Introduction: Acute pain represents one of the most common reasons for emergency department (ED) visits. In the opioid epidemic that North America faces, there is a significant demand for novel pain control modalities that are both safe and effective. Regional anesthesia techniques have revolutionized perioperative pain management, and they are currently thought to be indicated for acute pain relief in the ED. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a novel regional block that has the ability to block multidermatomal sensation, including cervical, thoracic and lumbar regions, depending on the vertebral level at which the anesthetic is injected along the erector spinae muscle. Under ultrasound guidance, the landmarks involved are easy to identify, and there are no vital structures in the immediate vicinity of the site of injection. By reviewing the literature on ESPB, this review aims to summarize all its indications and efficacy for acute pain management in the ED. Methods: In April 2019, PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE as well as CINAHL databases were systematically searched for articles discussing the use of ESPB in the ED. In compliance with the PRISMA guidelines, the search results were selected against inclusion and exclusion criteria. Due to the novelty of the block, all types of articles were included. Results: Ten studies on 7 different indications have been published on the use of ESPB in the ED. It is currently most commonly used for rib and spine fractures. Other indications include, mechanical back pain, burn injuries, herpes zoster, renal colic, and acute pancreatitis. ESPB was administered at the vertebral level of region of most pain, unilaterally or bilaterally for complete dermatomal block. It was injected as a single or continuous block - in the seated, lateral, or prone position. All of the studies demonstrate a significant reduction in pain. Furthermore, it has been reported to improve respiratory function, and it has not been associated with any complications following administration. Conclusion: This review shows initial data on the promising effect of ESPB in acute pain management in the ED. Current evidence shows its effectiveness and safety for the most common presenting cases of pain, such as rib and spine fracture, mechanical back pain, burn injuries, herpes zoster, renal colic, as well as acute pancreatitis. ESPB is flexible in administration and relatively easy to perform under ultrasound guidance.

Introduction: The use of regional anesthesia (RA) by emergency physicians (EPs) is expanding in frequency and range of application as expertise in point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) grows, but widespread use remains limited. We sought to characterize the use of RA by Canadian EPs, including practices, perspectives and barriers to use in the ED. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of Canadian EPs was administered to members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP), consisting of sixteen multiple choice and numerical responses. Responses were summarized descriptively as percentages and as the median and inter quartile range (IQR) for quantitative variables. Results: The survey was completed by 149/1144 staff EPs, with a response rate of 13%. EPs used RA a median of 2 (IQR 0-4) times in the past ten shifts. The most broadly used applications were soft tissue repair (84.5% of EPs, n = 126), fracture pain management (79.2%, n = 118) and orthopedic reduction (72.5%, n = 108). EPs agreed that RA is safe to use in the ED (98.7%) and were interested in using it more frequently (78.5%). Almost all (98.0%) respondents had POCUS available, however less than half (49.0%) felt comfortable using it for RA. EPs indicated that they required more training (76.5%), a departmental protocol (47.0%), and nursing assistance (30.2%) to increase their use. Conclusion: Canadian EPs engage in limited use of RA but express an interest in expanding their use. While equipment is available, additional training, protocols, and increased support from nursing staff are modifiable factors that could facilitate uptake of RA in the ED.

