Search

Objective: Falls in older adults correlate with heightened morbidity and mortality. Assessing fall risk in the emergency department (ED) not only aids in identifying candidates for prevention interventions but may also offer insights into overall mortality risk. We sought to examine the link between fall risk and 30-day mortality in older ED adults., Methods: Observational cohort study of adults aged ≥ 75years who presented to an academic ED and who were assessed for fall risk using the Memorial Emergency Department Fall Risk Assessment Tool (MEDFRAT), a validated, ED-specific screening tool. The fall risk was classified as low (0-2 points), moderate (3-4 points), or high (≥5) risk. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated., Results: A total of 941 patients whose fall risk was assessed in the ED were included in the study. Median age was 83.7 years; 45.6% were male, 75.6% lived in private residences, and 62.7% were admitted. Mortality at 30 days among the high fall risk group was four times that of the low fall risk group (11.8% vs 3.1%; HR 4.00, 95% CI 2.18 to 7.34, p < 0.001). Moderate fall risk individuals had nearly double the mortality rate of the low-risk group (6.0% vs 3.1%), but the difference was not statistically significant (HR 1.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 4.32, p = 0.087)., Conclusion: ED fall risk assessments are linked to 30-day mortality. Screening may facilitate the stratification of older adults at risk for health deterioration., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors of this manuscript have no conflict of interest to disclose related to this manuscript., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The use of a bougie, a flexible endotracheal tube introducer, has been proposed to optimize first-attempt success in emergency department intubations. We aimed to evaluate the available evidence on the association of bougie use in the first attempt and success in tracheal intubations. This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that evaluated first-attempt success between adults intubated with a bougie versus without a bougie (usually with a stylet) in all settings. Manikin and cadaver studies were excluded. A medical librarian searched Ovid Cochrane Central, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies from inception to June 2023. Study selection and data extraction were done in duplicate by 2 independent reviewers. We conducted a meta-analysis with random-effects models, and we used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence at the outcome level. We screened a total of 2,699 studies, and 133 were selected for full-text review. A total of 18 studies, including 12 randomized controlled trials, underwent quantitative analysis. In the meta-analysis of 18 studies (9,151 patients), bougie use was associated with increased first-attempt intubation success (pooled risk ratio [RR] 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06 to 1.17, low certainty evidence). Bougie use was associated with increased first-attempt success across all analyzed subgroups with similar effect estimates, including in emergency intubations (9 studies; 8,070 patients; RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.16, low certainty). The highest point estimate favoring the use of a bougie was in the subgroup of patients with Cormack-Lehane III or IV (5 studies, 585 patients, RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.40 to 1.84, moderate certainty). In this meta-analysis, the bougie as an aid in the first intubation attempt was associated with increased success. Despite the certainty of evidence being low, these data suggest that a bougie should probably be used first and not as a rescue device in emergency intubations., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: History and physical examination are key features to narrow the differential diagnosis of central versus peripheral causes in patients presenting with acute vertigo. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic test accuracy of physical examination findings., Methods: This study involved a patient-intervention-control-outcome (PICO) question: (P) adult ED patients with vertigo/dizziness; (I) presence/absence of specific physical examination findings; and (O) central (ischemic stroke, hemorrhage, others) versus peripheral etiology. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) was assessed., Results: From 6309 titles, 460 articles were retrieved, and 43 met the inclusion criteria: general neurologic examination-five studies, 869 patients, pooled sensitivity 46.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 32.3%-61.9%, moderate certainty) and specificity 92.8% (95% CI 75.7%-98.1%, low certainty); limb weakness/hemiparesis-four studies, 893 patients, sensitivity 11.4% (95% CI 5.1%-23.6%, high) and specificity 98.5% (95% CI 97.1%-99.2%, high); truncal/gait ataxia-10 studies, 1810 patients (increasing severity of truncal ataxia had an increasing sensitivity for central etiology, sensitivity 69.7% [43.3%-87.9%, low] and specificity 83.7% [95% CI 52.1%-96.0%, low]); dysmetria signs-four studies, 1135 patients, sensitivity 24.6% (95% CI 15.6%-36.5%, high) and specificity 97.8% (94.4%-99.2%, high); head impulse test (HIT)-17 studies, 1366 patients, sensitivity 76.8% (64.4%-85.8%, low) and specificity 89.1% (95% CI 75.8%-95.6%, moderate); spontaneous nystagmus-six studies, 621 patients, sensitivity 52.3% (29.8%-74.0%, moderate) and specificity 42.0% (95% CI 15.5%-74.1%, moderate); nystagmus type-16 studies, 1366 patients (bidirectional, vertical, direction changing, or pure torsional nystagmus are consistent with a central cause of vertigo, sensitivity 50.7% [95% CI 41.1%-60.2%, moderate] and specificity 98.5% [95% CI 91.7%-99.7%, moderate]); test of skew-15 studies, 1150 patients (skew deviation is abnormal and consistent with central etiology, sensitivity was 23.7% [95% CI 15%-35.4%, moderate] and specificity 97.6% [95% CI 96%-98.6%, moderate]); HINTS (head impulse, nystagmus, test of skew)-14 studies, 1781 patients, sensitivity 92.9% (95% CI 79.1%-97.9%, high) and specificity 83.4% (95% CI 69.6%-91.7%, moderate); and HINTS+ (HINTS with hearing component)-five studies, 342 patients, sensitivity 99.0% (95% CI 73.6%-100%, high) and specificity 84.8% (95% CI 70.1%-93.0%, high)., Conclusions: Most neurologic examination findings have low sensitivity and high specificity for a central cause in patients with acute vertigo or dizziness. In acute vestibular syndrome (monophasic, continuous, persistent dizziness), HINTS and HINTS+ have high sensitivity when performed by trained clinicians., (© 2022 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: A short course of corticosteroids is among the management strategies considered by specialists for the treatment of vestibular neuritis (VN). We conducted an umbrella review (systematic review of systematic reviews) to summarize the evidence of corticosteroids use for the treatment of VN., Methods: We included systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated the effects of corticosteroids compared to placebo or usual care in adult patients with acute VN. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened in duplicate. The quality of reviews was assessed with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) tool. