This was a retrospective cohort study of the national trauma data bank that included about 64000 pediatric trauma patients in the derivation group and the same amount in the validation group. The authors empirically created upper and lower cut off values for the shock index based on age. They compared the shock index based on age cut offs with major trauma as defined by the standardized triage assessment tool criteria.
The empirically derived age adjusted values had a sensitivity of 43.2% and a specificity of 79.4% for major trauma. The sensitivity of the pediatric shock index (PSI) in that same group was 33.9% with a specificity of 90.7%. The pediatric-adjusted shock index (SIPA) had a 37.4% sensitivity and 87.8% sensitivity for 4-16 year olds.
Shock index = (Heart Rate / Systolic BP)
Pediatric Shock Index (PSI)
For children age 1-12 years
SI > 1.55 - (0.5) x (age in years)
Patients with an elevated shock index had a 5.02 greater odds of major trauma in this study.
This study used age specific cut offs such as:
1 yr to < 3 years = lower limit of 0.73 and an upper limit of 1.40
(see article for a full table).
Patients with a shock index below the lower limit had a 1.55 greater offs of major trauma and patients with a shock index above the upper limit had a 3.97 greater risk of major trauma.
Bottom line: Shock index alone has a limited role in the identification of major trauma in children. Of these three methods for calculating/interpreting shock index, PSI seemed to do better.
Multiple trials have aimed to assess the effect of blood pressure control in the prehospital setting for patients with suspected acute stroke. The INTERACT-4 trial was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, blind endpoint trial conducted in China, in which 2404 hypertensive patients with suspected acute stroke (based on FAST score >2, symptom onset <2h, SBP >150mmHg) were randomized to receive urapidil versus usual care in the prehospital setting. The primary outcome was modified Rankin score (mRs) distribution at 90 days. Overall, no significant difference in functional outcomes at 90 days were observed in the urapidil versus usual care groups (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87-1.15). However, when analyzed by stroke type, improved functional outcomes and lower rates of rebleeding were seen in patients with hemorrhagic stroke (46.5% of all enrolled patients), while worsened functional outcomes and mortality were seen in patients with ischemic stroke. These observations are consistent with standard practices of intensive blood pressure reduction in patients found to have ICH, versus the “permissive hypertension” approach to patients found to have cerebrovascular occlusion. The results of this trial are not practice-changing, but do highlight the importance of prompt stroke recognition, streamlined hospital workflows for expedited diagnostics (CT), and timely initiation of antihypertensive therapy in ICH patients.
Bottom line: Prehospital blood pressure reduction was not shown to improve clinical outcomes in hypertensive patients suspected to have acute undifferentiated stroke.
Previous studies have suggested that a single dose of epinephrine in out of hospital cardiac arrests compared to multiple dose protocols result in a similar survival to hospital discharge rate. This study aimed to see if single dose epinephrine compared to multiple doses improved survival in the subset of patients that were 1) in a shockable rhythm or 2) received bystander CPR.
This study looked at patients from 5 EMS systems in North Carolina before and after a protocol change from multiple dose epinephrine to single dose epinephrine in cardiac arrest. 1690 patients were included, 19.2% with a shockable rhythm and 38.9% who received bystander CPR.
The study found:
- Survival to hospital discharge was higher in the single dose epinephrine group who received bystander CPR
- Survival rates were similar in the single and multiple dose epinephrine groups for patients who were initially in shockable rhythms, in asystole/PEA and who did NOT receive bystander CPR.
Bottom Line: More studies are needed to support prehospital protocol changes.
Arterial lines are essential tools in managing critically ill patients, but it is frustrating when they are not working as expected. It can be hard to tell when an unexpected waveform or pressure reflects the patient's physiology versus a problem with the line. Recognizing common issues and systematic troubleshooting will optimize your hemodynamic monitoring.
Types of arterial line problems
Troubleshooting Steps
By following these steps, you can systematically identify whether waveform or pressure abnormalities are due to technical issues or true patient physiology.
Looking at 416 patients aged 12-16, 48% at a Peds trauma center vs 20% at adult Level 1 center vs 34% at an adult level 2 center, there was no difference in in hospital mortality between adult and pediatric centers.
The authors conclude “These findings suggest that severely injured adolescents aged 12 to 16 years may be safely treated at either adult or pediatric trauma centers.”
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is more than just a collection of buzzwords or political noise. They are real, important and necessary components to provided excellent, compassionate and culturally appropriate care to all of our patients. EDs across the country are looking for ways to incorporate the principles of diversity, equity and inclusion. To do this effectively needs both a bottom-up and top-down approach.
This study details the results of a top-down approach to incorporate diversity, equity and inclusion at a very large ED system. Leaders on every level of their organization participated in book clubs followed by a guided discussion of one of 9 themes- examination of privilege, initial reaction to discussion about racism, discomfort, worry, self-reflection, release, role recognition, readiness, and education.
The results showed that all participants were able to move from a feeling of paralysis due to the enormity of the challenges and defensiveness, to a release of that paralysis with a commitment to move the organization forward in a positive way.
