Search

Erica Koch,1 Shannon Lovett,2 Trac Nghiem,2 Robert A Riggs,2 Megan A Rech2,31Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL 60153, USA; 2Department of Emergency Medicine, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL 60153, USA; 3Department of Pharmacy, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL 60153, USAAbstract: Shock index (SI) is defined as the heart rate (HR) divided by systolic blood pressure (SBP). It has been studied in patients either at risk of or experiencing shock from a variety of causes: trauma, hemorrhage, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, sepsis, and ruptured ectopic pregnancy. While HR and SBP have traditionally been used to characterize shock in these patients, they often appear normal in the compensatory phase of shock and can be confounded by factors such as medications (eg, antihypertensives, beta-agonists). SI >1.0 has been widely found to predict increased risk of mortality and other markers of morbidity, such as need for massive transfusion protocol activation and admission to intensive care units. Recent research has aimed to study the use of SI in patients immediately on arrival to the emergency department (ED). In this review, we summarize the literature pertaining to use of SI across a variety of settings in the management of ED patients, in order to provide context for use of this measure in the triage and management of critically ill patients.Keywords: shock index, emergency, trauma, hemorrhage, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, sepsis, obstetrics, ectopic pregnancy, pediatrics

Study Objective: The primary objective of our study was to compare the effectiveness of oral cephalosporins versus fluroquinolones and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) for the treatment of pyelonephritis in patients discharged home from the emergency department (ED)., Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study of 11 geographically diverse US EDs. Patients aged ≥18 years diagnosed with pyelonephritis and discharged home from the ED between January 1, 2021 and October 31, 2023 were included. The primary outcome was treatment failure at 14 days defined as a composite outcome of the following: (1) recurrence of urinary symptoms, (2) repeat ED visit or hospitalization for a urinary tract infection, (3) receipt of a new antibiotic prescription for urinary tract infection. Secondary outcome was appropriateness of empiric treatment based on urine culture susceptibility., Results: Among the 851 patients who met inclusion criteria, 647 patients received a cephalosporin, and 204 patients received an Infectious Diseases Society of America guideline-endorsed first-line treatment (fluroquinolones, TMP-SMX). Overall, baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 cohorts. Rates of treatment failure were not significantly different in the cephalosporin group compared with the fluroquinolone/TMP-SMX groups (17.2% of cephalosporin vs 22.5% of fluroquinolone/TMP-SMX group, difference=5.3%, 95% confidence interval -0.118 to 0.01). After adjusting for potential confounders, cephalosporin use was not associated with treatment failure (odds ratio=0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 1.95). There was no difference in rates of appropriate empiric treatment based on urine culture susceptibility., Conclusion: Oral cephalosporins were associated with similar treatment failure rates compared with Infectious Diseases Society of America guideline-endorsed treatments for the treatment of pyelonephritis in ED patients discharged home., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Clinical pharmacists bring unparalleled medication expertise, but quantifying their impact on a health system's bottom line remains unestablished. Objective: To classify interventions by pharmacists with and without board certification and quantify the cost avoidance (CA) from accepted interventions. Methods: This multicenter prospective observational study, conducted between August 2018 and January 2019, included board certified (BPS) and non-board certified (Non-BPS) emergency medicine (EM) and intensive care unit (ICU) clinical pharmacists from 89 U.S. institutions. Primary outcomes included the quantity, type, and acceptance of interventions and the CA generated by BPS pharmacists compared to Non-BPS pharmacists. Results: 287 pharmacists (227 BPS, 60 Non-BPS) at 89 centers provided care throughout 4184 shifts. BPS pharmacist provided more interventions (overall: 63 693 vs 8690; per shift: 18.8 vs 10.9, P  < .001) with higher acceptance (98.2% vs 97.6%, P  < .001). Accepted interventions per shift included adverse drug event prevention (2.0 vs 1.6, P  = .17), resource utilization (3.6 vs 1.7, P  = .007), individualization of patient care (9.7 vs 5.3, P  = .05), prophylaxis (0.4 vs 0.3, P  = .99), hands-on care (1.4 vs 0.9, P  = .99), and administrative/supportive tasks (1.8 vs 1.1, P  = 0.). BPS pharmacists generated greater mean CA per intervention ($873 vs $801), patient day ($961 vs $501), shift ($8112 vs $4828) and annum ($1 946 942 vs $1 158 784) ( P  < .001 for all). The CA to salary ratio was 10.5:1 for BPS and 6.3:1 for Non-BPS pharmacists. Conclusion: BPS pharmacists in the ED and ICU generated greater CA and a higher monetary CA to salary ratio than Non-BPS pharmacists., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2025.)

Intravenous push (IVP) administration of anti-seizure medications is becoming increasingly popular among emergency departments. IVP administration eliminates the need for compounding and preparation by the pharmacy department, as well as the need to gather infusion materials or set up a patient's tubing and pump, all of which translate to faster drug administration. This is important given the time-sensitive nature of status epilepticus treatment. This review will discuss several anti-seizure medications, including phenytoin, fosphenytoin, valproic acid, levetiracetam, brivaracetam and lacosamide, for which evidence supports the safe and efficacious use of IV push administration., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2025 Aljadeed, Gilbert, Karaze and Rech.)

