Archive for October 14th, 2008

On B12

NY Times, 10/14/08 (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/health/14brod.html?sq=+osteoporosis&st=nyt&scp=1&pagewanted=print):

It has long been known that vitamins must be obtained from sources outside the body — food and drink, and for vitamin D, exposure to sunlight — and that failing to get enough of a vitamin can result in well-defined and sometimes deadly diseases.

But in recent decades, epidemiological studies have linked several nutrients, especially vitamins C and E, beta carotene and folic acid, to chronic ills including heart disease and cancer. That led people to take large doses in hopes of warding off dire consequences.

But when scientifically designed clinical trials were conducted, most early promises proved false. Now another vitamin, B12, is being discussed as a factor in several ailments that commonly afflict older people, including heart disease and stroke, Alzheimer’s disease and dementia, frailty, depression, osteoporosis and even some cancers.

As with the other vitamins, the evidence for the role that low levels of B12 may play in these problems comes almost entirely from epidemiological studies — those that follow a population of people, in this case measuring their B12 levels to see whether there are correlations with health. For example, a continuing study of 2,576 adults in Framingham, Mass., linked low blood levels of B12 to bone loss in men and women; a study of 703 women in their 70s living at home in Baltimore linked markers of B12 deficiency to frailty; and a study published this year, of 107 community-dwelling people over 60 who were followed for five years, linked low levels of B12 to shrinkage of the brain.

This latest finding has attracted much attention, given the problem of Alzheimer’s and the fact that B12 protects the nervous system. Without B12, permanent neurological damage can occur.

In many of the studies, symptoms were seen in people with B12 levels just slightly below normal. In some cases, symptoms were seen in people with B12 levels considerably above the levels that cause the best-known disease of B12 deficiency, anemia.The findings have prompted some experts to question whether blood levels of B12 now considered normal are really optimal.

A Complex Nutrient

The studies suggest considerable benefits from the increasing of B12 levels, especially in adults over 50. But these types of studies cannot prove cause and effect. Until placebo-controlled clinical trials are conducted, it is not known whether artificially increasing levels of B12 among people at the low end is safe and beneficial.

Still, a growing number of experts, who cite well-established explanations for drops in B12 levels, especially in older people, are urging everyone over 50 to increase their B12 intake through supplements or fortified foods. These experts believe it cannot hurt and may help to keep people hale and hearty.

Dr. Donald Jacobsen, a biochemist at the Cleveland Clinic who has studied B12 for 40 years and is a consultant for a company developing a new B12 supplement, explained that this vitamin is needed by every cell in the body.

Since it is water-soluble and only a small fraction of the amount consumed is absorbed by the body, taking large doses of it appears to be safe, Dr. Jacobsen said in an interview.

The only dietary sources are animal products and bacteria: meat, fish, poultry, eggs and milk and nutritional yeast.

Vegans, who consume no animal foods, must take a B12 supplement or eat plant foods fortified with the vitamin. But there are other health factors that lead to a need for supplementation.

The body has a complicated means of acquiring naturally occurring B12. In animal foods the vitamin enters the body attached to protein; to be absorbed, it must first be separated from protein by stomach acid. The vitamin then combines with a substance in the gut called intrinsic factor, which enables it to pass through the small intestine into the bloodstream.

People with low levels of stomach acid or who lack intrinsic factor are at risk of developing a B12 deficiency. Among them are many millions of older people who develop atrophic gastritis, a loss of acid-producing stomach cells, and those who chronically take acid-lowering drugs like Prilosec, Prevacid and Zantac to control reflux. Because the body has a temporary storage system for B12 in the liver, a deficiency may not show up for several years after acid levels fall.

Others who are at serious risk of a B12 deficiency are those who lose major parts of their stomachs or parts of their small intestine, through, for example, surgery for weight loss or ulcers. They must take daily B12 supplements to stay healthy.

But more often it is the elderly — as many as 30 percent over age 65 — who are found to have B12 levels that are less than ideal.

“It’s a huge problem,” Dr. J. David Spence, a neurologist and stroke specialist at the Robarts Research Institute in London, Ontario, said in an interview.

“Close to 80 percent of older adults with a B12 deficiency don’t know it,” he said. “Neither do their doctors. Doctors tend to think ‘normal’ means adequate.”