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment was used to rate certainty of evidence. No meta-analysis was performed., Results: From 149 titles, five systematic reviews were selected for quality assessment, and two reviews were of higher methodological quality and were included. These two reviews included 12 individual studies and 660 patients with VN. In a meta-analysis of two RCTs including a total of 50 patients, the use of corticosteroids (compared to placebo) was associated with higher complete caloric recovery (risk ratio 2.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32 to 6.00, low certainty). It is very uncertain whether this translates into clinical improvement as shown by the imprecise effect estimates for outcomes such as patient-reported vertigo or patient-reported dizziness disability. There was a wide CI for the outcome of dizziness handicap score (one study, 30 patients, 20.9 points in corticosteroids group vs. 15.8 points in placebo, mean difference +5.1, 95% CI -8.09 to +18.29, very low certainty). Higher rates of minor adverse effects for those receiving corticosteroids were reported, but the certainty in this evidence was very low., Conclusions: There is limited evidence to support the use of corticosteroids for the treatment of VN in the emergency department., (© 2022 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute vertigo or dizziness represent a diagnostic challenge. Neuroimaging has variable indications and yield. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic test accuracy of neuroimaging for patients presenting with acute vertigo or dizziness., Methods: An electronic search was designed following patient-intervention-control-outcome (PICO) question-(P) adult patients with acute vertigo or dizziness presenting to the ED; (I) neuroimaging including computed tomography (CT), CT angiography (CTA), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), and ultrasound (US); (C) MRI/clinical criterion standard; and (O) central causes (stroke, hemorrhage, tumor, others) versus peripheral causes of symptoms. Articles were assessed in duplicate. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) was used to assess certainty of evidence in pooled estimates., Results: We included studies that reported diagnostic test accuracy. From 6309 titles, 460 articles were retrieved, and 12 were included: noncontrast CT scan-six studies, 771 patients, pooled sensitivity 28.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.4%-48.5%, moderate certainty) and specificity 98.9% (95% CI 93.4%-99.8%, moderate certainty); MRI-five studies, 943 patients, sensitivity 79.8% (95% CI 71.4%-86.2%, high certainty) and specificity 98.8% (95% CI 96.2%-100%, high certainty); CTA-one study, 153 patients, sensitivity 14.3% (95% CI 1.8%-42.8%) and specificity 97.7% (95% CI 93.8%-99.6%), CT had higher sensitivity than CTA (21.4% and 14.3%) for central etiology; MRA-one study, 24 patients, sensitivity 60.0% (95% CI 26.2%-87.8%) and specificity 92.9% (95% CI 66.1%-99.8%); US-three studies, 258 patients, sensitivity ranged from 30% to 53.6%, specificity from 94.9% to 100%., Conclusions: Noncontrast CT has very low sensitivity and MRI will miss approximately one in five patients with stroke if imaging is obtained early after symptom onset. The evidence does not support neuroimaging as the only tool for ruling out stroke and other central causes in patients with acute dizziness or vertigo presenting to the ED., (© 2022 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Study Objective: To evaluate the association between delirium and subsequent short-term mortality in geriatric patients presenting to the emergency department (ED)., Methods: This was an observational cohort study of adults age ≥75 years who presented to an academic ED and were screened for delirium during their ED visit. The Delirium Triage Screen followed by the Brief Confusion Assessment Method were used to ascertain the presence of delirium. In-hospital, 7-day, and 30-day mortality were compared between patients with and without ED delirium. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated through logistic regression after adjusting for confounders including age, sex, history of dementia, ED disposition, and acuity., Results: A total of 967 ED visits were included for analysis among which delirium was detected in 107 (11.1%). The median age of the cohort was 83 years (IQR 79, 88), 526 (54.4%) were female, 285 (29.5%) had documented dementia, and 171 (17.7%) had a high acuity Emergency Severity Index triage level 1 or 2. During the hospitalization, 5/107 (4.7%) of those with delirium and 4/860 (0.5%) of those without delirium died. Within 7 days of ED departure, 6/107 (5.6%) of those with delirium and 6/860 (0.7%) of those without delirium died (unadjusted OR 8.46, 95% CI 2.68-26.71). Within 30 days, 18/107 (16.8%) of those with delirium and 37/860 (4.3%) of those without delirium died (unadjusted OR 4.50, 95% CI 2.46-8.23). ED delirium remained associated with higher 7-day (adjusted OR 5.23, 95% CI 1.44-19.05, p = 0.008) and 30-day mortality (adjusted OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.45-5.46, p = 0.002)., Conclusion: Delirium is an important prognostic factor that ED clinicians and nurses must be aware of to optimize delirium prevention, management, disposition, and communication with patients and families., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Bellolio has no conflicts of interest related to this work. She receives funding from AHRQ for the study of diagnostic errors, NIH, FDA and Kern Center for palliative and geriatric care related research. The rest of the authors of this manuscript have no conflict of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: The objective of this study is to evaluate the prognostic accuracy of existing rules (San Francisco Syncope Rule [SFSR], Canadian Syncope Risk Score [CSRS], and FAINT score) in older adults., Methods: This is a cohort study of adults aged ≥60 years presenting to an academic emergency department (ED) with syncope or near syncope. We used original criteria for all rules except for the FAINT score, in which N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide was largely missing from the extracted data. Patients were deemed positive for each rule if classified as non-low risk. The primary outcome was the presence of 30-day serious outcome, as defined by syncope research guidelines. Sensitivity and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: A total of 404 ED visits (mean age of patients, 75.5 years) were included. Of these, 44 (10.9%) had a 30-day serious outcome, and 24 (5.9%) had incomplete 30-day follow-up. SFSR was positive for 280 of 380 visits with complete follow-up. Its sensitivity and NLR for predicting 30-day serious outcomes were 86.4% (95% CI, 72.0%-94.3%) and 0.53 (95% CI, 0.25-1.15), respectively. The CSRS was positive for 299 of 380 visits (sensitivity was 88.6% [95% CI, 76.4%-95.7%], and NLR was 0.50 [95% CI, 0.22-1.17]). The modified FAI(N)T score was positive for 318 of 380 visits (sensitivity was 90.9% [95% CI, 77.4%-97.0%], and NLR was 0.53 [95% CI, 0.20-1.38])., Conclusion: Existing rules are suboptimal to predict 30-day serious outcomes in older adults presenting with syncope or near syncope to the ED., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2022 The Authors. JACEP Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Emergency Physicians.)