Introduction: Emergency department encounters include an increasing number of patients with limited English proficiency, yet little is known about the impact of interpreter services on unplanned revisits to the emergency department. This study aims to assess interpreters' utilization and unplanned ED revisits, serving as an indicator of care quality., Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective chart review of ED visits at an urban academic center between January and April 2019. Inclusion criteria involved patients aged >18, discharged after evaluation, and with at least 1 ED revisit in the study period. Demographic data, interpreter modality, and revisit incidences within 72 hours and 30 days were analyzed using Chi-squared and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests., Results: Of 786 reviewed charts, 401 limited English proficiency patients and 294 controls matched by gender, race, and ethnicity were included. Among limited English proficiency patients, the majority identified as Hispanic (84.8% vs 36%, P<.01) and showed higher 72-hour unplanned revisit rates (2.8% vs 0.7%, P = .05). Interpreter documentation for limited English proficiency patients was only 49.6%, with in-person modality prevailing (45.8%). Trained interpreters were underutilized (13% in-person vs 7.7% video, P<.0001). Only 78% (P<.01) of patients with limited English proficiency received discharge instructions in their preferred language., Discussion: This study reveals a higher unplanned ED revisit rate among limited English proficiency patients, potentially linked to varying interpreter modality effectiveness and underutilization of trained interpreters. Emphasizing the critical role of trained interpreters, these findings offer an opportunity to enhance care quality for limited English proficiency patients in the emergency department., (Copyright © 2024 Emergency Nurses Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Alzheimer's disease is the neurodegenerative disorder responsible for approximately 60% to 70% of all cases of dementia and is expected to affect 152 million by 2050. Recently, anti-amyloid therapies have been developed and approved by the Food and Drug Administration as disease-modifying treatments given as infusions every 2 to 5 weeks for Alzheimer's disease. Although this is an important milestone in mitigating Alzheimer's disease progression, it is critical for emergency medicine clinicians to understand what anti-amyloid therapies are and how they work to recognize, treat, and mitigate their adverse effects. Anti-amyloid therapies may be underrecognized contributors to emergency department visits because they carry the risk of adverse effects, namely amyloid-related imaging abnormalities. Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities are observed as abnormalities on magnetic resonance imaging as computed tomography is not sensitive enough to detect the microvasculature abnormalities causing vasogenic edema (amyloid-related imaging abnormalities-E) microhemorrhages and hemosiderin deposits (amyloid-related imaging abnormalities-H). Patients presenting with amyloid-related imaging abnormalities may have nonspecific neurologic symptoms, including headache, lethargy, confusion, and seizures. Anti-amyloid therapies may increase risk of hemorrhagic conversion of ischemic stroke patients receiving thrombolytics and complicate the initiation of anticoagulation. Given the novelty of anti-amyloid therapies and limited real-world data pertaining to amyloid-related imaging abnormalities, it is important for emergency medicine clinicians to be aware of these agents., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Vasoactive medications are used during advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) to shunt oxygenated blood to vital organs and after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) to maintain hemodynamic goals. However, limited evidence exists to support vasoactive medication recommendations in such scenarios, and it is unknown how practices vary among emergency departments across the US., Methods: A survey questionnaire (15 questions) was electronically distributed to emergency medicine pharmacists (EMPs) in the US through various professional listservs. Demographic information, American Heart Association ACLS algorithm medication use, and use of continuous vasopressor infusions and adjunct medications following ROSC were assessed and are reported descriptively., Results: The survey was distributed to 764 EMPs, with a 23% response rate from a wide geographic distribution and 48% of respondents practicing in academic medical centers. Epinephrine dosing and administration during cardiac arrest were reported by most to be in accordance with ACLS cardiac arrest algorithms. Calcium, magnesium sulfate, and sodium bicarbonate were the most common adjunct intravenous medications given during cardiac arrest. Norepinephrine was the first-choice vasopressor (81%) for post-ROSC hypotension, while epinephrine was preferred less frequently (17%). Antibiotics and sodium bicarbonate were the most frequently administered post-ROSC adjunct medications., Conclusion: This survey of a geographically diverse group of EMPs demonstrated high ACLS algorithm adherence for epinephrine during cardiac arrest with frequent additional administration of nonalgorithm medications. Sodium bicarbonate and calcium were the most frequently administered adjunct medications during cardiac arrest, while sodium bicarbonate and antibiotics were the most frequently used adjunct medications following ROSC. Norepinephrine was the most commonly used vasopressor following ROSC., (© American Society of Health-System Pharmacists 2024. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Competing Interests: Dr. Rech’s institution received funding from the Emergency Medicine Foundation/AstraZeneca. Dr. Feldman has disclosed that he does not have any potential conflicts of interest.

Background: Sugammadex rapidly reverses the nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) rocuronium and vecuronium. The role of sugammadex is not well-defined outside of the postoperative setting., Objective: This study aims to describe sugammadex use outside the postoperative setting for the reversal of nondepolarizing NMBAs., Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study conducted in patients who received sugammadex outside of the postoperative setting at an academic medical center between June 2016 and November 2022. The primary outcome was the effect of sugammadex use for rocuronium reversal, defined as any increase in train-of-four (TOF) after sugammadex administration and/or progress note documentation if TOF was unavailable. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and documentation of contraceptive counseling in patients taking hormonal contraceptives with child-bearing ability., Results: A total of 14 383 patients received sugammadex during the study period. Of those patients, 39 (0.3%) were outside of the postoperative setting for the reversal of rocuronium and included in the study. Twenty-nine (74%) patients had an increase in TOF after sugammadex administration and/or progress note documentation if TOF was unavailable. Ten (26%) patients lacked documentation regarding the effect of sugammadex. No adverse reactions were reported. Three (8%) patients included in the study were of child-bearing ability, and 1 of the 3 patients was counseled on using an alternative method of contraception following sugammadex administration., Conclusion and Relevance: There is a paucity of literature for the use of sugammadex outside of the postoperative setting. This study found that while the use of sugammadex was rare, overall, it was safe and well-tolerated., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objective: To determine frequency that ED visits are needed, and the most common chief complaints and medications prescribed to Veterans with spinal cord injuries and disorders (SCI/D)., Methods: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) SCI and Disorders (SCI/D) Registry (VHA SCIDR) was used to identify Veterans with SCI/D over a five-year period (fiscal years 2018-2022). The primary outcome was the proportion of Veterans with SCI/D who had visits to the ED during the study period. Secondary outcomes included diagnostic codes and medications prescribed in the ED, and other healthcare encounters., Results: Overall, 18,464 Veterans with SCI/D, including 80,661 patient-years were included. Of these Veterans, 10,234 (55.4%) had at least one ED visit and 8230 (44.6%) did not. ED visits were