advice to come directly to our ED. These exercises often end with the caller’s tremendous expressions of gratitude, thanking us for being “miracle workers.” However, it shouldn’t take a miracle to communicate and deliver high-quality patient-centered care in the ED. Every year, between 1 and 3 million US ED visits are related to cancer. The visits may be the index presentation leading to an eventual cancer diagnosis. More commonly, such visits are prompted by symptoms resulting from cancer progression, treatment toxicities, or complications of surgery. These visits weigh heavy on our patients and often portend a worsening prognosis. Because cancer is commonly a disease of aging, US EDs should expect to see increasing numbers of cancer patients and survivors as the population ages. Given projected shortages of cancer care providers, it is increasingly important for the emergency care community to better understand and expertly manage cancer emergencies. To fulfill the Triple Aim (improved patient experience, improved population health, and reduced health care costs) and effectively manage limited resources, we must foster transparent communication and collaboration between emergency physicians and the multiple professionals who participate in cancer care and research. It is vital that

To characterize the initial management of patients with sickle cell disease and an acute pain episode, to compare these practices with the American Pain Society Guideline for the Management of Acute and Chronic Pain in Sickle-Cell Disease in the emergency department, and to identify factors associated with a delay in receiving an initial analgesic.This was a multicenter retrospective design. Consecutive patients with an emergency department visit in 2004 for an acute pain episode related to sickle cell disease were included. Exclusion criteria included age younger than 18 years. A structured medical record review was used to abstract data, including the following outcome variables: analgesic agent and dose, route, and time to administration of initial analgesic. Additional variables included demographics, triage level, intravenous access, and study site. Mann-Whitney U test or Kruskal-Wallis test and multivariate regression were used to identify differences in time to receiving an initial analgesic between groups.There were 612 patient visits, with 159 unique patients. Median time to administration of an initial analgesic was 90 minutes (25th to 75th interquartile range, 54-159 minutes). During 87% of visits, patients received the recommended agent (morphine or hydromorphone); 92% received the recommended dose, and 55% received the drug by the recommended route (intravenously or subcutaneously). Longer times to administration occurred in female patients (mean difference, 21 minutes; 95% confidence interval = 7 to 36 minutes; p = 0.003) and patients assigned triage level 3, 4, or 5 versus 1 or 2 (mean difference, 45 minutes; 95% confidence interval = 29 to 61 minutes; p = 0.00). Patients from study sites 1 and 2 also experienced longer delays.Patients with an acute painful episode related to sickle cell disease experienced significant delays to administration of an initial analgesic.

Objectives Patient compliance and satisfaction with analgesics prescribed after emergency department (ED) care for acute pain are poorly understood, largely because of the lack of direct patient follow-up with the ED provider. Our objective was to compare patient satisfaction with three analgesia regimens prescribed for post-ED care—a nasally administered nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), an opioid, or combination therapy—by collecting granular follow-up on analgesic use, pain scores, side effects, work activity levels, and overall satisfaction directly from patients. Methods We designed a prospective registry linking ED assessment and analgesic management for acute pain of specific musculoskeletal or visceral etiologies with self-reported automated telephonic follow-up daily for the 4 days post-ED discharge. Patients were prescribed a specific NSAID (SPRIX, ketorolac tromethamine for nasal instillation) only, an oral opioid only, or both with the opioid clearly defined as rescue therapy, at the ED provider's discretion. Results There were 824 evaluable subjects. Maximum pain scores improved day to day more effectively with a ketorolac-based approach. Self-reported rates of return to work and work effectiveness were higher with SPRIX than with opioids or combination therapy. Adverse effects of nausea, constipation, drowsiness, and abdominal pain were higher each day among patients taking an opioid; nasal irritation was more common with SPRIX. Overall satisfaction at the end of the follow-up period was higher with SPRIX-based treatment than with opioid monotherapy. Conclusions Automated telephonic follow-up of ED patients prescribed short-term analgesia is feasible. Ketorolac-based analgesia after an ED visit for many acute pain syndromes was associated with favorable patient outcomes and higher satisfaction than opioid-based therapy. SPRIX, an NSAID that is not available over the counter and has a novel delivery approach, may be useful for short-term post-ED outpatient analgesia.