Background: Acute blood pressure (BP) management in neurologic patients is paramount. Different neurologic emergencies dictate various BP goals. There remains a lack of literature determining the optimal BP regimen regarding safety and efficacy. The objective of this study was to identify which intravenous antihypertensive is the most effective and safest for acute BP management in neurologic emergencies., Methods: Ovid EBM (Evidence Based Medicine) Reviews, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched from inception to August 2020. Randomized controlled trials or comparative observational studies that evaluated clevidipine, nicardipine, labetalol, esmolol, or nitroprusside for acute neurologic emergencies were included. Outcomes of interest included mortality, functional outcome, BP variability, time to goal BP, time within goal BP, incidence of hypotension, and need for rescue antihypertensives. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to evaluate the degree of certainty in the evidence available., Results: A total of 3878 titles and abstracts were screened, and 183 articles were selected for full-text review. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria; however, the significant heterogeneity and very low quality of studies precluded a meta-analysis. All studies included nicardipine. Five studies compared nicardipine with labetalol, three studies compared nicardipine with clevidipine, and two studies compared nicardipine with nitroprusside. Compared with labetalol, nicardipine appears to reach goal BP faster, have less BP variability, and need less rescue antihypertensives. Compared with clevidipine, nicardipine appears to reach goal BP goal slower. Lastly, nicardipine appears to be similar for BP-related outcomes when compared with nitroprusside; however, nitroprusside may be associated with increased mortality. The confidence in the evidence available for all the outcomes was deemed very low., Conclusions: Because of the very low quality of evidence, an optimal BP agent for the treatment of patients with neurologic emergencies was unable to be determined. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to compare the most promising agents., (© 2022. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society.)

Objectives: Evaluate the associations between patients taking ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and their clinical outcomes after an acute viral respiratory illness (AVRI) due to COVID-19., Design: Retrospective cohort., Setting: The USA; 2017-2018 influenza season, 2018-2019 influenza season, and 2019-2020 influenza/COVID-19 season., Participants: People with hypertension (HTN) taking an ACEi, ARB or other HTN medications, and experiencing AVRI., Main Outcome Measures: Change in hospital admission, intensive care unit (ICU) or coronary care unit (CCU), acute respiratory distress (ARD), ARD syndrome (ARDS) and all-cause mortality, comparing COVID-19 to pre-COVID-19 influenza seasons., Results: The cohort included 1 059 474 episodes of AVRI (653 797 filled an ACEi or ARB, and 405 677 other HTN medications). 58.6% were women and 72.9% with age ≥65. The ACEi/ARB cohort saw a larger increase in risk in the COVID-19 influenza season than the other HTN medication cohort for four out of five outcomes, with an additional 1.5 percentage point (pp) increase in risk of an inpatient stay (95% CI 1.2 to 1.9 pp) and of ICU/CCU use (95% CI 0.3 to 2.7 pp) as well as a 0.7 pp (0.1 to 1.2 pp) additional increase in risk of ARD and 0.9 pp (0.4 to 1.3 pp) additional increase in risk of ARDS. There was no statistically significant difference in the absolute risk of death (-0.2 pp, 95% CI -0.4 to 0.1 pp). However, the relative risk of death in 2019/2020 versus 2017/2018 for the ACEi/ARB group was larger (1.40 (1.36 to 1.44)) than for the other HTN medication cohort (1.24 (1.21 to 1.28))., Conclusions: People with AVRI using ACEi/ARBs for HTN had a greater increase in poor outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic than those using other medications to treat HTN. The small absolute magnitude of the differences likely does not support changes in clinical practice., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Computed tomography (CT) imaging is frequently obtained for recurrent abdominal pain after a prior emergency department (ED) evaluation. We evaluate the utility of repeat CT imaging following an indeterminate index CT in low-risk abdominal pain adult ED patients., Methods: An electronic search was designed for the patient-intervention-control-outcome-timing (PICOT) question: (P) adult patients with low-risk, recurrent, and previously undifferentiated atraumatic abdominal pain presenting to the ED after an index-negative CT within 12 months; (I) repeat CT versus (C) no repeat CT; for (O) abdominal surgery or other invasive procedure, mortality, identification of potentially life-threatening diagnosis, and hospital and intensive care unit admission rates; and return ED visit (T), all within 30 days. Four reviewers independently selected evidence for inclusion and then synthesized the results around the most prevalent themes of repeat CT timing, diagnostic yield, ionizing radiation exposure, and predictors of repetitive imaging., Results: Although 637 articles and abstracts were identified, no direct evidence was found. Thirteen documents were synthesized as indirect evidence. None of the indirect evidence defined a low-risk subset of abdominal pain nor did investigators describe whether reimaging occurred for complaints similar to the initial ED evaluation. Included studies did not describe the index CT findings and some reported explanatory findings noted on the original CT for which repeat CTs might have been indicated. The time frame for a repeat CT ranged from hours to 1 year. The frequency of repeat CTs (2%-47%) varied across studies as did the yield of imaging to alter downstream clinical decision making (range = 5%-67%)., Conclusion: Due to the absence of direct evidence our scoping review is unable to provide high-quality evidence-based recommendations upon which to confidently base an imaging practice guideline. There is no evidence to support or refute performing a CT for low-risk recurrent abdominal pain., (© 2021 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Recurrent abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED) might represent an opportunity for screening of depression and/or anxiety., Methods: We systematically searched five databases for studies evaluating the effect of screening for depression and/or