consistent, ranging from 33.5% to 36.4% annually. The number of in-person healthcare encounters decreased over the study period. The most common ED diagnostic codes were paraplegia or quadriplegia, discharge counseling, UTI, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder and low back pain. The most common medications prescribed in the ED were analgesics (e.g., acetaminophen, ketorolac), antimicrobials (e.g., ceftriaxone, vancomycin) and ondansetron. Antibiotics were among the most prescribed discharge medications, including ciprofloxacin, sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim, cephalexin, and doxycycline., Conclusion: This national study of Veterans with SCI/D characterized ED healthcare utilization. Overall, more than half of Veterans with SCI/D required an ED visit during the five-year study period and over one third of Veterans in each fiscal year required an ED visit. Interventions to target prevention of ED visits and subsequent hospitalizations could focus on these areas., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. We confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all named authors and that there are no other persons who satisfied the criteria for authorship but are not listed. We further confirm that the order of authors listed in the manuscript has been approved by all of us. We confirm that we have given due consideration to the protection of intellectual property associated with this work and that there are no impediments to publication, including the timing of publication, with respect to intellectual property. In so doing we confirm that we have followed the regulations of our institutions concerning intellectual property. We understand that the Corresponding Author is the sole contact for the Editorial process (including Editorial Manager and direct communications with the office). He/she is responsible for communicating with the other authors about progress, submissions of revisions and final approval of proofs. We confirm that no AI tools were used to write the manuscript., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The purpose of this article is to summarize pharmacotherapy related emergency medicine (EM) literature indexed in 2023. Articles were selected utilizing a modified Delphi approach. The table of contents from pre-determined journals were reviewed and independently evaluated via the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system by paired authors. Pharmacotherapy-related publications deemed to be GRADE 1A and 1B were reviewed by the collective group for inclusion in the review. In all, this article summarizes and provides commentary on the potential clinical impact of 13 articles, 6 guidelines, and 5 meta-analyses covering topics including guideline releases and updates on rapid sequence intubation in the critically ill, managing cardiac arrest or life-threatening toxicity due to poisoning, and management of major bleeding following trauma. Also discussed are ongoing controversies surrounding fluid resuscitation, time and treatment modalities for ischemic stroke, steroid use in community-acquired pneumonia, targeted blood product administration, and much more., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest There are two authors who declare potential competing interests. Caitlin Brown has receiving funding from Alexion/Astra Zeneca and Brian Gilbert consults and has received speakers fees from Haemonetics. All other authors have nothing to disclose relevant to this article., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: While our understanding of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has evolved, uncertainty remains regarding utility of previously established pulmonary embolism (PE) screening guidelines in patients with COVID-19. Many studies have investigated the efficacy of D-dimer (DD) screenings for patients with COVID-19 admitted to inpatient services, but few have evaluated patients in the emergency department (ED). The purpose of this study was to investigate utility of DD threshold for PE screening in patients with COVID-19 presenting to the ED., Methods: This was a retrospective, multicenter cohort including patients presenting to three EDs between March 1, 2020 and February 1, 2021 who tested positive for COVID-19 during ED visit or in 60 days prior to presentation and had DD ordered in ED. Patients were grouped by those who underwent computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) to evaluate for PE and those who did not, and descriptive statistics were performed. Those who underwent CTPA were further divided into PE-positive and PE-negative groups. The discriminative ability of DD in predicting PE in patients with COVID-19 was analyzed using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve., Results: A total of 570 patients with COVID-19 were included in the study, of which 107 underwent CTPA to evaluate for PE. History of diabetes, elevated glucose, elevated lactate dehydrogenase, elevated white blood cell count, elevated platelets, elevated respiratory rate, and lower temperature were associated with increased risk for PE. Compared to those without PE, patients with PE were significantly more likely to be hospitalized (100% vs. 82%, p  = 0.020) and admitted to the ICU (64% vs. 24%, p  = 0.002). Those with PE had a significantly higher median DD value (21,177 ng/mL) compared to PE-negative group (952 ng/mL, p  < 0.001). The ROC curve for DD in predicting PE had an area under the curve of 0.91 (95% confidence interval [0.84, 0.98]). In our study population, the optimal DD threshold for predicting PE was 1815 ng/mL (sensitivity 93% and specificity 80%). A conservative threshold of 1089 ng/mL could be used with sensitivity 100% and specificity 58%., Conclusion: DD is often elevated in patients with COVID-19, regardless of PE. While the classically used DD cutoff is 500 ng/mL, our study demonstrated a threshold of 1089 ng/mL safely predicted PE in patients with COVID-19 ., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Emergency Physicians.)

Background: Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are commonly treated in the emergency department (ED), and unfortunately, resistance to first-line agents is increasing., Objectives: To characterize treatment of pyelonephritis in a nationally representative sample of ED patients and to identify patient- and treatment-specific factors associated with receiving initial inactive antibiotics., Methods: We conducted a multicentre, observational cohort study utilizing the Emergency Medicine PHARMacotherapy Research NETwork (EMPHARM-NET), comprising 15 geographically diverse US EDs. All patients ≥18 years of age with a diagnosis of pyelonephritis between 2018 and 2020 were included. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who received initial inactive empirical antibiotic therapy and to identify predictive factors of inactive antibiotic therapy., Results: Of the 3714 patients evaluated, 223 had culture-positive pyelonephritis. Median patient age was 50.1 years and patients were mostly female (78.3%). Overall, 40.4% of patients received an IV antibiotic, most commonly ceftriaxone (86.7%). The most frequently prescribed antibiotics were cefalexin (31.8%), ciprofloxacin (14.3%), cefdinir (13.5%) and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (12.6%). Overall, 10.3% of patients received initial inactive therapy. After adjustment in a multivariable analysis, long-acting IV antibiotic was predictive of inactive therapy (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07-0.83)., Conclusions: In our prospective, multicentre observational study, we found that only 40.4% of patients with pyelonephritis received empirical IV antibiotics in the ED, contributing to inactive therapy. Receipt of long-acting IV antibiotics was independently associated with a decreased rate of initial inactive therapy. This reinforces guideline recommendations to administer long-acting IV antibiotics empirically in the ED upon suspicion of pyelonephritis., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: To evaluate practitioner use of ketamine and identify potential barriers to use in acutely and critically ill patients. To compare characteristics, beliefs, and practices of ketamine frequent users and non-users. Methods: An online survey developed by members of the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology Section was distributed to physician, pharmacist, nurse practitioner, physician assistant and nurse members of SCCM. The online survey queried SCCM members on self-reported practices regarding ketamine use