Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES:To compared outcomes of regional nerve blocks with those of standard analgesics after hip fracture. DESIGN:Multisite randomized controlled trial from April 2009 to March 2013. SETTING:Three New York hospitals. PARTICIPANTS:Individuals with hip fracture (N = 161). INTERVENTION:Participants were randomized to receive an ultrasound-guided, single-injection, femoral nerve block administered by emergency physicians at emergency department (ED) admission followed by placement of a continuous fascia iliaca block by anesthesiologists within 24 hours (n = 79) or conventional analgesics (n = 82). MEASUREMENTS:Pain (0-10 scale), distance walked on Postoperative Day (POD) 3, walking ability 6 weeks after discharge, opioid side effects. RESULTS:Pain scores 2 hours after ED presentation favored the intervention group over controls (3.5 vs 5.3, P = .002). Pain scores on POD 3 were significantly better for the intervention than the control group for pain at rest (2.9 vs 3.8, P = .005), with transfers out of bed (4.7 vs 5.9, P = .005), and with walking (4.1 vs 4.8, P = .002). Intervention participants walked significantly further than controls in 2 minutes on POD 3 (170.6 feet, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 109.3-232 vs 100.0 feet, 95% CI = 65.1-134.9; P = .04). At 6 weeks, intervention participants reported better walking and stair climbing ability (mean Functional Independence Measure locomotion score of 10.3 (95% CI = 9.6-11.0) vs 9.1 (95% CI = 8.2-10.0), P = .04). Intervention participants were significantly less likely to report opioid side effects (3% vs 12.4%, P = .03) and required 33% to 40% fewer parenteral morphine sulfate equivalents. CONCLUSION:Femoral nerve blocks performed by emergency physicians followed by continuous fascia iliaca blocks placed by anesthesiologists are feasible and result in superior outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is not traditionally viewed as a potentially life-threatening condition. There are conflicting recommendations regarding its evaluation and treatment, and wide variability in clinical practice. The presentation of this case highlights the fatal potential of this condition. CASE REPORT/METHODS:This is the report of a previously healthy young woman who presented to the emergency department with calf pain concerning for a DVT. She received two radiologist-performed duplex ultrasound examinations of the affected extremity, both of which were negative, but suffered a sudden cardiac arrest several hours after the second study. Autopsy attributed the death to DVT and pulmonary embolism. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: This case highlights the risk for fatal pulmonary embolization, even after normal serial ultrasound examinations to exclude DVT.

For more than 25 years, emergency medicine researchers have examined 72-hour return visits as a marker for high-risk patient visits and as a surrogate measure for quality of care. Individual emergency departments frequently use 72-hour returns as a screening tool to identify deficits in care, although comprehensive departmental reviews of this nature may consume considerable resources. We discuss the lack of published data supporting the use of 72-hour return frequency as an overall performance measure and examine why this is not a valid use, describe a conceptual framework for reviewing 72-hour return cases as a screening tool, and call for future studies to test various models for conducting such quality assurance reviews of patients who return to the emergency department within 72 hours.

BACKGROUND:Evaluating the quality of care as part of a quality improvement process is required in many clinical environments by accrediting bodies. It produces metrics used to evaluate department and individual provider performance, provides outcomes-based feedback to clinicians, and identifies ways to reduce error. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:To improve patient safety and train our residents to perform peer review, we expanded our quality assurance program from a narrow, administrative process carried out by a small number of attendings to an educationally focused activity of much greater scope incorporating all residents on a monthly basis. We developed an explicit system by which residents analyze sets of high-risk cases and record their impressions onto structured databases, which are reviewed by faculty. At monthly meetings, results from the month's case reviews are presented, learning points discussed, and corrective actions are proposed. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:By integrating Clinical Quality Review (CQR) as a core, continuous component of the residency curriculum, we increased the number of cases reviewed more than 10-fold and implemented a variety of clinical process improvements. An anonymous survey conducted after 2 years of resident-led CQR indicated that residents value their exposure to the peer review process and feel it benefits them as clinicians, but also that the program requires a significant investment of time that can be burdensome.

Acute aortic dissection (AAD) is a rare and lethal disease with presenting signs and symptoms that can often be seen with other high risk conditions; diagnosis is therefore often delayed or missed. Pain is present in up to 90% of cases and is typically severe at onset. Many patients present with acute on chronic hypertension, but hypotension is an ominous sign, often reflecting hemorrhage or cardiac tamponade. The chest x-ray can be normal in 10-20% of patients with AAD, and though transthoracic echocardiography is useful if suggestive findings are seen, and should be used to identify pericardial effusion, TTE cannot be used to exclude AAD. Transesophageal echocardiography, however, reliably confirms or excludes the diagnosis, where such equipment and expertise is available. CT scan with IV contrast is the most common imaging modality used to diagnose and classify AAD, and MRI can be used in patients in whom the use of CT or IV contrast is undesirable. Recent specialty guidelines have helped define high-risk features and a diagnostic pathway that can be used the emergency department setting. Initial management of diagnosed or highly suspected acute aortic dissection focuses on pain control, heart rate and then blood pressure management, and immediate surgical consultation.