Search

Objective: To describe the epidemiology, treatment and monitoring of treatment outcomes of patients presenting to the ED with hyperkalaemia. Methods: We undertook a retrospective observational study in a mixed adult/paediatric ED over five 3‐month periods. Consecutive patients were included if they had an initial serum or blood gas potassium ≥6.0 mmol/L. Patients were excluded if their principal diagnosis was diabetic ketoacidosis, their blood sample was haemolysed or the blood gas result was inconsistent with a subsequent serum potassium. Data were extracted from electronic medical records and two senior emergency registrars independently assessed available ECGs. Moderate and severe hyperkalaemia were potassium 6.0–6.4 and ≥6.5 mmol/L, respectively. Results: Overall, 392 patients were included (mean age 73.7 years, triage category 1 or 2 28.3%, admitted 91.3%). Three hundred and twenty‐one (81.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 77.6–85.5%) patients took one or more medications that predispose to hyperkalaemia and 335 (85.5%, 95% CI 81.5–88.7%) had one or more predisposing comorbidities. Two hundred and seventy‐one (69.1%, 95% CI 64.3–73.6%) patients had moderately severe and 121 (30.9%, 95% CI 26.4–35.7%) had severe hyperkalaemia. Two hundred and fifty‐nine (66.1%, 95% CI 61.1–70.7%) patients were administered at least one medication in ED to lower the potassium concentration and 51 (13.0%, 95% CI 9.9–16.8%) were dialysed. One hundred and eighty‐seven patients received intravenous insulin: 40 (21.4%) had documented biochemical hypoglycaemia, but 45 (24.1%) had no post‐insulin blood glucose level documented. Hyperkalaemia‐associated ECG changes were uncommon. Conclusion: Most ED patients with hyperkalaemia have identifiable clinical and medication‐related risk factors. Variations in care were widespread and monitoring for iatrogenic adverse events was suboptimal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Patients present to EDs with various medication‐related problems (MRPs). MRPs are also associated with ED care, occurring during ED presentation or shortly afterwards. The aim of the present study is to describe the prevalence and nature of MRPs that occur prior to, during or shortly after leaving ED. Methods: We undertook a prospective, observational study in nine Australian EDs. Blocks of 10 consecutive adult patients who were not seen by a pharmacist in ED and who presented at pre‐specified times were identified. Within 1 week of ED discharge, a pharmacist interviewed patients and undertook a medical record review to determine their medication history, patients' understanding of treatment, potential MRP risk factors and manage any identified MRPs. Results: A total of 904 patients were recruited: 14.8% aged ≥80 years, 18.9% taking more than eight regular medications; 581 MRPs were identified; 287 (49.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 45.3–53.5%) of moderate‐high significance. Most highly significant MRPs involved high‐risk medications, particularly strong opioids, insulin and anti‐coagulants. The most common types of MRPs were prescribing errors (46.8%), patient adherence/knowledge issues (31.2%) and adverse drug reactions (7.4%). Of all patients, 381 (42.1%, 95% CI 38.9–45.5%) had at least one MRP; 31.4% (95% CI 28.4–34.6%) had MRPs that could be identified or managed by screening at ED presentation and 12.4% (95% CI 10.4–14.8%) had MRPs that could be identified or managed by screening at ED discharge. Conclusions: Patients experienced a range of MRPs throughout the ED continuum of care. From these data, screening tools will be developed so that ED clinicians may identify patients at greatest risk of MRPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objective was to describe the incidence, nature, and risk factors for adverse events (AEs) among patients who received parenteral sedation for acute agitation in an emergency department (ED) setting. Methods: We undertook a prospective observational study and a clinical trial of parenteral sedation for the management of acute agitation. We included agitated adult patients who required parenteral sedation from 2014 to 2017 in 12 Australian EDs, excluding those with incomplete information or aged under 18 years. The primary outcome was the number of patients who experienced at least one AE. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with AEs. Results: A total of 904 patients were included in the analyses (62.3% male; median age = 34 years, range = 18 to 95 years). Of these, 144 (15.9%) patients experienced at least one AE. The most common AEs were oxygen desaturation (7.4%), airway obstruction (3.6%), bradycardia (1.9%), hypotension (1.7%), and prolonged QTc interval (1.3%). No deaths or serious AEs were reported. The following factors had an increased adjusted odds ratio (OR) for experiencing an AE: age 65 years and older (OR = 2.