and potential barriers in acute and critically ill patients. Results: Respondents, 341 analyzed, were mostly adult physicians, practicing in the United States at academic medical centers. Clinicians were comfortable or very comfortable using ketamine to facilitate intubation (80.0%), for analgesia (77.9%), procedural sedation (79.4%), continuous ICU sedation (65.8%), dressing changes (62.4%), or for asthma exacerbation and status epilepticus (58.8% and 40.4%). Clinicians were least comfortable with ketamine use for alcohol withdrawal and opioid detoxification (24.7% and 23.2%). Most respondents reported "never" or "infrequently" using ketamine preferentially for continuous IV analgesia (55.6%) or sedation (61%). Responses were mixed across dosing ranges and duration. The most common barriers to ketamine use were adverse effects (42.6%), other practitioners not routinely using the medication (41.5%), lack of evidence (33.5%), lack of familiarity (33.1%), and hospital/institutional policy guiding the indication for use (32.3%). Conclusion: Although most critical care practitioners report feeling comfortable using ketamine, there are many inconsistencies in practice regarding dose, duration, and reasons to avoid or limit ketamine use. Further educational tools may be targeted at practitioners to improve appropriate ketamine use., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Purpose: The preferred vasopressor in post-cardiac arrest shock has not been established with robust clinical outcomes data. Our goal was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing rates of in-hospital mortality, refractory shock, and hemodynamic parameters in post-cardiac arrest patients who received either norepinephrine or epinephrine as primary vasopressor support., Methods: We conducted a search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL from 2000 to 2022. Included studies were prospective, retrospective, or published abstracts comparing norepinephrine and epinephrine in adults with post-cardiac arrest shock or with cardiogenic shock and extractable post-cardiac arrest data. The primary outcome of interest was in-hospital mortality. Other outcomes included incidence of arrhythmias or refractory shock., Results: The database search returned 2646 studies. Two studies involving 853 participants were included in the systematic review. The proposed meta-analysis was deferred due to low yield. Crude incidence of in-hospital mortality was numerically higher in the epinephrine group compared with norepinephrine in both studies, but only statistically significant in one. Risk of bias was moderate to severe for in-hospital mortality. Additional outcomes were reported differently between studies, minimizing direct comparison., Conclusion: The vasopressor with the best mortality and hemodynamic outcomes in post-cardiac arrest shock remains unclear. Randomized studies are crucial to remedy this., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The following authors report no conflict of interest: CL, CC, NA, LR. The following authors received funding by Spero Therapeutics-provided unrestricted research grant via its Investigator Initiated Research Program: BF, MR, GS. GS reports participating in an advisory board meeting for Hema Biologics in 2022 regarding blood factor products. CB reports grant funding from Alexion/Astra Zeneca Rare Disease., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Emergency department (ED) pharmacists commonly perform positive culture follow-ups that result in optimized antibiotic prescribing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential positive impact on the outcome of antibiotic-free days through an ED pharmacist-driven protocol to contact patients with negative urine cultures and sexually transmitted infection (STI) test results who were discharged with antibiotics., Methods: This was a single-center, prospective, observational, pre-post intervention study to determine antibiotic use in patients with negative urine cultures who were discharged from the Loyola Medical University Center ED with antibiotics prescribed. Patients were identified through daily positive culture reports. The primary outcome was days free of antibiotics, defined as the number of calendar days within 28 days after urine culture or STI test collection on which the patient did not receive any antibiotic treatments., Results: One hundred ninety-two patients were screened. Sixty-three and twenty-six patients met the inclusion criteria in the pre- and postintervention groups, respectively. The study identified 163/465 (35.1%) antibiotic free days for the preintervention group, compared to 150.5/187 (80.5%) antibiotic-free days for the postintervention group. A majority of the patients did not have urinary tract infection as the chief complaint. The most common urinary and STI symptoms upon ED admission in the pre- and postintervention groups were dysuria (19.2% vs 28.1%) and unusual discharge (30.8% vs 28.6%), respectively., Conclusion: This study showed that a pharmacist-driven protocol increased the number of antibiotic-free days for patients prescribed empiric antibiotic therapy and discharged from the ED with subsequent negative urine cultures and STI results. We propose taking a novel approach in discontinuation of antibiotics by implementing an expansion of ED culture programs to include negative cultures that promote antimicrobial stewardship., (© American Society of Health-System Pharmacists 2023. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To comprehensively classify interventions performed by pediatric critical care clinical pharmacists and quantify cost avoidance (CA) generated through their accepted interventions., Design: A multicenter, prospective, observational study performed between August 2018 and January 2019., Setting: Academic and community hospitals in the United States with pediatric critical care units., Subjects: Pediatric clinical pharmacists., Interventions: Pharmacist recommendations were classified into one of 38 total intervention categories associated with CA., Measurements and Main Results: Nineteen pediatric pharmacists at five centers documented 1,458 accepted interventions during 112 shifts on 861 critically ill pediatric patients. This calculated to an associated CA of $450,590. The accepted interventions and associated CA in the six established categories included as follows: adverse drug event prevention (155 interventions, $118,901 CA), resource utilization (267 interventions; $59,020), individualization of patient care (898 interventions, $217,949 CA), prophylaxis (8 interventions, $453 CA), hands-on care (30 interventions, $35,509 CA), and administrative/supportive tasks (108 interventions, $18,758 CA). The average associated CA was $309 per accepted intervention, $523 per patient day, and $4,023.13 per pediatric clinical pharmacist shift. The calculated potential annualized CA of accepted interventions from a pediatric pharmacist was $965,550, resulting in a potential monetary-associated CA-to-pharmacist salary ratio between $1.5:1 and $5.2:1., Conclusions: There is potential for significant avoidance of healthcare costs when pediatric pharmacists are involved in the care of critically and emergently ill pediatric patients, with a monetary potential CA-to-pediatric pharmacist salary ratio to be between $1.5:1 and $5.2:1., Competing Interests: Dr. Rech’s institution received funding from Spero Pharmaceutics (investigator-initiated research). The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.)

The Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) Reviewer Academy seeks to train and establish a community of trusted, reliable, and skilled peer reviewers with diverse backgrounds and interests to promote high-quality reviews for each of the SCCM journals. Goals of the Academy include building accessible resources to highlight qualities of excellent manuscript reviews; educating and mentoring a diverse group of healthcare professionals; and establishing and upholding standards for insightful and informative reviews. This manuscript will map the mission of the Reviewer Academy with a succinct summary of the importance of peer review, process of reviewing a manuscript, and the expected ethical standards of reviewers. We will equip readers to target concise, thoughtful feedback as peer reviewers, advance their understanding of the editorial process and inspire readers to integrate medical journalism into diverse professional careers., Competing Interests: Dr. Alexander has received funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH)/Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R13HD104432), Food and Drug Administration (FP01029501), US Department of Defense (W81XWH2210301), and unrestricted grants from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO). Her institution received funding from Novartis (end-point adjudication committee PANORAMA-HF) and she serves as the ELSO Treasurer of the Board of Directors. Dr. Barreto received funding from Wolters-Kluwer. Dr. Morrow’s institution received funding from the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) for her role as Senior Associate Editor for Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, the National Research Foundation of Southern Africa, and EuroQual; she received funding from the Brazilian Physiotherapy Association. Dr. Mayer’s institution received funding from the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (no. K23-AR079583); he received support for article research from the NIH. Dr. Lane-Fall’s institution receives funding from NIH (R01HL153735, P30AG059302, UM1HL088957, U01OD033246, R01HD105446, R01HD109229), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (K12HS026372), Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (21106), and the American Heart Association (962544). She serves as the Vice President of the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation and is on the Board of Directors of the Foundation for Anesthesia Education and Research. Dr. Kudchadkar has received funding from NIH/NICHD (R01HD103811) and NIH/NIDDK (R01DK132348). Dr. Rech has received research funding from Spero Pharmaceuticals. Ms. Napolitano receives funding from NIH (1R44HD105552, 1R21HD103927-01A1, 1R01HD106996) and FDA (5P50FD006427) and also has research/consulting relationships with Drager, Philips/Respironics, Timpel, Actuated Medical, and Vero-Biotech. Dr. Sorce disclosed that she is an SCCM Executive Board Member. Dr. Tasker is the Editor-in-Chief for Pediatric Critical Care Medicine. Dr. Buchman is Editor-in-Chief for Critical Care Medicine. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Purpose: Rapid-sequence intubation (RSI) is the process of administering a sedative and neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) in rapid succession to facilitate endotracheal intubation. It is the most common and preferred method for intubation of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). The selection and use of medications to facilitate RSI is critical for success. The purpose of this review is to describe pharmacotherapies used during the RSI process, discuss current clinical controversies in RSI medication selection, and review pharmacotherapy considerations for alternative intubation methods., Summary: There are several steps to the intubation process requiring medication considerations, including pretreatment, induction, paralysis, and post-intubation sedation and analgesia. Pretreatment medications include atropine, lidocaine, and fentanyl; but use of these agents in clinical practice has fallen out of favor as there is limited evidence for their use outside of select clinical scenarios. There are several options for induction agents, though etomidate and ketamine are the most used due to their more favorable hemodynamic profiles. Currently there is retrospective evidence that etomidate may produce less hypotension than ketamine in patients presenting with shock or sepsis. Succinylcholine and rocuronium are the preferred neuromuscular blocking agents, and the literature suggests minimal differences between succinylcholine and high dose rocuronium in first-pass success rates. Selection between the two is based on patient specific factors, half-life and adverse effect profiles. Finally, medication-assisted preoxygenation and awake intubation are less common methods for intubation in the ED but require different considerations for medication use., Areas for Future Research: The optimal selection, dosing, and administration of RSI medications is complicated, and further research is needed in several areas. Additional prospective studies are needed to determine optimal induction agent selection and dosing in patients presenting with shock or sepsis. Controversy exists over optimal medication administration order (paralytic first vs induction first) and medication dosing in obese patients, but there is insufficient evidence to significantly alter current practices regarding medication dosing and administration. Further research examining awareness with paralysis during RSI is needed before definitive and widespread practice changes to medication use during RSI can be made., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest with the material presented in this clinical review article., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Massive transfusion protocols (MTP) commonly result in severe hypocalcemia due to the calcium-binding affinity of citrate in blood components. The purpose of this study is to determine the optimal grams (g) of citrate to repletion calcium (Ca) milliequivalents (mEq) (Citrate:Ca) ratio to reduce 30-day mortality., Methods: This was a retrospective, single-centered, cohort study at a level 1 trauma center evaluating trauma and surgical patients in need of MTP activation from January 1, 2010-July 31, 2021. Patients with severe hypocalcemia at baseline, defined as ionized calcium (iCa) <0.9 mmol/L, were compared to patients without severe hypocalcemia. The primary endpoint was to determine the optimal ratio of grams of citrate to calcium mEq to reduce mortality in patients receiving a MTP. Secondary endpoints included mortality at 24 h and 30 days, blood components used in MTP, and type of calcium used., Results: Overall, 501 patients were screened for inclusion. Of these patients, 193 were excluded, leaving 308 patients, of which 165 patients (53.6%) had an iCa <0.9 mmol/L within 24 h and 143 patients (46.4%) had iCa ≥0.9 mmol/L within 24 h. The ratio of Citrate:Ca for each patient was not significantly associated with mortality at 24 h (P = 0.79) or 30 days (P = 0.91) at a repletion Citrate:Ca ratio of median 1.97 (IQR 1.14-2.91). The rate of mortality was lowest at a Citrate:Ca of 2 in both <24-h mortality and 30-day mortality., Conclusions: There were no differences in 24 h or 30 day mortality based on repletion ratios seen in this study. A Citrate:Ca ratio between 2 and 3 in patients undergoing MTP was sufficient to obtain a normalized iCa within 24 h of MTP activation regardless of baseline iCa level. Further prospective studies will be needed to determine the optimal Citrate:Ca ratio., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The purpose of this article is to summarize pharmacotherapy related emergency medicine (EM) literature indexed in 2022. Articles were selected utilizing a modified Delphi approach. The table of contents from pre-determined journals were reviewed and independently evaluated via the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system by paired authors, with disagreements adjudicated by a third author. Pharmacotherapy-related publications deemed to be GRADE 1A and 1B were reviewed by the group for inclusion in the review. In all, this article summarizes and provides commentary on the potential clinical impact of 13 articles, 4 guidelines, and 3 meta-analyses covering topics including anticoagulant reversal, tenecteplase in acute ischemic stroke, guideline updates for heart failure and aortic aneurysm, magnesium in atrial fibrillation, sedation in mechanically ventilated patients and pain management strategies in the Emergency Department (ED), and tranexamic acid use in epistaxis and GI bleed., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest CSB has funding from Alexion/Astra Zeneca. All other authors have nothing to disclose relevant to this article., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

D-cycloserine (DCS) is an anti-tuberculosis medication that has been utilized for years for drug-resistant tuberculosis. DCS works via a centrally acting mechanism which can cause neurotoxic adverse effects which has limited its use. This centrally acting mechanism also allows for DCS to be utilized for various neuropsychiatric purposes. Our patient was on high-dose DCS for autism spectrum disorder and presented to the emergency department (ED) with a seizure. The seizure episode was managed with both anti-epileptics and pyridoxine. With increasing novel use of this older medication, it is imperative for ED clinicians to be aware of the different management strategies that may be required when a patient presents with a neurotoxic effect, specifically seizures, secondary to DCS.