OBJECTIVES: One of the most challenging areas of emergency medicine practice is the management and treatment of severe and persistent pain, including cancer-related pain. Emergency departments (EDs) in the United States frequently provide care for patients with cancer and an increasing concern is the potential for opioid misuse in this patient group. The authors determined the risk for opioid misuse among ED cancer patients with pain and assessed demographic and clinical factors associated with increased misuse risk. The Texas state prescription monitoring program was also queried for evidence of multiple opioid prescriptions for comparing low- and high-risk groups. METHODS: The Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain-Revised (SOAPP-R) was administered to assess risk for opioid misuse among cancer patients presenting to the ED of a comprehensive cancer center in the United States. Eligibility criteria included: 1) presentation for treatment of chronic cancer-related pain while taking a prescribed schedule II opioid for analgesia, 2) age of 18 years or older, 3) ability to speak English, and 4) ability to understand the study and give written informed consent. RESULTS: Of 934 ED patients screened for the study, 290 were eligible and 209 participated (72% response rate). On the basis of the recommended SOAPP-R cutoff score of 18, a total of 71 of the 209 patients (34%) were categorized as having a high risk of misuse. Of note, 15% and 4% of all patients reported past or current use of illicit substances, respectively. The total number of annual opioid prescriptions (17.8 vs. 12.6; p = 0.023) differed between the high- versus low-risk groups. Multivariable analyses showed that depression (odds ratio [OR] = 3.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.45 to 6.48; p = 0.003), poor coping (OR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.13; p = 0.001), and illicit substance use (OR = 28.30, 95% CI = 2.97 to 269.24; p = 0.029) were significantly associated with high risk of opioid misuse. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of opioid misuse among cancer patients is substantial. Screening for opioid misuse in the ED is feasible. Language: en

Background Effective, appropriate, and safe opioid analgesia administration in the Emergency Department (ED) is a complex issue, with risks of both over- and underutilization of medications. Objective To assess for possible association between practitioner status (physician [MD] vs. mid-level provider [MLP]) and use of opioids for in-ED treatment of musculoskeletal pain (MSP). Methods This was a secondary, hypothesis-generating analysis of a subset of subjects who had ED analgesia noted as part of entry into a prospective registry trial of outpatient analgesia. The study was conducted at 12 U.S. academic EDs, 10 of which utilized MLPs. Patients were enrolled as a convenience sample from September 2012 through February 2014. Study patients were adults (>17 years of age) with acute MSP and eligibility for both nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and opioids at ED discharge. The intervention of interest was whether patients received opioid therapy in the ED prior to discharge. Results MDs were significantly more likely to order opioids than MLPs for ED patients with MSP. The association between MD/MLP status and likelihood of treatment with opioids was similar in both classical logistic regression (odds ratio [OR] 2.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1–4.5, p = 0.019) and in propensity-adjusted modeling (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0–4.5, p = 0.049). Conclusions In preliminary analysis, MD/MLP status was significantly associated with likelihood of provider treatment of MSP with opioids. A follow-up study is warranted to confirm the results of this hypothesis-testing analysis and to inform efforts toward consistency in opioid therapy in the ED.

