RESUMEN
Background Pain is a common complaint in the emergency department (ED), yet there is a lack of robust pain curricula in emergency medicine (EM) residency programs. In this study, we investigated pain education in EM residencies and various factors related to educational development. Methodology This was a prospective study collecting online survey results sent to Program Directors, Associate Program Directors, and Assistant Program Directors of EM residencies in the United States. Descriptive analyses with nonparametric tests were performed to investigate relationships between these factors, including educational hours, level of educational collaboration with pain medicine specialists, and multimodal therapy utilization. Results The overall individual response rate was 39.8% (252 out of 634 potential respondents), representing 164 out of 220 identified EM residencies with 110 (50%) Program Directors responding. Traditional classroom lectures were the most common modality for the delivery of pain medicine content. EM textbooks were the most common resource utilized for curriculum development. An average of 5.7 hours per year was devoted to pain education. Up to 46.8% of respondents reported poor or absent educational collaboration with pain medicine specialists. Greater collaboration levels were associated with greater hours devoted to pain education (p = 0.01), perceived resident interest in acute and chronic pain management education (p < 0.001), and resident utilization of regional anesthesia (p = <0.01). Faculty and resident interest in acute and chronic pain management education were similar to each other and high on the Likert scale, with higher scores correlating to greater hours devoted to pain education (p = 0.02 and 0.01, respectively). Faculty expertise in pain medicine was rated the most important factor in improving pain education in their programs. Conclusions Pain education is a necessity for residents to adequately treat pain in the ED, but remains challenging and undervalued. Faculty expertise was identified as a factor limiting pain education among EM residents. Collaboration with pain medicine specialists and recruitment of EM faculty with expertise in pain medicine are ways to improve pain education of EM residents.
RESUMEN
Background Since coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged, increasing cases have been identified worldwide. COVID-19 continues to lead to significant morbidity and mortality, despite developing a vaccination for the disease. While much has been studied regarding the initial presentation and treatment of patients with COVID-19, to our knowledge, no study has uncovered that COVID-19-positive patients with abdominal pain are at a higher risk of requiring intubation. Methodology In this retrospective cohort study, we identified 104 patients who presented to the emergency room of a single tertiary care center with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 between February 1, 2020, and April 27, 2020, and collected data on reported pain complaints. Results In this retrospective cohort study, the most common pain complaints were chest pain (25.5%), myalgia (23.4%), and abdominal pain (17.0%). Less common pain complaints included headaches (14.9%) and neck/back pain (6.3%). Of these pain complaints, only patients who reported having abdominal pain were more likely to be intubated (37.5% of patients with abdominal pain were intubated compared to 8.3% of patients without abdominal pain, with a p-value of 0.001). Conclusions Abdominal pain in a patient with COVID-19 infection significantly increases their chances of requiring intubation based on the results of this study.
RESUMEN
Deutetrabenazine (DTBZ) (Austedo®) is a novel vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT2) inhibitor, which acts by blocking dopamine release and other monoamines from neuronal vesicles. Although this drug is considered the first-line treatment for tardive dyskinesia (TD), VMAT2 inhibition has also been shown to improve patients' symptoms with Huntington's disease-induced chorea. We present the case of a 59-year-old woman with a history of TD, who presented to the emergency department following massive DTBZ ingestion. The relative paucity of other overdose symptoms further supports the manufacturer's claims of a low side effect profile for this drug in overdose. Although DTBZ demonstrates an excellent safety profile, emergency physicians should be aware of the potential side effect of DTBZ overdose, in addition to other known side effects of this novel drug.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Vascular access device placement is one of the most routinely performed procedures in the emergency department. Despite its high usage, most patients have limited knowledge about vascular access device placement. Patient decision aids have been utilized heavily in non-emergency department settings to provide basic clinical information regarding a patient's medical care options. In this study, we investigated whether exposure to a patient decision aid on vascular access devices and patients' experiences with vascular access devices would influence their vascular access device preference during an acute care episode. METHODS: Patients in this institutional review board-approved study were enrolled prospectively in the emergency department at a busy level 1 trauma institution. A patient decision aid on vascular access device was constructed using criteria developed by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. All participants were exposed to the patient decision aid and were asked to complete two questionnaires, and two tests. RESULTS: Fifty subjects (50) were enrolled prospectively in the emergency department. The mean pretest score was 17.2% (95% confidence interval, 0.54-1.18), while the mean post-test score was 72.4% (95% confidence interval, 3.15-4.09). We found that patients who were exposed to the patient decision aid preferred landmark-based peripheral intravenous lines over ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous lines in this data set. CONCLUSION: The result from this analysis indicated that most patients visiting the emergency department are not knowledgeable about their options related to vascular access device placement. The observed increase in the average correct responses on the post-test indicates that a patient decision aid can be an effective educational tool in the emergency department.