anxiety in ED patients with recurrent and undifferentiated abdominal pain. Given paucity of direct evidence, we also searched for indirect evidence including studies that assessed prevalence of depression and/or anxiety in EDs (not necessarily recurrent abdominal pain), diagnostic accuracy of screening tools, effectiveness of screening in other settings, and outcomes such as repeat ED visits of patients with abdominal pain who were screened in the ED. Two methodologists evaluated certainty in the evidence using the GRADE approach., Results: A total of 4,337 citations were reviewed, and zero studies were found on the effect of screening in patients with recurrent and undifferentiated abdominal pain in the ED. A total of 35 studies were included as relevant indirect evidence. In studies of ED patients with abdominal pain, depression ranged from 10% to 29%, while anxiety ranged from 18% to 50%. False positives appear to be an issue given relatively low specificity of screening tools. One randomized trial including ED patients with vague symptoms evaluated the effect of depression screening on a composite outcome of depression recognition, psychiatric consultation, or referral by the emergency physician (risk ratio = 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49 to 4.53, very low certainty). One study reported that patients with undifferentiated abdominal pain who screened positive for depression have had increased ED recidivism (odds ratio = 3.17, 95% CI = 1.14 to 8.85, very low certainty)., Conclusions: We were unable to identify any evidence that confirms that depression or anxiety screening in ED patients with recurrent and undifferentiated abdominal pain improves outcomes or changes management downstream., (© 2021 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

This second Guideline for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE-2) from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine is on the topic "low-risk, recurrent abdominal pain in the emergency department." The multidisciplinary guideline panel applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations regarding four priority questions for adult emergency department patients with low-risk, recurrent, undifferentiated abdominal pain. The intended population includes adults with multiple similar presentations of abdominal signs and symptoms recurring over a period of months or years. The panel reached the following recommendations: (1) if a prior negative computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis (CTAP) has been performed within 12 months, there is insufficient evidence to accurately identify populations in whom repeat CTAP imaging can be safely avoided or routinely recommended; (2) if CTAP with IV contrast is negative, we suggest against ultrasound unless there is concern for pelvic or biliary pathology; (3) we suggest that screening for depression and/or anxiety may be performed during the ED evaluation; and (4) we suggest an opioid-minimizing strategy for pain control. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The GRACE-2 writing group developed clinically relevant questions to address the care of adult patients with low-risk, recurrent, previously undifferentiated abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED). Four patient-intervention-comparison-outcome-time (PICOT) questions were developed by consensus of the writing group, who performed a systematic review of the literature and then synthesized direct and indirect evidence to formulate recommendations, following GRADE methodology. The writing group found that despite the commonality and relevance of these questions in emergency care, the quantity and quality of evidence were very limited, and even fundamental definitions of the population and outcomes of interest are lacking. Future research opportunities include developing precise and clinically relevant definitions of low-risk, recurrent, undifferentiated abdominal pain and determining the scope of the existing populations in terms of annual national ED visits for this complaint, costs of care, and patient and provider preferences., (© 2022 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objective: The objective was to derive a risk score that uses variables available early during the emergency department (ED) encounter to identify high-risk geriatric patients who may benefit from delirium screening., Methods: This was an observational study of older adults age ≥ 75 years who presented to an academic ED and who were screened for delirium during their ED visit. Variable selection from candidate predictors was performed through a LASSO-penalized logistic regression. A risk score was derived from the final prediction model, and predictive accuracy characteristics were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: From the 967 eligible ED visits, delirium was detected in 107 (11.1%). The area under the curve for the REcognizing DElirium in Emergency Medicine (REDEEM) score was 0.901 (95% CI = 0.864-0.938). The REEDEM risk score included 10 different variables (seven based on triage information and three obtained during early history taking) with a score ranging from -3 to 66. Using an optimal cutoff of ≥11, we found a sensitivity of 84.1% (90 of 107 ED delirium patients, 95% CI = 75.5%-90.2%) and a specificity of 86.6% (745 of 860 non-ED delirium patients, 95% CI = 84.1%-88.8%). A lower cutoff of ≥5 was found to minimize false negatives with an improved sensitivity at 91.6% (98 of 107 ED delirium patients, 95% CI = 84.2%-95.8%)., Conclusion: A risk stratification score was derived with the potential to augment delirium recognition in geriatric ED patients. This has the potential to assist on delirium-targeted screening of high-risk patients in the ED. Validation of REDEEM, however, is needed prior to implementation., (© 2021 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Study Objective: To evaluate the association between potential emergency department (ED)-based modifiable risk factors and subsequent development of delirium among hospitalized older adults free of delirium at the time of ED stay., Methods: Observational cohort study of patients aged ≥75 years who screened negative for delirium in the ED, were subsequently admitted to the hospital, and had delirium screening performed within 48 h of admission. Potential ED-based risk factors for delirium included ED length of stay (LOS), administration of opioids, benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, or anticholinergics, and the placement of urinary catheter while in the