Objectives: The lack of epidemiological studies has made it difficult to assess the extent of public health problems in North Korea. In the absence of empirical data, less intrusive study designs acceptable to the North Korean government could be developed to gauge the public's health. To this end we developed a basic oral health survey in order to assess the prevalence of untreated dental caries among children. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 854 elementary school students was conducted in the city of Wonsan, North Korea. Students were screened and classified into one of three states of oral health: no caries, minor caries or severe dental caries. Verbal surveys were concurrently administered on children to collect basic information on oral health behaviours and demographic characteristics. Statistical analyses were performed to determine if any variables were significant predictors of oral health status category. Results: Among the 854 students screened, we found 255 students with no caries (29.9%), 316 students with minor caries (37.0%), and 283 students with severe caries (33.1%). The majority of students (70.1%) screened had dental caries. Almost all of the students (98.5%) claimed to brush their teeth daily and 71.2% of students visited a dentist in the past year. There were no significant predictors of oral health status. Conclusions: The oral health of children in Wonsan, North Korea is comparable if not slightly better than the oral health status of children of similar age in countries with similar Social-Economic Status (SES). Basic oral health screens are useful to produce a snapshot of general oral health status among children in North Korea and may provide insight as to the general health of these children.

Each patient's pain experience is uniquely his or her own. Standardized pain assessment methodologies and procedures provide a window to this experience and constitute a necessary first step to our understanding of pain, in both clinical and research settings. All too often, emergency department pain assessment is cursory--performed more to satisfy regulatory requirements than to guide our therapies or evaluate our practices. This article provides information on a number of assessment techniques that are appropriate for clinical and research use. Their use should inform our practice and lead to continuous improvements in our management of pain.

A number of emergency department studies have corroborated findings from mortality and hospital admission studies regarding an association of ambient air pollution and respiratory outcomes. More refined assessment has been limited by study size and available air quality data.Measurements of 5 pollutants (particulate matter [PM10], ozone, nitrogen dioxide [NO2], carbon monoxide [CO], and sulfur dioxide [SO2]) were available for the entire study period (1 January 1993 to 31 August 2000); detailed measurements of particulate matter were available for 25 months. We obtained data on 4 million emergency department visits from 31 hospitals in Atlanta. Visits for asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, upper respiratory infection, and pneumonia were assessed in relation to air pollutants using Poisson generalized estimating equations.In single-pollutant models examining 3-day moving averages of pollutants (lags 0, 1, and 2): standard deviation increases of ozone, NO2, CO, and PM10 were associated with 1-3% increases in URI visits; a 2 microg/m increase of PM2.5 organic carbon was associated with a 3% increase in pneumonia visits; and standard deviation increases of NO2 and CO were associated with 2-3% increases in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease visits. Positive associations persisted beyond 3 days for several of the outcomes, and over a week for asthma.The results of this study contribute to the evidence of an association of several correlated gaseous and particulate pollutants, including ozone, NO2, CO, PM, and organic carbon, with specific respiratory conditions.

761 Pain is the single most common reason patients seek care in the emergency department.1 Given the prevalence of pain as a presenting complaint, one might expect emergency physicians to assign its treatment a high priority; however, pain is often seemingly invisible to the emergency physician. Multiple research studies have documented that the undertreatment of pain, or oligoanalgesia, is a frequent occurrence.2 Pain that is not acknowledged and managed appropriately causes dissatisfaction with medical care, hostility toward the physician, unscheduled returns to the emergency department, delayed return to full function, and potentially, an increased risk of litigation. Failure to recognize and treat pain may result in anxiety, depression, sleep disturbances, increased oxygen demands with the potential for end organ ischemia, and decreased movement with an increased risk of venous thrombosis. Given this state affairs, we should examine the barriers that serve to block the adequate recognition and treatment of pain in emergency departments, as well as other healthcare delivery settings. One of these barriers is the physician’s fear of being “duped” by patients who fabricate pain symptoms in order to obtain controlled substances for recreational use or diversion. This article will focus on the problem of substance abuse, and the perceptions of healthcare providers regarding substance abuse, as they relate to patients who present to the emergency department with complaints of pain.