Background:
Approximately 10% of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) report penicillin allergies, which may lead to use of second- or third-line agents. Alternative therapies (such as aztreonam, clindamycin and fluroquinolones) carry an increased risk of mortality and complications such as Clostridioides difficile infection. Considering that less than 10% of penicillin allergies may be confirmed by formal testing results, the PEN-FAST clinical decision tool was created to identify patients with low risk of true penicillin allergy who do not require formal skin testing for rechallenging with a beta-lactam:
Though PEN-FAST has only been validated in the clinic and inpatient settings, a study from Tran et al. published this January sought to determine the safety and efficacy of utilizing this tool to assess penicillin allergies and re-challenge patients in the ED.
Study design:
This was a single-center, prospective, observational cohort study. Emergency medicine (EM) pharmacists screened patients in the ED with:
Screened patients were excluded from the study if orders were placed by a non-EM physician, if they previously tolerated a penicillin/cephalosporin within the healthcare system of the study site, if they were unable to participate in bedside interview, if the antibiotics selected were appropriate despite the penicillin allergy or if there were time constraints that would delay care if the PEN-FAST assessment needed to be completed.
Study Intervention:
EM pharmacists completed the PEN-FAST assessment for all included patients. They recommended rechallenging with an appropriate beta-lactam for patients with a score of 0-2, recommended to consider rechallenging for patients scoring 3, and did not recommend rechallenging for scores of 4-5 or if it was confirmed patients previously experienced anaphylaxis, angioedema or severe cutaneous reactions with a beta-lactam. Orders for any change in therapy were only placed with discussion and agreement from EM physicians. Rechallenged patients were assessed at bedside for any immune-mediated reactions 45 to 75 minutes after initiation of antibiotics. The primary outcome was the percent of patients with a PEN-FAST score of 0-2 who tolerated a beta-lactam after being rechallenged.
Patient Characteristics:
After screening, one hundred patients were included in this study.
Results:
Primary Outcome:
Secondary Outcomes:
Key Takeaways:
Background
Diagnosed by continuous seizure activity that lasts for 5 minutes or more and/or multiple seizures that occur without returning to baseline in-between each. Further classified as being convulsive or non-convulsive. Refractory status epilepticus can be defined as status epilepticus that does not respond to an adequately dosed benzodiazepine and another anti-seizure medication. The primary objective in management is to stop both clinical and electrographic seizures which can become an important point for those patients who require intubation and receive neuromuscular blockade. Essential to evaluate early for reversible causes (electrolytes, liver function, glucose, ammonia, medications) and for other precipitating causes with toxicology screening and CT head imaging with consideration for angiography and venography.
Management:
First-Line/Initial Therapy:
Lorazepam IV 0.1 mg/kg up to 4 mg per dose is the preferred agent, can be repeated after 5 minutes if seizures persist
Diazepam 0.15 mg/kg IV/0.2 mg/kg PR up to 10 mg, or midazolam IM 0.2 mg/kg up to 10 mg are also alternatives
Second-line/Urgent control: (Provided to all patients with SE after initial therapy)
- Levetiracetam 60 mg/kg, Valproate 40 mg/kg, and fosphenytoin 20 mgPE/kg were studied by Kapur et al., and they found similar rates of resolution of status epilepticus with similar rates of adverse events.
- Phenobarbital 15-20 mg/kg is another agent that has good efficacy and is remerging as an effective agent. Can cause respiratory depression at high doses.
- Keppra may have the best side-effect profile to consider.
- Valproate can cause hepatotoxicity, elevated ammonia and thrombocytopenia.
- Fosphenytoin can cause hypotension and arrhythmias.
Third-line:
Midazolam 0.2 mg/kg load followed by 0.05 – 2 mg/kg/hr infusion
Propofol 1-2 mg/kg load followed by 20-200 mcg/kg/min infusion
Ketamine 0.5 – 3 mg/kg load followed by 1.5-10 mg/kg/hr infusion
Pentobarbital 5 mg/kg load followed by 0.5-5 mg/kg/hr infusion
- Propofol carries the risk of propofol infusion syndrome with high doses or prolonged infusions, some favor midazolam because of this.
No conclusive data to support one over another.
Important Considerations
- A common mistake is to under-dose benzodiazepines for initial therapy, give the full weight-based dose as described above.
- Following initial management it is important to monitor patients with continuous EEG if they have not returned to their neurologic baseline
- Propofol, midazolam or ketamine are good options for induction for intubation.
- Consider against using etomidate for induction of intubation since it can cause myoclonus which can complicate the picture if you are already worried about seizures, can be hard to differentiate.
- If intubation is required and EEG is not readily available consider reversal of neuromuscular blockade after intubation to better monitor for continued seizures.
- If in refractory status epilepticus despite using a second-line agent and a third line agent then consider adding a second agent from the second-line/urgent control that was not previously started (fosphenytoin, valproate, levetiracetam, or phenobarbital).
In the last few months, there have been multiple articles published regarding the use of prophylactic TXA to prevent postpartum hemorrhage. While almost none of us want to ever be in the situation where we have to deliver a baby in the ED, we need to be prepared for all outcomes.