ED. Odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated., Results: Among 472 patients without delirium in the ED (mean age 84 years, 54.2% females), 33 (7.0%) patients developed delirium within 48 h of hospitalization. The ED LOS of those who developed delirium was similar to those who did not develop delirium (312.1 vs 325.6 min, MD -13.5 min, CI -56.1 to 29.0). Patients who received opioids in the ED were as likely to develop delirium as those who did not receive opioids (7.2% vs 6.9%: OR 1.04, CI 0.44 to 2.48). Patients who received benzodiazepines had a higher risk of incident delirium, the difference was clinically but not statistically significant (37.3% vs 6.5%, OR 5.35, CI 0.87 to 23.81). Intermittent urinary catheterization (OR 2.05, CI 1.00 to 4.22) and Foley placement (OR 3.69, CI 1.55 to 8.80) were associated with a higher risk of subsequent delirium. After adjusting for presence of dementia, only Foley placement in the ED remained significantly associated with development of in-hospital delirium (adjusted OR 3.16, CI 1.22 to 7.53)., Conclusion: ED LOS and ED opioid use were not associated with higher risk of incident delirium in this cohort. Urinary catheterization in the ED was associated with an increased risk of subsequent delirium. These findings can be used to design ED-based initiatives and increase delirium prevention efforts., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess the QTc interval variation after low-dose droperidol in a population of undifferentiated, stable, and non-agitated patients receiving droperidol in the emergency department., Methods: Prospective cohort study of patients aged ≥12 years of age who received low-dose droperidol (≤ 2.5 mg) for indications other than acute behavioral disturbances. QTc intervals were monitored in real-time during pre-specified observation periods in the ED. Primary outcome was variation of QTc interval after droperidol administration, defined as the maximum delta (change) of QTc interval. Other outcomes included proportion of patients with a QTc ≥ 500 ms after droperidol, delta ≥ +60 ms, and incidence of clinical adverse events. Patients were monitored up to 30 min after IV bolus and up to 46 min after infusion., Results: A total of 68 patients were included (mean age 42.1 years, 66.2% females). The median dose of droperidol was 1.875 mg (range 0.625 mg, 2.5 mg) and 94.1% received droperidol for headache management. Most patients received droperidol as a 2-min bolus (n = 41, 60.3%). The mean maximum delta of QTc interval after droperidol across all 68 patients was +29.9 ms (SD 15). A total of 12 patients (17.6%) experienced a QTc interval ≥ 500 ms during the observation period after droperidol, and 3 patients (4.4%) had a delta QTc ≥ +60 ms. There were no serious arrhythmias, such as TdP, or deaths among the 68 participants in this study (0/68). However, 13.2% (n = 9) had at least one non-serious adverse event including restlessness and/or anxiety., Conclusion: The QTc interval slightly increased after droperidol administration, but these prolongations were brief, mostly below 500 msec and did not lead to serious arrhythmias. The yield of continuous cardiac monitoring in patients receiving low doses of droperidol is likely low., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To evaluate the short-term mortality of adult patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with altered mental status (AMS) as compared to other common chief complaints., Methods: Observational cohort study of adult patients (age ≥ 40) who presented to an academic ED over a 1-year period with five pre-specified complaints at ED triage: AMS, generalized weakness, chest pain, abdominal pain, and headache. Primary outcomes included 7 and 30-day mortality. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, acuity level, and comorbidities., Results: A total of 9850 ED visits were included for analysis from which 101 (1.0%) and 295 (3.0%) died within 7 and 30 days, respectively. Among 683 AMS visits, the 7-day mortality rate was 3.2%. Mortality was lower for all other chief complaints, including generalized weakness (17/1170, 1.5%), abdominal pain (32/3609, 0.9%), chest pain (26/3548, 0.7%), and headache (4/840, 0.5%). After adjusting for key confounders, patients presenting with AMS had a significantly higher risk of death within 7 days of ED arrival than patients presenting with chest pain (HR 3.72, 95% CI 2.05 to 6.76, p < .001). Similarly, we found that patients presenting with AMS had a significantly higher risk of dying within 30 days compared to patients with chest pain (HR 3.65, 95% CI 2.49 to 5.37, p < .001), and headache (HR 2.09, 95% CI 1.09 to 4.01, p = .026). Differences were not statistically significant for comparisons with abdominal pain and generalized weakness, but confidence intervals were wide., Conclusion: Patients presenting with AMS have worse short-term prognosis than patients presenting to the ED with chest pain or headache. AMS may indicate an underlying brain dysfunction (delirium), which is associated with adverse outcomes and increased mortality., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors of this manuscript have no conflict of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Emergency medicine (EM) in Brazil has achieved critical steps toward its development in the last decades including its official recognition as a specialty in 2016. In this article, we worked in collaboration with the Brazilian Association of Emergency Medicine (ABRAMEDE) to describe three main aspects of EM in Brazil: (1) brief historical perspective; (2) current status; and (3) future challenges., Main Text: In Brazil, the first EM residency program was created in 1996. Only 20 years later, the specialty was officially recognized by national regulatory bodies. Prior to recognition, there were only 2 residency programs. Since then, 52 new programs were initiated. Brazil has now 54 residency programs in 16 of the 27 federative units. As of December 2020, 192 physicians have been board certified as emergency physicians in Brazil. The shortage of formal EM-trained physicians is still significant and at this point it is not feasible to have all Brazilian emergency care units and EDs staffed only with formally trained emergency physicians. Three future challenges were identified including the recognition of EM specialists in the house of Medicine, the need of creating a reliable training curriculum despite highly heterogeneous emergency care practice across the country, and the importance of fostering the development of academic