Man vs machine in emergency medicine – a study on the effects of manual and automatic vital sign documentation on data quality and perceived workload,using observational paired sample data and questionnaires

Background

Emergency medicine is characterized by a high patient flow where timely decisions are essential. Clinical decision support systems have the potential to assist in such decisions but will be dependent on the data quality in electronic health records which often is inadequate. This study explores the effect of automated documentation of vital signs on data quality and workload.

Methods

An observational study of 200 vital sign measurements was performed to evaluate the effects of manual vs automatic documentation on data quality. Data collection using questionnaires was performed to compare the workload on wards using manual or automatic documentation.

Results

In the automated documentation time to documentation was reduced by 6.1?min (0.6?min vs 7.7?min, p?<? 0.05) and completeness increased (98% vs 95%, p?<? 0.05). Regarding workflow temporal demands were lower in the automatic documentation workflow compared to the manual group (50 vs 23, p?<? 0.05). The same was true for frustration level (64 vs 33, p?<? 0.05). The experienced reduction in temporal demands was in line with the anticipated, whereas the experienced reduction in frustration was lower than the anticipated (27 vs 54, p?<?0.05).

Discussion

The study shows that automatic documentation will improve the currency and the completeness of vital sign data in the Electronic Health Record while reducing workload regarding temporal demands and experienced frustration. The study also shows that these findings are in line with staff anticipations but indicates that the anticipations on the reduction of frustration may be exaggerated among the staff. The open-ended answers indicate that frustration focus will change from double documentation of vital signs to technical aspects of the automatic documentation system.

     

Ear measurement of temperature is only useful for screening for fever in an adult emergency department

Background

A new generation of ear thermometers with preheated tips and several measurements points should allow a more precise temperature measurement. The aim of the study was to evaluate if the ear temperature measured by this ear thermometer can be used to screen for fever and whether the thermometer is in agreement with the rectal temperature and if age, use of hearing devices or time after admission influences the temperature measurements.

Methods

Open cross-sectional clinical single site study patients, >?18?years old, who were acutely admitted to the short stay unit at the ED. A sample size of 99 patient per subgroup was recruited as random convenience series. As ear thermometer Braun Thermoscan Pro 4000® and as rectal thermometer Omron Flex Temp Smart ® was used. For different cut off of temperature the AUC was calculated and Bland-Altman analysis for calculation of 95% limits of agreement with rectal temperature, with subgroup analysis concerning age, time span from admission time and use of hearing aid.

Results

Among 599 patients the sensitivity to detect fever with an ear thermometer varied between 68 and 70% with AUC from 0.88–0.97. If the ear temperature was ≥37.5 oC, the sensitivity to detect patients with ≥38.0 oC rectally was 95% which raised to 100% for a rectal temperature of ≥38.3 oC. For the ear thermometer’s ability to determine the exact temperature the 95% limits of agreement were +/??0.8 oC. with no influence from age, duration of hospital stay or hearing aids.

Conclusion

The examined ear thermometer is able to detect fever, defined as ≥38 oC rectally in an adult ED population by using an ear cut-point of 37.5 oC, but not to measure the exact temperature. Used in this way around a fifth of the patients will still be in need of a rectal temperature measurement, but less than 5% with fever ≥38.0 oC will remain undetected and none with fever ≥38.3 oC. Age, admission time and use of hearing aid did not influence the temperature measurements.

Trial registration

Clinical Trials: ID NCT02977481, date 11/18/2016.

     

Rivaroxaban versus standard anticoagulation for acute venous thromboembolism in childhood. Design of the EINSTEIN-Jr phase III study

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a relatively rare condition in childhood with treatment mainly based on extrapolation from studies in adults. Therefore, clinical trials of anticoagulation in children require novel approaches to deal with numerous challenges. The EINSTEIN-Jr program identified pediatric rivaroxaban regimens commencing with in vitro dose finding studies followed by evaluation of children of different ages through phase I and II studies using extensive modeling to determine bodyweight-related doses. Use of this approach resulted in drug exposure similar to that observed in young adults treated with rivaroxaban 20?mg once-daily.

