Emergency department (ED) patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter (AFF) with underlying occult condition such as sepsis or heart failure, and who are managed with rate or rhythm control, have poor prognoses. Such conditions may not be easy to identify early in the ED evaluation when critical treatment decisions are made. We sought to develop a simple decision aid to quickly identify undifferentiated ED AFF patients who are at high risk of acute underlying illness.

We collected consecutive ED patients with electrocardiogram-proven AFF over a 1-year period and performed a chart review to ascertain demographics, comorbidities, and investigations. The primary outcome was having an acute underlying illness according to prespecified criteria. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with the primary outcome, and developed criteria to identify those with an underlying illness at presentation.

Of 1,083 consecutive undifferentiated ED AFF patients, 400 (36.9%) had an acute underlying illness; they were older with more comorbidities. Modeling demonstrated that three predictors (ambulance arrival; chief complaint of chest pain, dyspnea, or weakness; CHA2DS2-VASc score greater than 2) identified 93% of patients with acute underlying illness (95% confidence interval [CI], 91–96%) with 54% (95% CI, 50–58%) specificity. The decision aid missed 28 patients; (7.0%) simple blood tests and chest radiography identified all within an hour of presentation.

In ED patients with undifferentiated AFF, this simple predictive model rapidly differentiates patients at risk of acute underlying illness, who will likely merit investigations before AFF-specific therapy.

Substance-related emergency department (ED) visits are rapidly increasing. Despite this finding, many EDs do not have access to on-site addiction services. This study characterized substance-related ED presentations and assessed the ED health care team's perceived need for an on-site rapid-access addiction clinic for direct patient referral from the ED.

This prospectively enrolled cohort study was conducted at an urban tertiary care ED from June to August 2018. Adult ED patients with problematic or high-risk substance use were enrolled by ED staff using a one-page form. The electronic and paper records from the index ED visit were reviewed. The primary outcome evaluated whether the ED health care team would have referred the patient to an on-site rapid-access addiction clinic, if one were available.

We received 557 enrolment forms and 458 were included in the analysis. Median age was 35 years, and 64% of included patients were male. Alcohol was the most commonly reported substance of problematic or high-risk use (60%). Previous ED visits within 7 days of the index visit were made by 28% of patients. The ED health care team indicated “Yes” for rapid-access addiction clinic referral from the ED for 66% of patients, with a mean of 4.3 patients referred per day during the study period.

At least four patients per day would have been referred to an on-site rapid-access addiction clinic from the ED, had one been available. This indicates a gap in care and collaborating with other sites that have successfully implemented this clinic model is an important next step.

Military Forward Aeromedical Evacuation and civilian Helicopter Emergency Medical Services are widely used to conduct Primary Aeromedical Retrieval. Crew composition in Primary Aeromedical Retrieval missions varies considerably. The ideal composition is unknown. Thus, we conducted a descriptive systematic review on mortality and other outcomes for different Primary Aeromedical Retrieval crew compositions.

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched up to January 2020. Results were reported per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Studies of adult trauma air transported by different crews were included. Population, injury severity, crew composition, procedures, and outcomes, including mortality, were abstracted. Risk of bias was assessed using previously validated tools. A lack of reported effect measures precluded a quantitative analysis.

Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria (3 prospective studies, 1 case-control, and 12 retrospective). Overall, studies reported a mortality benefit associated with advanced health care providers. This was most apparent in patients with severe but survivable injuries. In this population, early rapid sequence induction, endotracheal intubation, mechanical ventilation, thoracostomies, blood products transfusion, and treatment of hemorrhagic shock are better performed by advanced providers and may improve outcomes. The quality of evidence reported a moderate risk of bias in the included studies.

Overall, findings were divergent but showed a trend to decreased mortality in patients treated by advanced providers with interventions beyond the basic paramedic level. This trend was most significant in patients with severe but survivable injuries. These results should be cautiously interpreted because most studies were observational, had small sample sizes, and had a high potential for confounding factors.

One in four cases of acute aortic syndrome are missed. This national survey examined Canadian Emergency physicians’ opinion on risk stratification, the need for a clinical decision aid to risk stratify patients, and the required sensitivity of such a tool.