Introduction: Approximately 30,000 hip fractures occur annually in Canada, and the incidence will increase with an aging population. Pain control remains a challenge with these patients, as many are elderly and prone to delirium. Regional anesthesia has shown to be very effective with minimal risks, but it is not clear how often emergency physicians are using this technique to provide analgesia for patients with proximal hip fractures. This is the first Canada-wide survey to evaluate the use of regional anaesthesia in the emergency department for hip fractures. It also evaluates physician comfort level with performing these blocks, perceived educational needs in this area, and barriers to performing nerve blocks. Methods: A 13-question survey was sent to 1041 members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians via email in January and February of 2016. Data was collected and analysed using an online collection program called “Survey Monkey”. Ethics approval was obtained through the University of Manitoba Research Ethics Board. Results: 272 Emergency physicians and residents took part in the survey. The majority of respondents (75.9%) choose intravenous opioids as their first line of analgesia and only 7.6% use peripheral nerve blocks (PNB) as their first line choice for analgesia in hip fracture. In response to practitioner comfort with PNBs for hip fractures, most were not at all confident (45.0%) in their ability and many respondents have never performed a nerve block for a hip fracture (53.9%). The most commonly identified barriers to performing PNBs include lack of training, the time to perform the procedure and a lack of confidence. A larger percentage of respondents (34.2%), identified having had no training and no knowledge of how to perform PNBs for hip fractures. Conclusion: The vast majority of Canadian emergency physicians who took part in this survey do not utilize PNBs as a method of pain management for hip fractures. Over half have never performed one of these procedures and many have never received training in how to do so. Future efforts should focus on improving access to education, disseminating information regarding the effectiveness of PNB, and addressing logistical barriers in the ED.

Introduction: Regional anesthesia has been shown to be an effective pain control strategy for patients presenting with hip fractures in the emergency department. There are two common methods for performing this block: the femoral nerve block (FNB) and the fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB). The objective of this pilot study is to determine whether one of these two ultrasound-guided block techniques provides superior analgesia to emergency department patients with hip fractures. Methods: Emergency physicians at a single institution were randomized to the FNB or FICB training groups. Participants completed a 2-hour practical workshop covering the technique, followed by a questionnaire to assess their comfort with the block. They were asked to perform their assigned nerve block on any patient in the ED presenting with a hip or femur fracture. Physician comfort level and patient pain scores using a visual analog scale (VAS) were recorded before and after the nerve block were recorded. Comparisons were performed using Student’s t-test and Fisher’s exact test. Results: A total of 20 physicians were enrolled in the study, 10 in the FNB group and 10 in the FICB group. There were no significant baseline differences between the groups with respect to ultrasound or nerve block experience. Following the training, 100% of participants in both the FNB group and FICB group felt comfortable performing the block. Nerve blocks were performed in 30/51 (58.8%) of eligible patients in the FNB group and 6/11 (54.5%) in the FICB group (p=1.0). On the 10-point VAS, pain scores decreased by a mean of 4.9 (SD 3.5) in the FNB group and 8.3 (SD 2.4) in the FICB group (p=0.056). In practice, physicians felt comfortable performing the FNB in 52.8% of cases, and the FICB in 85.7% of cases (p=0.21). Mean time to completion of the blocks was similar between the two groups (19 vs 18 mins, p=0.83). Conclusion: In this pilot study, we found a non-significant trend towards improved analgesia and higher physician comfort with the ultrasound-guided FICB compared with the FNB in patients with hip fractures. We found no differences in time to performing the blocks. These results require confirmation with a larger sample size.

Introduction: Ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block (USFNB) is optimal for providing analgesia for patients with hip fractures, but is rarely performed. Time of the procedure was cited as a barrier in our previous survey. Methods: We conducted a knowledge-to-practice intervention that included a two-hour training session on USFNB, use of a block kit, and reminders to improve uptake of USFNB. We measured the time it took for trained EPs to complete the block during a 20 month period. Results: Of 36 EPs, 34 (94.4%) were not routinely performing USFNB at the beginning of the study, and 4 declined to participate, leaving 30 participants who received training. The 30 trained EPs performed 100 USFNB over the next 20 months (range 1 to 20 blocks per EP). The mean reduction in pain was -4.47 on a 10 point numeric rating scale. The median time to perform the blocks was 15.0 minutes (IQR, 10 to 20 minutes), and 90 % of blocks took less than 30 minutes. The most common reason given for not performing a block was excessive clinical load. Conclusion: Given that we included 88.2% of eligible EP’s and included the first time EP’s performed a USFNB, our estimates of time to perform USFNB block should generalize to other Canadian academic ED’s. Time to complete USFNB is in keeping with other commonly performed ED procedures and should not be a barrier to optimizing analgesia.