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2 to 7.2), more than one type of parenteral sedation administered within 60 minutes (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.4 to 3.1), and alcohol intoxication (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.2 to 2.6). Conclusions: Sedation‐related AEs are common, especially respiratory events. Elderly patients, sedation with multiple sedatives within 60 minutes, and alcohol intoxication increased the risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of an educational intervention on ED discharge opioid analgesic ( OA) prescribing. Methods A brief, one-on-one, educational intervention was delivered to ED OA prescribers by an ED clinical champion. The percentage of patients receiving (i) written advice regarding appropriate oxycodone use, (ii) written or verbal advice regarding appropriate post-discharge follow up and (iii) written general practitioner notification that oxycodone had been prescribed were determined pre- and post-intervention, through review of electronic patient records and structured patient telephone interviews conducted 3-7 days after ED attendance. Secondary outcomes included total amount prescribed and use of non- OA therapies. ED OA prescribers were surveyed to evaluate perceived effectiveness and intervention acceptability. Results A total of 30 ED OA prescribers received the 5-min intervention. Pre- and post-intervention, 80 and 81 patients were interviewed, respectively. Percentage of patients given written OA information increased from 10% to 22% ( P = 0.04) and those receiving follow-up advice increased from 61 to 94% ( P < 0.01). General practitioner notification of OA prescription increased from 15% to 88% ( P < 0.01). Risk ratio for achieving all three end-points was 7.5 (95% confidence interval 1.8-32, P = 0.01). Median total amount of oxycodone prescribed/patient decreased from 100mg to 50mg ( P = 0.04). Non- OA therapies were used by 49% of pre-intervention and 85% of post-intervention patients ( P = <0.01). All ED OA prescribers agreed the intervention would change their prescribing practices; 70% deemed the intervention appropriate for delivery in their work environment. Conclusion A brief, one-on-one educational intervention targeting ED OA prescribers was well received by clinicians and associated with improved quality of OA prescribing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim To examine the efficacy and safety of (1) midazolam-droperidol versus droperidol and (2) midazolam-droperidol versus olanzapine for methamphetamine-related acute agitation. Design and setting A multi-centre, randomized, double-blind, controlled, clinical trial was conducted in two Australian emergency departments, between October 2014 and September 2015. Participants Three hundred and sixty-one patients, aged 18-65 years, requiring intravenous medication sedation for acute agitation, were enrolled into this study. We report the results of a subgroup of 92 methamphetamine-affected patients. Intervention and comparator Patients were assigned randomly to receive either an intravenous bolus of midazolam 5 mg-droperidol 5 mg combined, droperidol 10 mg or olanzapine 10 mg. Two additional doses were administered, if required: midazolam 5 mg, droperidol 5 mg or olanzapine 5 mg, respectively. Measurements The primary outcome was the proportion of patients sedated adequately at 10 minutes. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (ORs, 95% CI) were estimated. Findings The baseline characteristics of patients in the three groups were similar. At 10 minutes, significantly more patients in the midazolam-droperidol group [29 of 34 (85.3%)] were sedated adequately compared with the droperidol group [14 of 30 (46.7%), OR = 6.63, 95% CI = 2.02-21.78] or with the olanzapine group [14 of 28 (50.0%), OR 5.80, 95% CI = 1.74-19.33]. The number of patients who experienced an adverse event (AE) in the midazolam-droperidol, droperidol and olanzapine groups was seven of 34, two of 30 and six of 28, respectively. The most common AE was oxygen desaturation. Conclusion A midazolam-droperidol combination appears to provide more rapid sedation of patients with methamphetamine-related acute agitation than droperidol or olanzapine alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To determine the prevalence and nature of off-label and unlicenced (off-label/unlicenced) medicine administration to paediatric ED patients. Methods We undertook a retrospective, observational study in six EDs ( July 2011 to June 2012, inclusive). Patients, aged 0-17 years, who were administered a medicine in the ED were included. At each site, 50 eligible patients were randomly selected each month of the study period. An explicit review of each patient's records was undertaken. Medicines were classified as on or off-label/unlicenced according