Introduction: In 2015, the Severe Sepsis and Early Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) tied hospital reimbursement to performance on a series of time sensitive indicators, including ordering blood cultures on patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. This metric could have broadly shaped ordering practices in the Emergency Department (ED), including for patients who did not have severe sepsis or septic shock. In this study, we sought to evaluate whether the frequency of blood culture orders on adult patients discharged from the ED changed after the SEP-1 metric, whether the rates of positivity for pathogens or contaminants changed after the SEP-1 metric, and whether similar changes were seen in orders for other laboratory tests., Methods: This was a retrospective evaluation of blood culture orders from discharged adult ED patients from a suburban academic hospital between January 1, 2012 and June 30, 2019. We compared the number of blood cultures per discharged adult patient before and after the SEP-1 metric. We categorized each culture that grew an organism as a pathogen or a contaminant, and we compared rates of pathogen and contaminant growth before and after SEP-1. We compared rates of orders of blood cultures and lactates as labs related to SEP-1 with rates of orders of D-dimers, lipases, human chorionic gonadotropins (HCGs), and brain natriuretic peptides (BNPs) as labs unrelated to SEP-1 before and after the implementation of the SEP-1 metric., Results: There were 144,343 adult patients discharged from the ED during the study period. A total of 6754 blood cultures were drawn from 3827 of those patient visits. The rate increased from 43.1 cultures per 1000 discharged patients before the SEP-1 metric to 75.9 blood cultures per 1000 discharged patients, an increase of 76.2% (p < 0.001). The cultures had a decreased rate of positivity (from 3.93% before SEP-1 to 3.03% after SEP-1, p = 0.044) and an unchanged rate of blood cultures resulting in a contaminant (2.49% to 1.85%, p = 0.071). Overall, orders of the labs unrelated to SEP-1 increased by an average of 16.8% after the SEP-1 metric and orders of the labs related to SEP-1 increased by an average of 81.0%., Conclusion: After the SEP-1 bundle, blood cultures were ordered more frequently on discharged ED patients. These cultures had a lower rate of positivity for pathogens and an unchanged rate of growth of contaminants. This increase was not matched by a similar increase in other labs. Taken together, these findings suggest that the SEP-1 metric had the unintended consequence of increasing orders of blood cultures on patients healthy enough to be discharged from the ED., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The effect of the use of antihypertensive agents in patients prior to the development of shock is unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of antihypertensive agents on vasopressor dose and duration in shock. Materials and Methods: This retrospective, single-center study included patients with shock who received at least one vasopressor for at least 24 hours after shock onset from January 1 to June 30, 2017. Patients taking an antihypertensive agent(s) were compared to those who were not. The primary outcome was the number of vasopressor-free hours at 72 hours. Secondary outcomes included maximum and cumulative vasopressor doses, intensive care unit length of stay, and 30-day mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-eight patients were included and 99 (59%) were on antihypertensives. Distributive shock was the most common type of shock (75.5%) and more patients taking antihypertensives had hypertension, coronary artery disease, and dyslipidemia at baseline. There was no difference in the number of vasopressor-free hours at 72 hours between patients taking an antihypertensive medication(s) and the control group (2 hours vs 1 hour; P = .11). No difference was found between any of the secondary outcomes. Conclusion: Patients taking antihypertensive agents prior to shock onset did not require increased vasopressor doses or duration.

Purpose: Emergency medicine pharmacists (EMPs) have been demonstrated to have a positive impact on patient outcomes in a variety of clinical scenarios in the emergency department (ED), yet their distribution across the nation is suboptimal. An emergency medicine pharmacy intensity score tool (EMPIST) would not only facilitate the quantification of EMP staffing needs and ideal resource deployment times, but would also allow practitioners to triage patient care activities. The purpose of this investigation was to develop an EMPIST and evaluate its relationship to EMP activities., Methods: This was a multicenter, prospective, observational analysis of an EMPIST developed by practicing EMPs. EMPs prospectively documented their clinical activities during usual care for patients in their ED. Spearman's rank-order correlation was used to determine any correlation between the EMPIST and pharmacist activities., Results: In total, 970 EMP activities and 584 EMPIST items were documented in 352 patients by 7 EMPs across 7 different EDs. The most commonly documented EMP interventions performed were bedside monitoring (12.7%), initiation of nonantimicrobial therapy (12.6%), and antimicrobial therapy initiation and streamlining (10.6%). The total EMPIST was found to significantly correlate with EMP activities, and this correlation was consistent across both "diagnostic/presentation" and "medication" items (P < 0.001 for all comparisons)., Conclusion: The EMPIST significantly correlated with EMP activities, with consistent correlation across all subgroups. Its utilization has the potential to enhance bedside clinical practice and optimize the deployment of limited EMP services. Additional investigations are needed to examine the validity of this tool and identify any relationship it may have to patient outcomes., (© American Society of Health-System Pharmacists 2022. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: The diagnosis and treatment of mild traumatic brain injuries (mTBIs) by emergency medicine providers is greatly varied. Because of the frequency and long-term consequences associated with pediatric head injuries, it is crucial that adequate counseling is provided in acute care settings. The purpose of our study is to evaluate existing practices at Loyola University Medical Center emergency department to address inconsistencies in diagnostic or discharge practices and determine future quality improvement measures., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at an academic hospital emergency department of patient records from 2017 to 2020. Demographic, diagnostic, and discharge data were summarized, and Pearson χ2 tests and Fisher exact tests were performed to determine associations among patient characteristics and provider practices., Results: A total of 1160 patients met inclusion criteria for analysis. In terms of diagnostic procedure, 31.6% of providers did not uniformly use existing screening criteria, such as PECARN, to determine if CT scans were needed for mTBI evaluation. Most discharge instructions were based on a generalized template on epic (91.9%). Only a minority of providers prepared patient-specific instructions through written, verbal, or other supplemental materials. The most common formats included epic only (46.1%), epic and personalized written instructions (20.2%), and epic and verbal instructions (12.4%). Follow-up care instructions were provided to 93% of patients who received discharged instructions, mainly for primary care (96.7%), sports medicine (1.58%), neurology (0.65%), or other providers (1.11%)., Conclusions: There is a lack of consistency in the evaluation and education of mTBI in pediatric patients. There is a need for personalized discharge instructions to ensure adequate patient and parent understanding and compliance. Further studies looking at long-term outcomes in these patients would also be beneficial., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Pneumonia is common in the intensive care unit (ICU), infecting 27% of all critically ill patients. Given the high prevalence of this disease state in the ICU, optimizing antimicrobial therapy while minimizing toxicities is of utmost importance. Inappropriate antimicrobial use can increase the risk of antimicrobial resistance, Clostridiodes difficile infection, allergic reaction, and other complications from antimicrobial use (e.g., QTc prolongation, thrombocytopenia). This review article aims to discuss methods to optimize antimicrobial treatment in patients with pneumonia, including the following: procalcitonin use, utilization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nares testing to determine need for vancomycin therapy, utilization of the Biofire ® FilmArray ® pneumonia polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and microbiology reporting techniques.