We surveyed 1,556 members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. We used a modified Dillman technique with a prenotification email and up to three survey attempts using electronic mail. Physicians were asked 21 questions about demographics, importance of certain high-risk features, investigation options, threshold for investigation, and if a clinical decision tool is required

We had a response rate of 32%. Respondents were 66% male, and 49% practicing >10 years, with 59% in an academic teaching hospital. A total of 93% reported a need for a clinical decision aid to risk stratify for acute aortic syndrome. A total of 99.6% of physicians were pragmatic accepting a non-zero miss-rate, two-thirds accepting <1%, and the remaining accepting a higher miss-rate.

Our national survey determined that emergency physicians would use a highly sensitive clinical decision aid to determine which patients are at low, medium, or high-risk for acute aortic syndrome. The majority of clinicians have a low threshold (<1%) for investigating for acute aortic syndrome, but accept that a zero miss-rate is not feasible.

Non-medical cannabis recently became legal for adults in Canada. Legalization provides opportunity to investigate the public health effects of national cannabis legalization on presentations to emergency departments (EDs). Our study aimed to explore association between cannabis-related ED presentations, poison control and telemedicine calls, and cannabis legalization.

Data were collected from the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System from October 1, 2013, to July 31, 2019, for 14 urban Alberta EDs, from Alberta poison control, and from HealthLink, a public telehealth service covering all of Alberta. Visitation data were obtained to compare pre- and post-legalization periods. An interrupted time-series analysis accounting for existing trends was completed, in addition to the incidence rate ratio (IRR) and relative risk calculation (to evaluate changes in co-diagnoses).

Although only 3 of every 1,000 ED visits within the time period were attributed to cannabis, the number of cannabis-related ED presentations increased post-legalization by 3.1 (range -11.5 to 12.6) visits per ED per month (IRR 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]; 1.39, 1.51; absolute level change: 43.5 visits per month, 95% CI; 26.5, 60.4). Cannabis-related calls to poison control also increased (IRR 1.87, 95% CI; 1.55, 2.37; absolute level change: 4.0 calls per month, 95% CI; 0.1, 7.9). Lastly, we observed increases in cannabis-related hyperemesis, unintentional ingestion, and individuals leaving the ED pre-treatment. We also observed a decrease in co-ingestant use.

Overall, Canadian cannabis legalization was associated with small increases in urban Alberta cannabis-related ED visits and calls to a poison control centre.

Long-term outcomes among syncope patients are not well studied to guide physicians regarding outpatient testing and follow-up. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review for outcomes at 1-year or later among ED syncope patients.

We searched Cochrane Central, Medline, Medline in Process, PubMed, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing databases from inception to December 2018. We included studies that reported long-term outcomes among ED syncope patients. We excluded studies on patients <16 years old, studies that included syncope mimickers (pre-syncope, seizure, intoxication, loss of consciousness after head trauma), case reports, letters to the editor, non-English and review articles. Outcomes included death, syncope recurrence requiring hospitalization, arrhythmias and procedural interventions for arrhythmias. Meta-analysis was performed by pooling the outcomes using random effects model.

Initial literature search generated 2,094 articles duplicate removal. Of the 50 articles selected for full-text review, 19 articles with 98,211 patients were included in this review: of which 12 were included in the 1-year outcome meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed : 7.0% mortality; 16.0% syncope recurrence requiring hospitalization; 6.0% with device insertion. 1-year arrhythmias reported in two studies were 1.1 and 26.4%. Pooled analysis for outcome at 31 to 365 days showed: 5.0% mortality and 1% device insertion. Two studies reported 4.9% and 21% mortality at 30 months and 4.2 years follow-up.

An important proportion of ED syncope patients suffer long-term morbidity and mortality. Appropriate follow-up is needed and future research to identify patients at risk is needed.

Opioid use disorder is a major public health crisis, and evidence suggests ways of better serving patients who live with opioid use disorder in the emergency department (ED). A multi-disciplinary team developed a quality improvement project to implement this evidence.