Patients presenting to the emergency department with heart failure are evaluated based on the subjective sensation of dyspnea. In this study, the authors sought to determine the change in dyspnea, measured by a visual analog scale (VAS), which is associated with a meaningful change in the patient's perception and the effect of dyspnea severity on the VAS. In this prospective, observational study the authors defined a meaningful change in VAS dyspnea as the difference between VAS scores when patients reported "a little less difficulty breathing" or "a little more difficulty breathing." Seventy-four patients were evaluated, and the mean for a meaningful change in VAS was 21.1 mm (95% confidence interval, 12.3-29.9 mm). Patients that recorded higher index VAS scores had a significantly greater change in VAS. VAS scores and the changes with treatment provide the treating physician with another means to assess the effects of their interventions.

Background Despite evidence supporting an association between ambient air pollutants and cardiovascular disease (CVD), the roles of the physicochemical components of particulate matter (PM) and copollutants are not fully understood. This time-series study examined the relation between ambient air pollution and cardiovascular conditions using ambient air quality data and emergency department visit data in Atlanta, Georgia, from January 1, 1993, to August 31, 2000. Methods Outcome data on 4,407,535 emergency department visits were compiled from 31 hospitals in Atlanta. The air quality data included measurements of criteria pollutants for the entire study period, as well as detailed measurements of mass concentrations for the fine and coarse fractions of PM and several physical and chemical characteristics of PM for the final 25 months of the study. Emergency department visits for CVD and for cardiovascular subgroups were assessed in relation to daily measures of air pollutants using Poisson generalized linear models controlling for long-term temporal trends and meteorologic conditions with cubic splines. Results Using an a priori 3-day moving average in single-pollutant models, CVD visits were associated with NO2, CO, PM2.5, organic carbon, elemental carbon, and oxygenated hydrocarbons. Secondary analyses suggested that these associations tended to be strongest with same-day pollution levels. Conclusions These findings provide evidence for an association between CVD visits and several correlated pollutants, including gases, PM2.5, and PM2.5 components.

Background Palliative sedation to treat severely distressing symptoms in those with a poor prognosis is well-accepted. Objective We discuss palliative sedation in the Emergency Department and the use of ketamine. Case Report We present the case of a patient with angioedema of the tongue and severe respiratory distress. The patient's nursing home was unable to control her symptoms and she was transferred to the Emergency Department. The patient received fentanyl 50 μg i.v. and ketamine 50 mg i.v. every 5 min until adequate palliative sedation was achieved. Conclusion Ketamine can be considered for Emergency Department palliative sedation in selected patients. Identifying and caring for unmet palliative care needs is an important skill for Emergency Medicine.

The Institute of Medicine's landmark report, "Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care," documents the pervasiveness of racial and ethnic disparities in the U.S. health care delivery system, and provides several recommendations to address them. It is clear from research data, such as those demonstrating racial and ethnic disparities in emergency department (ED) pain management, that emergency medicine (EM) is not immune to this problem. The IOM authors describe two strategies that can reduce disparities in EM. First, workforce diversity is likely to result in a community of emergency physicians who are better prepared to understand, learn from, and collaborate with persons from other racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds, whether these be patients, fellow clinicians, or the larger medical and scientific community. Given the ethical and practical advantages of a more diverse EM workforce, continued and expanded initiatives to increase diversity within EM should be undertaken. Second, the specialty's educational programs should produce emergency physicians with the skills and knowledge needed to serve an increasingly diverse population. This cultural competence should include an awareness of existing racial and ethnic health disparities, recognition of the risks of stereotyping and biased treatment, and knowledge of the incidence and prevalence of health conditions among diverse populations. Culturally competent emergency care providers also possess the skills to identify and manage racial and ethnic differences in health values, beliefs, and behaviors with the ultimate goal of delivering quality health services to all patients cared for in EDs.