EM as a way to build a strong research agenda and therefore increase the knowledge about the epidemiology and organization of emergency care., Conclusion: Although EM in Brazil has accomplished key steps toward its development, there are several obstacles before it becomes a solid medical specialty. Its continuous development will depend on special attention to key challenges involving recognition, reliability, and research., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: To evaluate the prognostic accuracy of qSOFA for predicting in-hospital mortality among patients with suspected infection presenting to the ED of a public tertiary hospital in Brazil., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with suspected infection who presented to an academic tertiary ED in Porto Alegre (Southern Brazil) during an 18-month period. The qSOFA was calculated by using information collected at triage and patients were followed throughout hospitalization for the primary outcome of in-hospital mortality. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratios with corresponding 95% CIs were calculated for the qSOFA and qSOFA65., Results: A total of 7523 ED visits of patients with suspected infection in which an intravenous antibiotic was administered within 24 h were included, which resulted in 908 in-hospital deaths (12.1%). There were 690 (9.2%) patients whose triage qSOFA was ≥2 points. When such cutoff was used, the sensitivity for in-hospital death was 24.6% (95% CI 21.8 to 27.4%) and the specificity was 92.9% (95% CI 92.3% to 93.5%). The sensitivity increased to 67.4% (95% CI 64.2% to 70.3%) when a cutoff of ≥1 was tested, but the specificity decreased to 55.3% (95% CI 54.1% to 56.5%). Using a cutoff of ≥2, the qSOFA65 had a sensitivity of 51.0% (95% CI 47.7% to 54.3%) and a specificity of 75.7% (95% CI 74.6% to 76.7%)., Conclusions: The qSOFA score yielded very low sensitivity in predicting in-hospital mortality. Emergency physicians or ED triage nurses in low-to-middle income countries should not be using qSOFA or qSOFA65 as "rule-out" screening tools in the initial evaluation of patients with suspected infection., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify risk factors for delirium in geriatric patients in the emergency department and to identify emergency department (ED)-based modifiable risk factors for developing delirium during hospitalization. We searched evidence based medicine reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science for observational studies from the time of their inception to July 2020. We included studies that evaluated potential risk factors for either prevalent or incident delirium among older adults (age ≥ 60 years) presenting to the ED. When appropriate, we meta-analyzed estimates for risk factors using a random-effects model. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation approach. The study's protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CDR42020175261). A total of 4,513 citations were reviewed, and 34 studies met the criteria for inclusion: 27 evaluating risk factors for ED delirium (13,412 patients) and 7 evaluating ED-based risk factors for developing delirium during hospitalization (2,238 patients). The prevalence of ED delirium ranged from 7% to 35%. Four factors had strong associations with ED delirium and were graded as high-certainty evidence, including nursing home residence (4 studies; odds ratio [OR], 3.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.17 to 5.48), cognitive impairment (7 studies; OR, 4.46; 95% CI, 3.38 to 5.89), hearing impairment (3 studies, OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.03 to 6.41), and a history of stroke (3 studies; OR, 3.20; 95% CI, 1.17 to 8.75). The rate of developing delirium during hospitalization ranged from 11% to 27%. A length of stay of more than 10 hours in ED was associated with a higher risk of delirium (1 study; OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.13 to 4.41). One study reported that severe pain, rather than the use of opioids, was associated with the development of delirium. These findings can be used to prioritize delirium screening in the ED and develop novel ED delirium risk scores or prevention interventions., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To describe the epidemiology of paediatric pain-related visits to emergency departments (EDs) across the USA., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: A representative sample of US ED visits using data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS)., Participants: Paediatric (age ≤18 years) ED visits in the 2017 NHAMCS data set., Data Analysis: Each visit was coded as pain-related or non-pain-related using the 'reason for visit' variable. Weighted proportions were calculated with 95% CIs. Logistic regression was used to compare odds of pain-related visits., Outcome Measures: Prevalence of pain-related visits among paediatric ED visits., Results: There were an estimated 35 million paediatric ED visits in the USA in 2017, 55.6% (CI 53.3% to 57.8%) were pain related, which equates to 19.7 million annual visits. The prevalence of pain-related visits reached more than 50% of visits at age 6-7 and plateaued at relatively high proportions. Children of races other than white or black had lower odds of having a pain-related visit (OR 0.48, CI 0.29 to 0.81) than white children, as did children who were black, though the difference was not statistically significant (OR 0.88, CI 0.73 to 1.06). Relative to children covered by private insurance, children with Medicaid or CHIP (Children's Health Insurance Program) coverage had lower odds of a pain-related visit (OR 0.75, CI 0.60 to 0.93). Injuries represented 46.5% (CI 42.0% to 51.0%) of pain-related visits. Pain scores were reported in less than 50% of pain-related visits., Conclusion: Pain is the reason for visit in 55.6% of paediatric ED visits across the USA. The prevalence of pain-related visits peak before adolescence and it continues relatively high until the age 18. Injury, racial disparities in pain and poor pain score reporting should remain major topics of study in the paediatric population., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To compare resource utilization and mortality between older and younger adult patients with similar ED chief complaints and ESI triage levels., Methods: This was an observational study of consecutive adult patients (age ≥ 40) who presented to an academic ED over a 1-year period with chest pain, abdominal pain, altered mental status, generalized weakness, or