Dr. Spence said that the low end of normal for B12 — commonly 160 to 250 picomoles per liter of blood serum — was hardly optimal.

That level, he said, could result in a host of chronic ailments, including cardiovascular disorders and damage to the nervous system, which becomes permanent if not caught and treated early. Dr. Spence, among others, considers 350 picomoles to be adequate.

Although it was proved long ago that people who lack enough intrinsic factor to absorb B12 can benefit from oral doses of the nutrient, most physicians were taught, and many still think, that it has to be given by injection as often as weekly to prevent life-threatening pernicious anemia.

Dr. Godfrey Oakley, a research epidemiologist at Emory University in Atlanta, said pernicious anemia could be cured with oral doses — 1,000 micrograms of B12 a day. For most people 50 and older who still have intrinsic factor but perhaps not enough stomach acid to benefit fully from B12 in animal foods, a daily intake of five or six micrograms of synthetic B12 from a supplement or fortified foods, like breakfast cereals with added B12, can correct the deficit, he said in an interview.

Divergent Views

Dr. Oakley is a staunch advocate of adding B12 to flour, as is now done with another B vitamin, folate. “If B12 were required in flour, the problem of low stomach acid would essentially disappear,” he said. “These people are not particularly sick but may be at increased risk of developing dementia, osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease.”

But another longtime researcher in the field, Dr. Ralph Carmel, a hematologist and director of research at New York-Methodist Hospital in Brooklyn, cautions against such recommendations. “The associations found in the studies are potentially important, but no one has yet shown that if you give B12 it will make a difference down the road,” he said. “We need clinical trials.”

Furthermore, he maintains that the small amount of B12 in most supplements will not correct a mild deficiency. “You don’t change anything,” Dr. Carmel said, “until you give 1,000 micrograms a day.”

On MRIs

NY Times, 10/14/08 (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/health/14scan.html?_r=1&sq=%20radiologist&st=nyt&oref=slogin&scp=1&pagewanted=print): 

This is a story about M.R.I.’s, those amazing scans that can show tissue injury and bone damage, inflammation and fluid accumulation. Except when they can’t and you think they can.

I found out about magnetic resonance imaging tests when I injured my forefoot running. All of a sudden, halfway through a run, my foot hurt so much that I had to stop.

But an M.R.I. at a local radiology center found nothing wrong.

That, of course, was what I wanted to hear. So I spent five days waiting for it to feel better, taking the anti-inflammatory drugs ibuprofen and naproxen, using an elliptical cross-trainer, and riding my road bike with its clipless pedals that attach themselves to my bicycling shoes. By then, my foot hurt so much I had to walk on my heel. I was beginning to doubt that scan: it was hard to believe nothing was wrong. So I went to the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York for a second opinion from Dr. John G. Kennedy, an orthopedist who specializes in sports-related lower-limb injuries. And there I had another M.R.I.

It showed a serious stress fracture, a hairline crack in a metatarsal bone in my forefoot. It was so serious, in fact, that Dr. Kennedy warned that I risked surgery if I continued activities like cycling and the elliptical cross-trainer, which make such injuries worse. And I had to stop taking anti-inflammatory drugs, since they impede bone healing.

As I hobbled around the office on crutches, one of my colleagues, James Glanz, asked what had happened. As we chatted, it turned out that he had had a much more sobering experience than mine.

Jim, the Baghdad bureau chief for The New York Times, was playing touch football in New York in late 2005 when he landed hard while diving to make a catch, both elbows hitting the ground at once. The next day, his fingers and hands hurt so much he couldn’t type.

But an M.R.I. showed nothing except some bulging disks in his neck that, he was told, were common in people his age, 50. He was advised to do neck exercises, and eventually he felt better.

About a year later, he fell again while playing football. His symptoms came roaring back.

The worst was when he woke up in the morning, Jim said. The two middle fingers on each hand were so stiff they would not even bend. He would massage his fingers and loosen them, but his hands and knuckles ached all day. He tried ibuprofen, to little avail.