CONTEXT: Pain has significant socioeconomic, health, and quality-of-life implications. Racial- and ethnic-based differences in the pain care experience have been described. Racial and ethnic minorities tend to be undertreated for pain when compared with non-Hispanic Whites. OBJECTIVES: To provide health care providers, researchers, health care policy analysts, government officials, patients, and the general public with pertinent evidence regarding differences in pain perception, assessment, and treatment for racial and ethnic minorities. Evidence is provided for racial- and ethnic-based differences in pain care across different types of pain (i.e., experimental pain, acute postoperative pain, cancer pain, chronic non-malignant pain) and settings (i.e., emergency department). Pertinent literature on patient, health care provider, and health care system factors that contribute to racial and ethnic disparities in pain treatment are provided. EVIDENCE: A selective literature review was performed by experts in pain. The experts developed abstracts with relevant citations on racial and ethnic disparities within their specific areas of expertise. Scientific evidence was given precedence over anecdotal experience. The abstracts were compiled for this manuscript. The draft manuscript was made available to the experts for comment and review prior to submission for publication. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the Institute of Medicine's report on health care disparities, racial and ethnic disparities in pain perception, assessment, and treatment were found in all settings (i.e., postoperative, emergency room) and across all types of pain (i.e., acute, cancer, chronic nonmalignant, and experimental). The literature suggests that the sources of pain disparities among racial and ethnic minorities are complex, involving patient (e.g., patient/health care provider communication, attitudes), health care provider (e.g., decision making), and health care system (e.g., access to pain medication) factors. There is a need for improved training for health care providers and educational interventions for patients. A comprehensive pain research agenda is necessary to address pain disparities among racial and ethnic minorities.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate ED documentation of patient pain in light of the Joint Commission of Accreditation of Healthcare Organization's emphasis on pain assessment and management. A prospectively designed pain management survey was offered to patients on ED discharge. Documentation of pain intensity by ED nurses and physicians was retrospectively reviewed. Of 302 patients surveyed, 261 (86%) complete charts were available for review. Initial pain assessments were noted on 94% of the charts, but a pain scale was used for only 23% of the patients. Documentation of pain subsequent to therapy was noted on 39% of the charts, but a pain scale was used only 19% of the time. Subsequent to therapy, nurses were 2.2 x more likely to document pain assessments than physicians (30% vs 16%, P

Background Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) after cardiac arrest is utilized indiscriminately among unselected populations. Cancer patients have particularly low rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to hospital discharge after CPR. Our study determines rates of ROSC and survival to hospital discharge among cancer patients undergoing CPR in our cancer center. We examined whether these rates have changed over the past decade. Methods This IRB-approved retrospective observational study was conducted in our cancer center. The ED and cancer center provide medical care for ≥ 115,000 patients annually. Cases of CPR presenting to the cancer center for years 2003–2012 were identified using Institutional CPR and Administrative Data for Resuscitation and Billing databases. Age, gender, ethnicity, ROSC and Discharge Alive using a modified Utsein template was used to compare proportions achieving ROSC and survival to hospital discharge for two time periods: 2003–2007 (Group 1) and 2008–2012 (Group 2), using traditional Pearson chi-square statistics. Results One hundred twenty-six cancer center patients received CPR from 2003–2012. Group 1 (N = 64) and Group 2 (N = 62) were similar; age (60 vs. 60 years), gender (63% vs. 58% male), and race/ethnicity (67% vs. 56% White). Proportions achieving ROSC were similar in the two time periods (36% Group 1 vs. 45% Group 2, OR = 1.47, 95% CI 0.72 - 3.00) as was survival to hospital discharge (11% Group 1 vs. 10% Group 2, OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.28 - 2.76). Conclusions ROSC after CPR in cancer patients and survival to hospital discharge did not change over time.