headache. Patients were categorized into 40-64, 65-79, and ≥ 80-year old groups. Mortality and utilization outcomes were compared between age groups through logistic regression models or Cox proportional hazards adjusting for ESI level and chief complaint. Odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI)., Results: A total of 9798 ED visits were included. As compared to younger adults (age 40-64), older adults, independently of ESI level and chief complaint, had higher ED laboratory use (OR 1.46 [CI 1.29, 1.66] for age 65-80; OR 1.33 [CI 1.15, 1.55] for age ≥ 80), ED radiology use (OR 1.40 [CI 1.26, 1.56]; OR 1.48 [CI 1.30, 1.69]), hospital admission (OR 1.56 [CI 1.42, 1.72]; OR 1.97 [CI 1.75, 2.21]), and ICU admission (OR 1.38 [CI 1.15, 1.65]; OR 1.23 [CI 0.99, 1.52]). Despite similar ESI and chief complaint, patients age 65-79 and ≥ 80 had higher 30-day mortality rates (HR 1.87 [CI 1.39 to 2.51] and 2.47 [CI 1.81 to 3.37], respectively)., Conclusions: Older adults with similar chief complaints and ESI levels than younger adults, have significantly higher ED resource use, hospitalization rates, and mortality., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To identify predictors of 30-day emergency department (ED) return visits in patients age 65-79 years and age ≥ 80 years., Methods: This was a cohort study of older adults who presented to the ED over a 1-year period. A mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to identify predictors for returning to the ED within 30 days. We stratified the cohort into those aged 65-79 years and aged ≥80 years. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. This study adhered to the STROBE reporting guidelines., Results: A total of 21,460 ED visits representing 14,528 unique patients were included. The overall return rate was 15% (1998/13,300 visits) for age 65-79 years, and 16% (1306/8160 visits) for age ≥ 80 years. A history of congestive heart failure (CHF), dementia, or prior hospitalization within 2 years were associated with increased odds of returning in both age groups (for age 65-79: CHF aOR 1.36 [CI 1.16-1.59], dementia aOR 1.27 [CI 1.07-1.49], prior hospitalization aOR 1.36 [CI 1.19-1.56]; for age ≥ 80: CHF aOR 1.32 [CI 1.13-1.55], dementia aOR 1.22 [CI 1.04-1.42], and prior hospitalization aOR 1.27 [CI 1.09-1.47]). Being admitted from the ED was associated with decreased odds of returning to the ED within 30 days (aOR 0.72 [CI 0.64-0.80] for age 65-79 years and 0.72 [CI 0.63-0.82] for age ≥ 80)., Conclusion: Age alone was not an independent predictor of return visits. Prior hospitalization, dementia and CHF were predictors of 30-day ED return. The identification of predictors of return visits may help to optimize care transition in the ED., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The development of an author-level complementary metric could play a role in the process of academic promotion through objective evaluation of scholars' influence and impact., Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the Healthcare Social Graph (HSG) score, a novel social media influence and impact metric, and the h-index, a traditional author-level metric., Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of health care stakeholders with a social media presence randomly sampled from the Symplur database in May 2020. We performed stratified random sampling to obtain a representative sample with all strata of HSG scores. We manually queried the h-index in two reference-based databases (Scopus and Google Scholar). Continuous features (HSG score and h-index) from the included profiles were summarized as the median and IQR. We calculated the Spearman correlation coefficients (ρ) to evaluate the correlation between the HSG scores and h-indexes obtained from Google Scholar and Scopus., Results: A total of 286 (31.2%) of the 917 stakeholders had a Google Scholar h-index available. The median HSG score for these profiles was 61.1 (IQR 48.2), and the median h-index was 14.5 (IQR 26.0). For the 286 subjects with the HSG score and Google Scholar h-index available, the Spearman correlation coefficient ρ was 0.1979 (P<.001), indicating a weak positive correlation between these two metrics. A total of 715 (78%) of 917 stakeholders had a Scopus h-index available. The median HSG score for these profiles was 57.6 (IQR 46.4), and the median h-index was 7 (IQR 16). For the 715 subjects with the HSG score and Scopus h-index available, ρ was 0.2173 (P<.001), also indicating a weak positive correlation., Conclusions: We found a weak positive correlation between a novel author-level complementary metric and the h-index. More than a chiasm between traditional citation metrics and novel social media-based metrics, our findings point toward a bridge between the two domains., (©Lucas Oliveira J e Silva, Graciela Maldonado, Tara Brigham, Aidan F Mullan, Audun Utengen, Daniel Cabrera. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 31.05.2021.)

Objective: The overuse of antibiotics for acute otitis media (AOM) in children is a healthcare quality issue in part arising from conflicting parent and physician understanding of the risks and benefits of antibiotics for AOM. Our objective was to develop a conversation aid that supports shared decision making (SDM) with parents of children who are diagnosed with non-severe AOM in the acute care setting., Materials and Methods: We developed a web-based encounter tool following a human-centered design approach that includes active collaboration with parents, clinicians, and designers using literature review, observations of clinical encounters, parental and clinician surveys, and interviews. Insights from these processes informed the iterative creation of prototypes that were reviewed and field-tested in patient encounters., Results: The ear pain conversation aid includes five sections: (1) A home page that opens the discussion on the etiologies of AOM; (2) the various options available for AOM management; (3) a pictograph of the impact of antibiotic therapy on pain control; (4) a pictograph of complication rates with and without antibiotics; and (5) a summary page on management choices. This open-access, web-based tool is located at www.earpaindecisionaid.org., Conclusions: We collaboratively developed an evidence-based conversation aid to facilitate SDM for AOM. This decision aid has the potential to improve parental medical knowledge of AOM, physician/parent communication, and possibly decrease the overuse of antibiotics for this condition., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association.)