Finally, last spring, he sought help at New York University, where he had another M.R.I. It turned out he had a nerve impingement so serious that he was warned that he risked permanent paralysis if he did not have surgery. So this summer, he had a major operation called a French-door laminoplasty, in which his surgeon, Dr. Ronald Moskovich at the N.Y.U. Hospital for Joint Diseases, opened and widened four or five vertebrae to free the trapped nerves.

How could M.R.I.’s have come to such different conclusions for both Jim and me?

Jim asked his doctors whether he could have really had nothing wrong at the time of his first scan. Unlikely, they replied, although they cautioned that no one had directly compared the two scans.

I asked Dr. Kennedy the same question and received the same answer. He explained that in my case the quality of the two images was vastly different. “It’s like the difference between a black-and-white TV and HDTV,” he said.

All well and good, but how was I supposed to know? The radiology center I first went to is accredited by the American College of Radiology, and there is no way I can tell a good M.R.I. image from a bad one. In fact, I never even saw the images. All I saw were the radiologists’ reports.

Academic radiologists say that, unfortunately, they see patients like Jim and me all the time.

“That’s the bane of our existence in an academic medical center,” said Dr. Howard P. Forman, a professor of diagnostic radiology at Yale University School of Medicine.

And it’s not just patients who have to deal with the problem, said Dr. William C. Black, a professor of radiology and community and family medicine at Dartmouth Medical School. Doctors do, too. Radiology centers send written reports to doctors, but the doctors may have no idea whether the M.R.I. was done well and interpreted well. “It’s a huge problem,” Dr. Black said.

Unlike C.T. scans or X-rays, which transmit radiation through the body to produce images, M.R.I.’s use powerful magnets and radio waves to manipulate protons in the body’s hydrogen atoms. The idea, said Dr. Andrew H. Haims, a diagnostic radiologist at Yale, is that protons in different types of tissue respond in distinctive ways to this pushing and prodding. The differing responses reveal the characteristics of the tissue.

Magnetic resonance machines, though, vary enormously, and not just in the strength of their magnets. Even more important, radiologists say, is the quality of the imaging coils they put around the body part being scanned and the computer programs they use to control the imaging and to analyze the images. And there is a huge variability in skill among the technicians doing the scans.

Dr. Forman said that at the very least, patients should go to radiology centers accredited by the American College of Radiology. But he added that accreditation does not tell you whether your scan will be done with a machine that is several generations removed from the best available today; whether the scanning is programmed to pick up your particular problem; or whether the receiving coil that picks up signals from the magnet is sufficiently sensitive.

G. Scott Gazelle, a professor of radiology at Harvard Medical School, shared Dr. Forman’s opinions.

“People don’t understand that there are these differences,” he said, adding that radiology centers that do not keep up will be doing a less than ideal job. “The pace of technology development is staggering,” he said.

Then there is the question of how skilled is the radiologist who reads your scans.

At Massachusetts General Hospital, for example, Dr. Gazelle said, “musculoskeletal M.R.I.’s are read by someone who does musculoskeletal imaging every day” — and not “by someone who reads chest M.R.I.’s one day and musculoskeletal M.R.I.’s the next.”

Dr. Forman says it pays to check the credentials of a center’s radiologists.

“If you say, ‘Who will be reading my scan?’ and they say, ‘One of our radiologists,’ you don’t go to a place like that,” he said. (I checked the Web site of the first center I went to. The radiologist who read my scan was a generalist with no special training.)

Of course, it may not be feasible to go to an academic medical center where subspecialists will read your images. And even if you do, said Dr. James Thrall, chairman of the board of chancellors of the American College of Radiology, “scans, as good as they are, are not perfect.”

”I wouldn’t equate a negative scan as being an 100 percent indicator that nothing is wrong,” he added. So if you are told nothing is wrong because a scan was negative and you are having alarming symptoms, you may want to seek a second opinion.

And don’t forget, said Dr. Jeffrey Jarvik, a professor of radiology and neurological surgery at the University of Washington, the point of an M.R.I., or any imaging study, is to help make a diagnosis that will improve your health. Often imaging is unnecessary: a good exam will reveal what’s wrong, and the treatment will be the same with or without the scan.

Just as big a problem as the erratic quality of scans is the tendency of doctors and patients to rely on them too much.

“There’s been a shift in medicine toward relying on imaging instead of a history and examination,” Dr. Jarvik said.