Methods

EINSTEIN-Jr phase III is a randomized, open-label, study comparing the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban 20?mg-equivalent dose regimens with those of standard anticoagulation for the treatment of any types of acute VTE in children aged 0–18?years.A total of approximately 500 children are expected to be included during the 4-year study window. Flexibility of treatment duration is allowed with study treatment to be given for 3?months with the option to continue treatment in 3-month increments, up to a total of 12?months. However, based on most common current practice, children younger than 2?years with catheter-related thrombosis will have a main treatment period of 1?month with the option to prolong treatment in 1-month increments, up to a total of 3?months.

Conclusions

EINSTEIN-Jr will compare previously established 20?mg-equivalent rivaroxaban dosing regimens with standard anticoagulation for the treatment of VTE in children. Demonstration of similarity of disease, as well as equivalent rivaroxaban exposure and exposure-response will enable extrapolation of efficacy from adult trials, which is critical given the challenges of enrollment in pediatric anticoagulation trials.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02234843, registered on 9 September 2014.

     

Exploratory evaluation of pharmacodynamics,pharmacokinetics and safety of rivaroxaban in children and adolescents: an EINSTEIN-Jr phase I study

Background

The EINSTEIN-Jr program will evaluate rivaroxaban for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in children, targeting exposures similar to the 20 mg once-daily dose for adults.

Methods

This was a multinational, single-dose, open-label, phase I study to describe the pharmacodynamics (PD), pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of a single bodyweight-adjusted rivaroxaban dose in children aged 0.5–18 years. Children who had completed treatment for a venous thromboembolic event were enrolled into four age groups (0.5–2 years, 2–6 years, 6–12 years and 12–18 years) receiving rivaroxaban doses equivalent to 10 mg or 20 mg (either as a tablet or oral suspension). Blood samples for PK and PD analyses were collected within specified time windows.

Results

Fifty-nine children were evaluated. In all age groups, PD parameters (prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time and anti-Factor Xa activity) showed a linear relationship versus rivaroxaban plasma concentrations and were in line with previously acquired adult data, as well as in vitro spiking experiments. The rivaroxaban pediatric physiologically based pharmacokinetic model, used to predict the doses for the individual body weight groups, was confirmed. No episodes of bleeding were reported, and treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in four children and all resolved during the study.

Conclusions

Bodyweight-adjusted, single-dose rivaroxaban had predictable PK/PD profiles in children across all age groups from 0.5 to 18 years. The PD assessments based on prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time demonstrated that the anticoagulant effect of rivaroxaban was not affected by developmental hemostasis in children.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01145859.

     

Combination of acquired von Willebrand syndrome (AVWS) and Glanzmann thrombasthenia in monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance (MGUS), a case report

Background

Autoimmune paraphenomena, are associated with B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders, including monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance. These paraphenomena can rarely include acquired bleeding disorders.

Case presentation

This case study reports an unusual clinical presentation of 2 acquired bleeding disorders, Acquired von Willebrand syndrome (disease) and Acquired Glanzmann’s thrombasthenia, in an elderly patient with monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance.

Conclusions

Acquired bleeding disorders are often underdiagnosed and a high degree of clinical suspicion is required. The patient in this study demonstrated platelet aggregometry which was atypical for isolated Glanzmann’s thrombosthenia because of the severe concomitant endogenous decrease in von Willebrand factor. There was an absence of platelet aggregation to all tested agonists including ristocetin. Once the diagnosis was made, however, the patient showed a partial response to intravenous immunoglobulin confirming the immunological pathogenesis in this case. This case highlights the need to consider acquired bleeding disorders in patients with a possible predisposing factor.

     

Relapsing Painful Ophthalmoplegic Neuropathy: No longer a “Migraine,” but Still a Headache

Purpose of Review

Recurrent painful ophthalmoplegic neuropathy (RPON), formerly known as ophthalmoplegic migraine, is an uncommon disorder with repeated episodes of ocular cranial nerve neuropathy associated with ipsilateral headache. This review discusses the clinical presentation, current understanding of the pathophysiology, key differential diagnoses, and evaluation and treatment of RPON.