Study Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of intranasal analgesic-dose ketamine as compared to intranasal fentanyl for pediatric acute pain., Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed following the PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases for randomized controlled trials from inception to December 2019. We conducted meta-analysis with random-effects models to evaluate pain reduction, rescue analgesia, adverse events and sedation between intranasal ketamine and intranasal fentanyl. Random-effects models were used to estimate weighted mean differences (WMD) and pooled relative risks (RR)., Results: A total of 546 studies were screened and 4 trials were included. In the meta-analysis of 4 studies including 276 patients, ketamine had similar reductions in pain scores from baseline to all post-intervention times (10 to 15 min: WMD -1.42, 95% CI -9.95 to 7.10; 30 min: WMD 0.40, 95% CI -6.29 to 7.10; 60 min: WMD -0.64, 95% CI -6.76 to 5.47). Ketamine was associated with similar rates of rescue analgesia (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.25). Ketamine had a higher risk of non-serious adverse events (RR 2.00, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.79), and no patients receiving ketamine had a serious adverse event. There was one serious adverse event (hypotension) with fentanyl that self-resolved. No patients receiving either IN fentanyl or ketamine had significant sedation., Conclusion: Intranasal analgesic-dose ketamine may be considered as an alternative to opioids for acute pain management in children. Its accepted use will depend on the tolerability of non-serious adverse events and the desire to avoid opioids., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Delirium is commonly missed in older adults presenting to the emergency department (ED). Although current recommendations for active screening of delirium in the ED, this might not be feasible or practical. Identifying patients at high risk for prevalent and incident delirium in the ED will help to improve the screening process and to build interventions. There is currently scattered synthesis of evidence on risk factors associated with delirium in the ED. To address this gap, we are conducting a systematic review to describe the risk factors (patient vulnerability factors and precipitating factors) for delirium in the ED., Methods and Analysis: A literature search was performed from inception to March 2020 in Ovid EBM Reviews, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science. We will include original research studies that report a quantitative relationship between at least one risk factor and delirium in the ED setting. Two investigators will use eligibility criteria from this protocol to independently screen titles and abstracts, and select studies based on full-text review of potentially eligible studies. After arriving at a final set of included studies, two investigators will extract data using a standardised data collection form. If appropriate, data regarding each risk factor will be pooled through a random-effect meta-analysis. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be used to evaluate the overall quality of evidence., Ethics and Dissemination: To our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review evaluating risk factors for prevalent and incident delirium specifically related to the ED setting. Results of this study will aid in the identification of older adults at risk for delirium in the ED. We aim to publish the results of this systematic review in a peer-reviewed journal with good visibility for the fields of emergency medicine and geriatrics. PROSPERO registration number CDR42020175261., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Study Objective: To summarize interventions that impact the experience of older adults in the emergency department (ED) as measured by patient experience instruments., Methods: This is a systematic review to evaluate interventions aimed to improve geriatric patient experience in the ED. We searched Ovid CENTRAL, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE and PsycINFO from inception to January 2019. The main outcome was patient experience measured through instruments to assess patient experience or satisfaction. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the confidence in the evidence available., Results: The search strategy identified 992 studies through comprehensive literature search and hand-search of reference lists. A total of 21 studies and 3163 older adults receiving an intervention strategy aimed at improve patient experience in the ED were included. Department-wide interventions, including geriatric ED and comprehensive geriatric assessment unit, focused care coordination with discharge planning and referral for community services, were associated with improved patient experience. Providing an assistive listening device to those with hearing loss and having a pharmacist reviewing the medication list showed an improved patient perception of quality of care provided. The confidence in the evidence available for the outcome of patient experience was deemed to be very low., Conclusion: While all studies reported an outcome of patient experience, there was significant heterogeneity in the tools used to measure it. The very low certainty in the evidence available highlights the need for more reliable tools to measure patient experience and studies designed to measure the effect of the interventions., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest All authors report no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To characterize pediatric Emergency Medicine Service (EMS) transports to the Emergency Department (ED) using a national claims database., Methods: We included children, 18 years and younger, transported by EMS to an ED, from 2007 to 2016 in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse. ICD-9 and ICD-10 diagnosis codes were used to categorize disease system involvement. Interventions performed were extracted using procedure codes. ED visit severity was measured by the Minnesota Algorithm., Results: Over a 10-year period, 239,243 children were transported. Trauma was the most frequent diagnosis category for transport for children ≥5 years of age, 35.1% (age 6-13) and 32.7% (age 14-18). The most common diagnosis category in children <6 years of age was neurologic (29.3%), followed by respiratory (23.1%). Over 10 years, transports for mental disorders represented 15.3% in children age 14 to 18, and had the greatest absolute increase (rate difference + 10.4 per 10,000) across all diagnoses categories. Neurologic transports also significantly increased in children age 14 to 18 (rate difference + 6.9 per 10,000). Trauma rates decreased across all age groups and had its greatest reduction among children age 14 to 18 (rate difference - 6.8 per 10,000). Across all age groups, an intervention was performed in 15.6%. Most children (83.3%) were deemed to have ED care needed type of visit, and 15.8% of the transports resulted in a hospital admission., Conclusion: Trauma is the most frequent diagnosis for transport in children older than 5 years of age. Mental health and neurologic transports have markedly increased, while trauma transports have decreased. Most children arriving by ambulance were classified as requiring ED level of care. These changes might have significant implication for EMS personnel and policy makers., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of apneic oxygenation during emergency intubation., Methods: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid CENTRAL, and Scopus databases for randomized controlled trials and observational studies from 2006 until July 2016, without language restrictions. Gray literature, clinicaltrials.gov, and reference lists of articles were hand searched. We conducted a meta-analysis with random-effects models to evaluate first-pass success rates, incidence of hypoxemia, and lowest peri-intubation SpO 2 between apneic oxygenation and standard oxygenation cases., Results: A total of 1,386 studies were screened and 77 selected for full-text review. A total of 14 studies were included for qualitative analysis, and 8 studies (1,837 patients) underwent quantitative analysis. In the meta-analysis of 8 studies (1,837 patients), apneic oxygenation was associated with decreased hypoxemia (odds ratio [OR] 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52 to 0.84), but was not associated with decreased severe hypoxemia (6 studies; 1,043 patients; OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.57) or life-threatening hypoxemia (5 studies; 1,003 patients; OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.55). Apneic oxygenation was associated with increased first-pass success rate (6 studies; 1,658 patients; OR 1.59; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.44) and increased lowest peri-intubation SpO 2 (6 studies; 1,043 patients; weighted mean difference 2.2%; 95% CI 0.8% to 3.6%)., Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, apneic oxygenation was associated with increased peri-intubation oxygen saturation, decreased rates of hypoxemia, and increased first-pass intubation success., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)