to categories of use approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration. Results There were 3343 patients enrolled (56.5% men, mean ± SD age 6.7 ± 5.4 years). Of the 6786 medicine doses administered, 2072 (30.5%, 95% CI 29.4-31.7%) were off-label/unlicenced. The off-label/unlicenced doses were administered to 1213 (36.3%, 95% CI 34.7-37.9%) patients. Patients administered an off-label/unlicenced medicine were younger than those who were not ( P < 0.01). Salbutamol, ondansetron, ipratropium, fentanyl and oxycodone were the medicines most commonly administered off-label. In 910 (44.0%) cases, the dose/frequency was not approved; in 592 (28.6%), there was an unapproved indication for treatment; in 158 (7.6%), the medicine was administered via an unapproved route; in 154 (7.4%) the medicine was not approved for the weight or age; and in 74 (3.5%) an unlicenced product was administered. The remaining cases had combinations of reasons. Conclusions Off-label/unlicenced medicine administration is common. A registry of commonly used off-label medicines is recommended in which the safety and efficacy of their off-label use have been demonstrated by published evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The study aims to evaluate the impact of a nurse-initiated analgesia pathway ( NIAP) intervention for paediatric patients in the ED. Methods We undertook a pre- and post-intervention trial in a large, tertiary referral, mixed ED. The intervention comprised development and implementation of a comprehensive NIA Standing Order. In addition to paracetamol, which nurses could initiate pre-intervention, they were authorised to administer ibuprofen, paracetamol/codeine combinations and topical local anaesthetics prior to a doctor assessing the patient. All nurses were trained and credentialed prior to administering the NIAP. Patients aged 5-17 years with a triage pain score of ≥4 ( Wong- Baker or numerical rating scale) were eligible for enrolment. The primary outcome was time to analgesia. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients who received 'adequate analgesia' and parental satisfaction with ED pain management (measured 48 h post-discharge). Results Fifty-one children were enrolled in both the pre- and post-intervention periods. Patient sex and mean age, weight and triage pain score did not differ between the groups ( P > 0.05). At post-intervention, significantly more patients received nurse-initiated analgesia (3.0% vs 43.9%; P < 0.001) and the median time to analgesia was significantly reduced (58 min vs 23 min; P < 0.01). Also, significantly more patients received 'adequate analgesia' post-intervention (41.2% vs 72.5%; P < 0.001). At follow up, the proportion of parents who were very satisfied with their child's overall pain management trended upwards in the post-intervention period (47.1% vs 66.7%; P = 0.07). No adverse events were observed during either period. Conclusion The NIAP significantly reduced time to analgesia. It was associated with high levels of parental satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We aimed to determine factors that are significantly associated with a high level of patient satisfaction with their pain management. We undertook an observational study in a large metropolitan ED. Adult patients with a triage pain score of ≥4 (0-10 scale) were enrolled. Data collected included demographics, presenting complaint, pain scores every 30 min, whether nurse-initiated analgesia was administered, the nature of the pain relief administered, time to first dose of analgesia, elements of staff communication and whether 'adequate analgesia' was provided (defined as a decrease in pain score to <4 and a decrease from the triage pain score of ≥2). The primary end-point, determined at follow up within 48 h, was the level of satisfaction with pain management (6-point scale: very unsatisfied-very satisfied). One hundred and sixty-seven (82.7%) of 202 enrolled patients were followed up - mean (SD) age 46.4 (18.3) years, 75 (44.9%) men. Eighty-one (48.5%) patients were very satisfied with their pain management. Only two clinical variables were significantly associated with a high level of satisfaction: receipt of 'adequate analgesia' (as defined) and specific communication regarding pain management. Forty-four (58.7%) versus 37 (40.2%) patients who did/did not receive 'adequate analgesia', respectively, were very satisfied (difference 18.5%, 95% CI 2.3-34.7, P= 0.027). Seventy-seven (53.9%) and four (16.7%) patients who were/were not advised by ED staff that their pain management was important, respectively, were very satisfied (difference 37.2%, 95% CI 17.7-56.6, P= 0.002). Our 'adequate analgesia' definition might provide a useful clinical target, which, combined with adequate communication, might help maximize patient satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]