Objectives: To adapt screening and brief intervention for alcohol problems (SBI) to a high-volume emergency department (ED) setting and evaluate its acceptability to patients. Methods: Patients at a large public-hospital ED were screened with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). Screen-positive drinkers (AUDIT score ≥ 6) were provided brief, on-site counseling and referral as needed. Three months later, project staff blinded to baseline measures reassessed alcohol intake, alcohol-related harm, alcohol dependence symptoms, and readiness to change. Results: Of 1,034 patients approached, 78.3% (810) consented to participate (95% CI = 75.5% to 81.2%), and 21.2% (172) screened positive (95% CI = 18.4% to 24.0%). Of 88 patients with complete intervention data, 94.3% (83) accepted an intervention (95% CI = 89.5% to 99.2%), with acceptance rates ranging from 93% to 100% across four alcohol-problem-severity levels (p = 0.7). A majority (59.0%) set goals to decrease or stop drinking (95% CI = 48.4% to 69.6%). The group recontacted (n= 23) experienced statistically significant decreases in alcohol intake, alcohol-related harm, and dependence symptoms, with measures decreasing for 68%, 52%, and 61% of the patients. Readiness to change also showed statistically significant improvement, with scores increasing for 43% of the patients. Moreover, two-thirds of the patients (15/23) reported at follow-up that SBI was a helpful part of their ED visit. Conclusions: High rates of consent and acceptance of counseling for alcohol problems by patients across a wide range of problem severity indicate that this protocol was acceptable to at-risk patients in a public-hospital ED. Improvements in alcohol-related outcome measures at follow-up were strong enough to warrant controlled studies of intervention efficacy.

Substantial evidence supports an association of particulate matter (PM) with cardiorespiratory illnesses, but little is known regarding characteristics of PM that might contribute to this association and the mechanisms of action. The Atlanta superstation sponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute as part of the Aerosol Research and Inhalation Epidemiology Study (ARIES) study is monitoring chemical composition of ambient particles by size fraction, as well as a comprehensive suite of other pollutants, at a site in downtown Atlanta during the 25-month period, August 1, 1998-August 31, 2000. Our investigative team is making use of this unique resource in several morbidity studies, called the "Study of Particulates and Health in Atlanta (SOPHIA)". The study includes the following components: (1) a time series investigation of emergency department (ED) visits for the period during which the superstation is operating; (2) a time series investigation of ED visits during the 5 years prior to implementation of the superstation; and (3) a study of arrhythmic events in patients equipped with automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillators (AICDs) for the period January 1, 1993-August 31, 2000. Thirty-three of 39 Atlanta area EDs are participating in the ED studies, comprising over a million annual ED visits. In this paper, we present initial analyses of data from 18 of the 33 participating EDs. The preliminary data set includes 1,662,713 ED visits during the pre-superstation time period and 559,480 visits during the superstation time period. Visits for four case groupings--asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), dysrhythmia, and all cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) combined--have been assessed relative to daily air quality indices, controlling for long-term temporal trends and meteorologic variables, using general linear models, generalized estimating equations and generalized additive models. Single-pollutant models predicting case visitation rates using moving averages of 0-, 1-, and 2-day lagged air quality variables were run. For the pre-superstation period, PM10 (24-h), ozone (8-h), SO2 (1-h), NO2 (1-h) and CO (1-h) were studied. For the first 12 months of superstation operation, the following air quality variables of a priori interest were available: ozone (8-h), NO2 (1-h), SO2 (1-h), CO (1-h), and 24-h measurements of PM10, coarse PM (PM 2.5-10 microm), PM2.5, polar VOCs, 10-100 nm particulate count and surface area, and in the PM2.5 fraction: sulfates, acidity, water-soluble metals, organic matter (OM), and elemental carbon (EC). During the pre-superstation time period, statistically significant, positive associations were observed for adult asthma with ozone, and for COPD with ozone, NO2 and PM10. During the superstation time period, the following statistically significant, positive associations were observed: dysrhythmia with CO, coarse PM, and PM2.5 EC; and all CVDs with CO, PM2.5 EC and PM2.5 OM. While covariation of many of the air quality indices limits the informativeness of this analysis, the study provides one of the first assessments of PM components in relation to ED visits.