The intervention was developed by an expert working group consisting of specialists and stakeholders. The group set goals of increasing prescribing of buprenorphine/naloxone and providing next day walk-in referrals to opioid use disorder treatment clinics. From May to September 2018, three Alberta ED sites and three opioid use disorder treatment clinics worked together to trial the intervention. We used administrative data to track the number of ED visits where patients were given buprenorphine/naloxone. Monthly ED prescribing rates before and after the intervention were considered and compared with eight nonintervention sites. We considered whether patients continued to fill opioid agonist treatment prescriptions at 30, 60, and 90 days after their index ED visit to measure continuity in treatment.

The intervention sites increased their prescribing of buprenorphine/naloxone during the intervention period and prescribed more buprenorphine/naloxone than the controls. Thirty-five of 47 patients (74.4%) discharged from the ED with buprenorphine/naloxone continued to fill opioid agonist treatment prescriptions 30 days and 60 days after their index ED visit. Thirty-four patients (72.3%) filled prescriptions at 90 days.

Emergency clinicians can effectively initiate patients on buprenorphine/naloxone when supports for this standardized evidence-based care are in place within their practice setting and timely follow-up in community is available.

To determine feasibility and efficacy of an Emergency Department Violence Intervention Program (EDVIP) to reduce violence related injuries in youth.

One hundred and thirty youth aged 14–24 presenting to an emergency with violence related injury were randomized in parallel to receive EDVIP for 1 year (n = 65) or a waitlist control (n = 65). The primary outcome was to determine feasibility. Secondary outcomes are incidence, number/severity of repeat violence related injury, justice and education systems interactions, substance misuse and mental health presentations, and ED length of stay (LOS).

This study established feasibility in recruitment, outcomes collection and safety. Fidelity and adherence measures required optimization during the study. Efficacy analysis of EDVIP vs. the control group demonstrates an absolute decrease of 10.4% in repeat violence related injury (13.7% vs. 24.1%) (p = 0.15), reduction in new interactions in the justice system (OR = 0.36 (0.07–1.77)), improved engagement in education (11.8% EDVIP vs. 7.6% control, p = 0.42) and no change in repeat visits for substance or mental health. LOS decreased by 59.5 min (p = 0.21).

This program is feasible for ED implementation and for completion of a future RCT to measure effectiveness.

Evaluate the relationship between naloxone dose (initial and cumulative) and opioid toxicity reversal and adverse events in undifferentiated and presumed fentanyl/ultra-potent opioid overdoses.

We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, DARE, CINAHL, Science Citation Index, reference lists, toxicology websites, and conference proceedings (1972 to 2018). We included interventional, observational, and case studies/series reporting on naloxone dose and opioid toxicity reversal or adverse events in people >12 years old.

A total of 174 studies (110 case reports/series, 57 observational, 7 interventional) with 26,660 subjects (median age 35 years; 74% male). Heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Where reported, we abstracted naloxone dose and proportion of patients with toxicity reversal. Among patients with presumed exposure to fentanyl/ultra-potent opioids, 56.9% (617/1,085) responded to an initial naloxone dose ≤0.4 mg compared with 80.2% (170/212) of heroin users, and 30.4% (7/23) responded to an initial naloxone dose >0.4 mg compared with 59.1% (1,434/2,428) of heroin users. Among patients who responded, median cumulative naloxone doses were higher for presumed fentanyl/ultra-potent opioids than heroin overdoses in North America, both before 2015 (fentanyl/ultra-potent opioids: 1.8 mg [interquartile interval {IQI}, 1.0, 4.0]; heroin: 0.8 mg [IQI, 0.4, 0.8]) and after 2015 (fentanyl/ultra-potent opioids: 3.4 mg [IQI, 3.0, 4.1]); heroin: 2 mg [IQI, 1.4, 2.0]). Where adverse events were reported, 11% (490/4,414) of subjects experienced withdrawal. Variable reporting, heterogeneity and poor-quality studies limit conclusions.

Practitioners have used higher initial doses, and in some cases higher cumulative naloxone doses to reverse toxicity due to presumed fentanyl/ultra-potent opioid exposure compared with other opioids. High-quality comparative naloxone dosing studies assessing effectiveness and safety are needed.