Introduction: The incidence of delirium following hip fracture is near 60%. The use of regional anesthesia (RA) with ultrasound (U/S) guidance has suggested a decrease in delirium incidence. In this pilot study, we propose to include the use of femoral block with U/S guidance in the management of the elderly population with hip fracture in the emergency department (ED) to lower the risk of delirium. Methods: This paired control case study was conducted from December 2013 to April 2015, and includes patients seen by emergency doctors from the ED of Hospital Enfant Jesus in Quebec City. Patients of the intervention and control groups were paired by age. Inclusion Criteria: Patients with(1) a hip fracture; (2) admitted to the hospital after their ED management; (3) and surgically repaired. Exclusion Criteria: Patients (1) with delirium upon arrival or a known mental/cognitive status (dementia, unconsciousness or severely ill status) (2) less than 60 years old (3) not able to speak English or French. Intervention group: Patients with hip fracture who received femoral blocks by the five emergency doctors who were trained and performed with U/S guidance. Control group: Patients with hip fracture who received standard pain control care by emergency doctors and who did not receive a femoral block. Analysis: Incidence of delirium and blocks performed by EM doctors were tallied. A comparison of absolute pain reduction at 30 minutes was also done. Odd ratios were derived and adjusted for age, sex, total opiates dose, delay before surgery and morbidity scores. Results: A total of 29 femoral blocks were performed through the analysis period. Groups were similar for age, sex and APACHE II and CHARLSON scores. A 30 minutes absolute pain reduction of 3/10 was noted. Two thirds of the blocks were performed by two ED doctors. Need for rescue medication was needed for 7% of patients for pain control at 30 minutes. Adjusted odd ratios for age, sex, morbidity scores, total opiate doses and delay before surgery revealed no decrease in delirium. Conclusion: Ten out of 26 patients hospitalized for hip fracture who received a femoral block under U/S guidance from the ED doctors were diagnosed with delirium. A Canadian prospective study «EDURAPID» is underway to demonstrate more the impact of R/A under U/S guidance on the incidence de delirium in this population.

The 12 January 2010 earthquake that struck Port-au-Prince, Haiti caused >200,000 deaths, thousands of injuries requiring immediate surgical interventions, and 1.5 million internally displaced survivors. The earthquake destroyed or disabled most medical facilities in the city, seriously hampering the ability to deliver immediate life- and limb-saving surgical care. A Project Medishare/University of Miami Miller School of Medicine trauma team deployed to Haiti from Miami within 24 hours of the earthquake. The team began work at a pre-existing tent facility in the United Nations (UN) compound based at the airport, where they encountered 225 critically injured patients. However, non-sterile conditions, no means to administer oxygen, the lack of surgical equipment and supplies, and no anesthetics precluded the immediate delivery of general anesthesia. Despite these limitations, resuscitative care was administered, and during the first 72 hours following the event, some amputations were performed with local anesthesia. Because of these austere conditions, an anesthesiologist, experienced and equipped to administer regional block anesthesia, was dispatched three days later to perform anesthesia for limb amputations, debridements, and wound care using single shot block anesthesia until a better equipped tent facility was established. After four weeks, the relief effort evolved into a 250-bed, multi-specialty trauma/intensive care center staffed with >200 medical, nursing, and administrative staff. Within that timeframe, the facility and its staff completed 1,000 surgeries, including spine and pediatric neurological procedures, without major complications. This experience suggests that when local emergency medical resources are completely destroyed or seriously disabled, a surgical team staffed and equipped to provide regional nerve block anesthesia and acute pain management can be dispatched rapidly to serve as a bridge to more advanced field surgical and intensive care, which takes longer to deploy and set up.