Purpose: Despite the expertise that emergency medicine (EM) pharmacists bring to multidisciplinary teams in the emergency department (ED) setting, they are not commonly present on writing groups for guidelines, policies, or task forces pertaining to EM pharmacotherapy. The purpose of this article is to quantify EM pharmacist involvement on author bylines of guidelines, position statements, and other official documents that specifically encompass EM pharmacotherapy., Methods: Official work products released between January 1, 2010, and May 1, 2021, were collected from the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM), and American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM) and the table of contents of the following journals: Annals of Emergency Medicine, Academic Emergency Medicine, and Journal of Emergency Medicine. A modified Delphi approach was used to gain consensus amongst the authors on which work products to include in the initial review and which works pertained to pharmacotherapy. The primary endpoint was the percentage of pharmacists listed as authors on EM work products pertaining to pharmacotherapy., Results: Overall, 76 EM work products were identified. Forty-seven work products with a total of 248 authors contained at least 1 recommendation pertaining to pharmacotherapy. Of these 47 EM work products, 23 (49%) were from AAEM, 16 (34%) were from Annals of Emergency Medicine (published on behalf of ACEP), 5 (11%) were from Journal of Emergency Medicine (published on behalf of AAEM), and 3 (6%) were from SAEM. The median number of authors per work product was 4. There were 5 pharmacists listed on work products (2% of the total of 248 authors). Additionally, there were 9 nonpharmacist/nonphysician authors (4% of the total)., Conclusion: Pharmacist inclusion on author lists of recently published EM work products pertaining to pharmacotherapy is extremely low. Given their unique knowledge pertaining to EM pharmacotherapy, an effort should be made to increase inclusion of pharmacists as authors of EM work products with recommendations that pertain to pharmacotherapy., (© American Society of Health-System Pharmacists 2022. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

This article highlights the most relevant emergency medicine (EM) pharmacotherapy publications indexed in 2021. A modified Delphi approach was utilized for selected journals to identify the most impactful EM pharmacotherapy studies via the GRADE system. After review of journal table of contents GRADE 1A and 1B articles were reviewed by authors. Twenty articles, 2 guidelines, 2 position papers, and 2 meta-analysis were selected for full summary. Articles included in this review highlight acute agitation management, acute appendicitis treatment, sexually transmitted infection updates, optimizing sepsis management and treatment, updates for the ideal thrombolytic agent in acute ischemic stroke and endovascular therapy candidates, indications for tranexamic acid, calicium for out of hospital cardiac arrest, optimial inotrope for cardiogenic shock, awareness during rapid sequence intubation paralysis, comparison of propofol or dexmedetomidine for sedation, treatment of cannabis hyperemsis syndrome, and prophylactic use of diphenhydramine to reduce neuroleptic side effects. Selected articles are summarized to include design, results, limitations, conclusions and impact., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest CSB: Alexion/Astra Zeneca Rare Disease. BF: Spero Therapeutics. MAR: Spero Therapeutics, advisory board for Harm Reduction Therapeutics., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Uropathogen resistance, fluoroquinolone-resistance (FQR), and extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL), has been observed to be emerging worldwide with prevalences above recommended thresholds for routine empirical treatment. The primary aim of our study was to determine the prevalence of FQR from a geographically diverse sample of United States emergency departments (EDs)., Methods: We conducted a multi-center, observational cohort study using a network of 15 geographically diverse US EDs. All patients ≥18 years of age with the primary or secondary diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI) in the ED identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) diagnosis code of cystitis, pyelonephritis, or UTI from 2018 to 2020 were included. We calculated descriptive statistics for uropathogens and susceptibilities. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify antimicrobial resistance risk factors associated with FQR Escherichia coli., Results: Among 3779 patients who met inclusion criteria, median age was 62.9 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 41-77.6) and 76.3% were female. The most common diagnoses were complicated (41.2%) and uncomplicated cystitis (40.3%). E. coli was the most common pathogen (63.2%), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (13.2%) and Enterococcus species (5.8%). Across all sites, overall E. coli FQ-resistance prevalence was 22.1%, ranging from 10.5 to 29.7% by site. The prevalence of ESBL-producing uropathogen was 7.4%, ranging from 3.6% to 11.6% by site. Previous IV or oral antimicrobial use in the past 90-days and history of a multi-drug resistant pathogen were associated with FQ-resistant E. coli (odds ratio [OR] 2.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.04-3.51, and OR 6.93, 95% CI: 4.95-9.70, respectively). Of the patients who had FQ-resistant E. coli or an ESBL-producing uropathogen isolated, 116 (37.1%) and 61 (36.7%) did not have any documented risk factors for resistance., Conclusion: FQ-resistant E. coli is widely prevalent across US sites highlighting the need for ongoing monitoring of antimicrobial resistance and, at some locations, modification of empirical treatments., (© 2022 The Authors. Academic Emergency Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objectives: Despite the established role of the critical care pharmacist on the ICU multiprofessional team, critical care pharmacist workloads are likely not optimized in the ICU. Medication regimen complexity (as measured by the Medication Regimen Complexity-ICU [MRC-ICU] scoring tool) has been proposed as a potential metric to optimize critical care pharmacist workload but has lacked robust external validation. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that MRC-ICU is related to both patient outcomes and pharmacist interventions in a diverse ICU population., Design: This was a multicenter, observational cohort study., Setting: Twenty-eight ICUs in the United States., Patients: Adult ICU patients., Interventions: Critical care pharmacist interventions (quantity and type) on the medication regimens of critically ill patients over a 4-week period were prospectively captured. MRC-ICU and patient outcomes (i.e., mortality and length of stay [LOS]) were recorded retrospectively., Measurements and Main Results: A total of 3,908 patients at 28 centers were included. Following analysis of variance, MRC-ICU was significantly associated with mortality (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.08-1.11; p < 0.01), ICU LOS (β coefficient, 0.41; 95% CI, 00.37-0.45; p < 0.01), total pharmacist interventions (β coefficient, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.04-0.09; p < 0.01), and a composite intensity score of pharmacist interventions (β coefficient, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.11-0.28; p < 0.01). In multivariable regression analysis, increased patient: pharmacist ratio (indicating more patients per clinician) was significantly associated with increased ICU LOS (β coefficient, 0.02; 0.00-0.04; p = 0.02) and reduced quantity (β coefficient, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.04 to -0.02; p < 0.01) and intensity of interventions (β coefficient, -0.05; 95% CI, -0.09 to -0.01)., Conclusions: Increased medication regimen complexity, defined by the MRC-ICU, is associated with increased mortality, LOS, intervention quantity, and intervention intensity. Further, these results suggest that increased pharmacist workload is associated with decreased care provided and worsened patient outcomes, which warrants further exploration into staffing models and patient outcomes., Competing Interests: Dr. Newsome has received research funding through the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under Award Numbers UL1TR002378 and KL2TR002381. Dr. Rech’s institution received funding from Spero Pharmaceuticals; she received funding from Harm Reduction Therapeutics. Dr. DePriest received funding from Baxter. Dr. Flannery’s institution received funding from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the American Society of Nephrology, and La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Pain is a common complaint precipitating emergency department (ED) visit, occurring in more than half of patient encounters. While opioids are effective for acute pain management in the Emergency Department (ED), the associated adverse effects, including respiratory and central nervous system depression, nausea, vomiting, and constipation, and physical manifestations of use, including tolerance, dependence and misuse leading to overdose and death, accentuate the need for non-opioid alternatives and/or multi-modal pain control. This review will provide examples of non-opioid pain management strategies and multimodal regimens for treatment of acute pain in the ED., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest directly pertaining to this work. Megan Rech, PharmD has investigator-initiated research funding from Spero Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this subject., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Etomidate is commonly used for induction of anesthesia for rapid sequence intubation (RSI). It has little impact on hemodynamic status, making it a widely used agent. Due to the inhibition of cortisol production, etomidate causes adrenal suppression. The purpose of this study is to determine whether there is a correlation with etomidate use and the incidence of secondary infections., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort of hospitalized patients who received either etomidate or control (ketamine, propofol, or no agent) for RSI. The primary endpoint was the incidence of secondary infections. Secondary outcomes included number of mechanical ventilator-free days within 28 days, 30-day mortality, length of hospital stay, and length of intensive care unit stay., Results: A total of 434 patients were reviewed, of which 129 (29.7%) met the study criteria (n = 94 etomidate; n = 35 control). The incidence of secondary infection was numerically higher in the etomidate group compared with the control group, though this was not statistically significant (38.7% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.447). Also, though the secondary outcomes showed no statistically significant difference between the groups, the patients in the control group had a longer hospital stay (14.0 vs. 18.1, p = 0.20) and a longer ICU stay (11.0 vs. 14.1, p = 030). Furthermore, the etomidate group had a non-statistically significant higher incidence of bacteremia (8 vs. 0, p = 0.17)., Conclusion: The use of etomidate was not associated with increased incidence of secondary infection. To fully understand the effects of etomidate use and its subsequent adrenal suppression, larger studies are needed.

Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) is the most common genetic disease in the United States. Symptoms result from formation of sickle hemoglobin (HbS), which polymerizes and obstructs vasculature. Voxelotor, a HbS polymerization inhibitor, was granted accelerated approval by the Food and Drug Administration in 2019 for chronic treatment of SCD. While voxelotor may offer a disease-modifying approach to SCD, little is known about long-term safety profile. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potential adverse effect (AE) that rarely occurred during clinical trials. While pulmonary embolism (PE) is listed as a potential AE, the pathophysiologic mechanism has yet to be elucidated. We report a patient with SCD presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute onset shortness of breath, tachycardia, and hypotension in the setting of newly initiated voxelotor twenty days prior to arrival. Computed tomography pulmonary angiography showed multiple acute subsegmental PEs. Lower extremity doppler showed acute bilateral DVTs. Voxelotor, which was suspected to have provoked the VTEs, was discontinued indefinitely. The patient's reaction scored a 5 on the Naranjo Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale, indicating probable causal relationship between the VTEs and voxelotor. Although listed as an AE on its drug label, the only reports of voxelotor-associated VTE are in the results of clinical trials. To our knowledge, we present the first case of VTE likely provoked by voxelotor. While voxelotor offers a promising therapeutic option for SCD, emergency medicine physicians should be aware of severe AEs that may necessitate ED visits., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Patients with critical illness often display variable hypo- and hypercoagulable sequalae requiring intense monitoring and anticoagulation pharmacotherapy to prevent or treat inappropriate clot formation. It is imperative to understand the various stages of the clotting cascade and where each pharmacotherapy agent exerts its therapeutic effect. Common coagulation tests are utilized to monitor the areas of the clotting cascade and the effects that anticoagulant pharmacotherapy exhibits. Many novel coagulation tests are also in development. The purpose of this narrative review is to evaluate commonly utilized coagulation tests that monitor anticoagulation while in the intensive care unit., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite improvements in both preventative and post-event care, cardiac arrest still occurs frequently with high morbidity and mortality. Bacteremia is a potential cause or complication of cardiac arrest that has received increasing notoriety in recent years., Objectives: To identify the incidence of and predictive factors for bacteremia in both inside and outside of hospital cardiac arrest patients., Methods: Retrospective, single centered, cohort study conducted at an academic medical center. Patients 18 years of age or older with cardiac arrest and blood cultures drawn within 24 h of the event were included., Results: Two-hundred sixty-three cardiac arrest patients were included, of which forty-three patients (16.3%) were bacteremic. Patients with bacteremia had higher rates of home parenteral nutrition and a history of known infection before cardiac arrest. Bacteremic patients had a higher blood urea nitrogen (30 mg/dL vs. 23, p = 0.02), serum creatinine (2.40 mg/dL  vs. 1.70, p = 0.05), and troponin (0.39 ng/mL vs. 0.12, p = 0.03) compared with the non-bacteremic group. There were no differences in duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay or ICU length of stay. Mortality at 28-days was higher in the bacteremic group (79%) compared to the non-bacteremic group (60.9%, p = 0.02). No factors associated with bacteremia were identified., Conclusion: Bacteremia was observed in 16.3% of patients, with significant differences between the bacteremic and non-bacteremic group regarding home parenteral nutrition and known infection before the event, cardiac arrest characteristics (blood urea nitrogen, serum creatinine, and troponin), and 28-day mortality., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest/Financial Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have been shown to have high sedation requirements., Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare sedative use between patients with COVID-19 ARDS and non-COVID-19 ARDS., Methods: This was a retrospective study of patients with COVID-19 ARDS compared with historical controls of non-COVID-19 ARDS who were admitted to 2 hospitals from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020, and April 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019, respectively. The primary outcome was median cumulative dose of propofol (µg/kg) at 24 hours after intubation., Results: There were 92 patients with COVID-19 ARDS and 37 patients with non-COVID-19 ARDS included. Within the first 24 hours of intubation, patients with COVID-19 ARDS required higher total median doses of propofol: 51 045 µg/kg (interquartile range, 26 150-62 365 µg/kg) versus 33 350 µg/kg (9632-51 455 µg/kg; P = 0.004). COVID-19 patients were more likely receive intravenous lorazepam (37% vs 14%; P = 0.02) and higher cumulative median doses of midazolam by days 5 (14 vs 4 mg; P = 0.04) and 7 of intubation (89 vs 4 mg; P = 0.03) to achieve the same median Richmond Analgesia-Sedation Scale scores. COVID-19 ARDS patients required more ventilator days (10 vs 6 days; P = 0.02). There was no difference in 30-day mortality., Conclusion and Relevance: Patients with COVID-19 ARDS required higher doses of propofol and benzodiazepines than patients with non-COVID-19 ARDS to achieve the same median levels of sedation.