Recent Findings

The literature is limited due to the rarity of the disorder. Recent case reports and series continue to suggest the age of first attack is most often during childhood or adolescence as well as a female predominance. Multiple recent case reports and series demonstrate focal enhancement of the affected cranial nerve, as the nerve root exits the brainstem. This finding contributed to the current classification of the disorder as a neuropathy, with the present understanding that it is due to a relapsing-remitting inflammatory or demyelinating process. The link to migraine remains a cause of disagreement in the literature.

Summary

RPON is a complex disorder with features of inflammatory neuropathy and an unclear association with migraine. Regardless, the overall prognosis is good for individual episodes, but permanent nerve damage may accumulate with repeated attacks. A better understanding of the pathogenesis is needed to clarify whether it truly represents a single disorder and to guide its treatment. Until that time, a combined approach with acute and preventive therapies can mitigate acute symptoms as well as attempt to limit recurrence of this disabling syndrome.

     

SUNCT and SUNA: an Update and Review

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to provide an update on the clinical features, diagnosis, pathogenesis, epidemiology, and treatment of the rare primary headache disorders short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT) and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with autonomic symptoms (SUNA). Together these entities are known as short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks (SUNHA).

Recent Findings

Recent case reports of secondary SUNCT and SUNA due to medullary infarcts support the theory that the trigeminohypothalamic pathway is involved in the pathophysiology of SUNHA. While medical therapy for SUNHA has not significantly changed, surgical therapy for refractory SUNCT and SUNA has made advancements with a recent case series demonstrating the efficacy of deep brain stimulation.

Summary

We will discuss the pathophysiology of both the pain and the autonomic symptoms experienced in SUNCT and SUNA attacks as well the medical, procedural, and surgical options for treatment with emphasis on recent advances. Specific secondary causes reported in the recent literature will be discussed in brief.

     

Headaches in Patients with Pituitary Tumors: a Clinical Conundrum

Purpose of Review

Pituitary tumors account for approximately 17% of all intracranial neoplasms, with the majority being pituitary adenomas. Often, these are found incidentally during a workup for headache; however, the relationship between symptom and pathology remains unclear. The purpose of this article is to review the most recent literature on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of headaches in patients with pituitary tumors.

Recent Findings

The current literature is limited, with few prospective trials focusing on this question. With the exception of pituitary apoplexy, the relationship between headaches and pituitary masses remains unclear. Intervention does not always improve headache and can lead to development of new headache syndromes.

Summary

Further research is needed to better elucidate the relationship between pituitary tumors and headaches. Headache alone is rarely an indication for surgical management of a pituitary adenoma.

     

Radio Frequency Ablation and Pulsed Radiofrequency for Treating Peripheral Neuralgias

Purpose of Review

Peripheral nerve pain is common among patients with typical management including the use of pain medications, neuropathic agents, steroid injections, and nerve blocks. Additionally, the use of pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) can be used in the management of chronic peripheral nerve pain. Previous studies investigating the effectiveness of RFA and PRF, typically case reports, have demonstrated that peripheral nerve RFA and PRF have the potential to provide relief of chronic pain for long duration. Our study aimed at testing efficacy of RFA/PRF for treating peripheral neuralgia. This was a retrospective review. We identified 16 patients who received 17 RFAs/PRFs. Outcomes of interest collected included pain scores before and after procedures, percent improvement in pain after each procedure, and duration of improvement until the time of data collection. In addition, demographic data including age, sex, and nerves involved were collected.

Recent Findings

Eleven patients (12 RFAs/PRFs) (80%) reported improvement after their procedure. Pain scores improved significantly from 6.3?±?2.3 before each procedure to 3.6?±?2.7 after each procedure (p?=?0.003). Eleven patients (12 RFAs/PRFs) reported an average improvement of 60.8%?±?35% after their procedure with an average duration of improvement of 128.8?±?106.8 days.

Summary

RFA and PRF can be used to treat chronic peripheral pain after conservative methods fail to do so. Large clinical trials are needed to confirm our finding.