A meta-analysis by Ker et. al (Oct 2024) and a RCT, blinded study by Zhang et. al (Dec 2024) both demonstrated that giving 1g TXA immediately after delivery of a baby can reduce the rate of severe postpartum hemorrhage in patients with risk factors. These studies had a wide variety in what they considered risk factors, but a few that showed particular significance included: hx of postpartum hemorrhage, history of anemia, gestational diabetes, and placental adhesion.
So next time you've scooped that screaming baby out into your already chaotic emergency department, ask your patient (not the baby) a few questions about their birth history and think about giving 1g of TXA to prevent a horror show for whoever is coming on for you next.
Caveat: These studies were done in delivery rooms and not emergency rooms, but I think we can extrapolate since it would be very hard to find enough patients to conduct a study like this in the emergency department.
A retrospective look at veterans who received oral and/or IV as needed blood pressure medications while hospitalized in a non-ICU setting found an association with as needed meds and acute kidney injury, greater than 25% blood pressure drop in 3 hours, and death, stroke and MI while hospitalized. IV medications had a higher association.
While needing prospective validation, this appears to be more evidence to treat the patient not the number.
For those of us living in a world where ED boarding is a reality and ICU beds are in short supply, a re-up on the basic tenets of post-arrest care to optimize survival and neurologic outcomes in patients with sustained ROSC after OHCA:
The suprasternal notch view is a valuable tool for assessing the aorta and identifying signs of thoracic aortic dissection. Proper technique is essential to obtain a clear image and improve diagnostic accuracy.
Steps to Obtain the Suprasternal Notch View:
Position the Patient:
Ideally, place the patient in a supine position.
If the patient cannot tolerate lying flat, the scan can be performed with the patient in an upright position.
Probe Selection & Orientation:
Use a phased array probe in cardiac mode.
Direct the probe marker slightly toward the patient’s left shoulder (or right hip if using abdominal mode).
Optimize Patient Positioning:
Ask the patient to extend their neck to improve visualization.
Having the patient rotate their head to the side may further enhance imaging.
Placing a rolled towel under the shoulders can help achieve optimal neck extension.
Probe Manipulation:
Angle the probe inferiorly toward the chest.
Adjust the depth to clearly visualize the aortic arch.
Risk factors for necrotizing soft tissue infections include: obesity, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, immunosuppression, injection drug use, and deep traumatic wounds.
“Any anatomical site can be involved, but the most common sites are perineal, anorectal, foot, or lower extremities.”
Not based on currently available literature.
This editorial reminds us that the only evidenced based screening criteria we have for C-spine clearance in those over age 65 after trauma is the Canadian C-Spine Rule (2002). This rule recommends imaging for all patients over age 65. No large, well done study indicates physical exam or other means can be used to clear C-Spines in those over age 65.
PECARN, in 2012, published a decision tool aimed at helping avoid unnecessary abdominal CT scans in children with blunt torso trauma. While a prior retrospective validation was done, the tool had not been prospectively validated and generally has not been in widespread use as a standalone, although the original paper may have helped to influence development of local pediatric trauma protocols. Recent prospective validation may make the tool more applicable for broader usage.
The tool is useful as a rule out given that when all criteria are negative, the risk of intraabdominal injury requiring intervention is less than 0.1%. The criteria are:
If using the rule, it is important to note that the presence of one or more of the criteria does not indicate that the patient needs a CT. Patients who do not rule out should be evaluated based on local pediatric trauma protocols and/or in collaboration with the local pediatric trauma center, which often will involve a stepwise approach based on historical information, laboratory workup, and physical exam findings.
These infections remain difficult to diagnose early and early diagnosis is key to limiting morbidity and mortality.
“The classic clinical signs and symptoms are rarely all present especially in early disease. Crepitus or gas in the soft tissues, while specific, is only present in approximately 10% of patients. More often, the presenting symptoms are nonspecific: fever, pain, induration, and edema. Pain out of proportion to examination is a more specific finding that may assist in differentiation of NSTI from cellulitis.”
Two recent studies (see “Additional Information” for more study details) published in the New England Journal of Medicine evaluated the outcomes of OHCA, comparing drug administration via intraosseous devices versus intravenous access, neither demonstrating benefit to one strategy over the other in terms of sustained ROSC or 30-day survival. [1,2] While there were a few limitations, these results are generally in line with existing literature. Although it is worth noting that some studies signal improved outcomes with IV access, the time to intervention seems to be the more important metric related to outcome. [3-5]
Bottom Line: Intraosseous devices remain rapid and easy to place devices that can provide access for drug administration when IV access is unable to be obtained. In patients with difficult access, use an IO to administer meds, fluids, or blood products as indicated while you and your team work on more definitive IV access and focus on high-quality CPR.
This small study randomized patients with 2 or greater rib fractures or requiring chest tube insertion into a kerorolac (30 mg) or ketamine (0.25 mg/kg) group and evaluated pain levels pre, 30 and 60 minutes post medication administration. They also looked at need for morphine rescue medication. The ketamine group had superior pain control and required less rescue medication.
https://buckup-cuh-production.s3.amazonaws.com/images/Capture_IIWc51k.width-840.png
“Hey Doc, do I knee surgery?”