And I suspect that that was one reason Jim and I were so misled.

“Pain is a way for Mother Nature to talk to us,” Dr. Thrall told me. “And when our invented process for understanding is at odds with what Mother Nature is telling us, we had better listen to Mother Nature.”

Adverse Events in Air Medical Transport

TITLE:  Epidemiology of Adverse Events in Air Medical Transport
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2008; 15:923–931 © 2008 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
ABSTRACT

Objectives: This observational study determined frequency and describes all-cause adverse event epidemiology in a large air medical transport system.

Methods: Records of a mandatory reporting system were reviewed and a data set containing all of the patient care records was searched to identify aviation- and non–aviation-related adverse events. Two reviewers independently identified adverse events and categorized them using an established taxonomy. Descriptive statistics were used to report adverse events, with frequency calculated per 1,000 flights and 1,000 hours flown.

Results: Between January 1, 2002, and June 30, 2005, there were 1,447 reports, of which 598 included an adverse event. Case-finding identified an additional 125. A complete report was available in 680 of 723 (94.1%) events. There were 58,956 flights and 103,632 hours flown during the study period, for a rate of 11.53 adverse events per 1,000 flights (95% CI = 10.7 to 12.4 adverse events) or 6.56 per 1,000 hours flown (95% CI = 6.1 to 7.1 adverse events). The frequencies of events by category were as follows: communication (229; 33.7%), transport vehicle (143; 21.0%), medical equipment (88; 12.9%), patient management (77; 11.4%), clinical performance (68; 10.0%), weather (30; 4.4%), unclassified (24; 3.5%), and patient factors causing death (21; 3.1%). There was possible patient harm in 117 events.

Conclusions: Air medical transport is associated with a low incidence of adverse events and possible patient harm. Communication problems were the most common cause of an event. Determining event epidemiology is necessary to identify modifiable factors, propose solutions to decrease the adverse events, and direct future efforts to improve safety.

Kids with Blunt Abdominal Trauma

TITLE:  Is Hospital Admission and Observation Required after a Normal Abdominal Computed Tomography Scan in Children with Blunt Abdominal Trauma?
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2008; 15:895–899 © 2008 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
ABSTRACT

Objectives: The objective was to determine if hospital admission of children with blunt abdominal trauma for observation of possible intraabdominal injury (IAI) is necessary after a normal abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan in the emergency department (ED).

Methods: The authors conducted a prospective observational cohort study of children less than 18 years of age with blunt abdominal trauma who underwent an abdominal CT scan in the ED. Abdominal CT scans were obtained with intravenous contrast but no oral contrast. The decision to hospitalize the patient was made by the attending emergency physician (EP) with the trauma or pediatric surgery teams. An abnormal abdominal CT scan was defined by the presence of any visualized IAI or findings suggestive of possible IAI (e.g., intraperitoneal fluid without solid organ injury). Patients were followed to determine if IAI was later diagnosed and the need for acute therapeutic intervention if IAI was present.

Results: A total of 1,295 patients underwent abdominal CT, and 1,085 (84%) patients had normal abdominal CT scans in the ED and make up the study population. Seven-hundred thirty-seven (68%) were hospitalized, and 348 were discharged to home. None of the 348 patients discharged home and 2 of the 737 hospitalized patients were identified with an IAI after a normal initial abdominal CT. The IAIs in patients with normal initial CT scans included a 10-year-old with a mesenteric hematoma and serosal tear at laparotomy and a 10-year-old with a perinephric hematoma on repeat CT. Neither underwent specific therapy. The negative predictive value (NPV) of a normal abdominal CT scan for IAI was 99.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 99.3% to 100%).

Conclusions: Children with blunt abdominal trauma and a normal abdominal CT scan in the ED are at very low risk of having a subsequently diagnosed IAI and are very unlikely to require a therapeutic intervention. Hospitalization of children for evaluation of possible undiagnosed IAI after a normal abdominal CT scan has a low yield and is generally unnecessary.

Bronchiolitis: Who needs ICU?

TITLE:  Prospective Multicenter Bronchiolitis Study: Predicting Intensive Care Unit Admissions
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2008; 15:887–894 © 2008 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
ABSTRACT

Objectives: The authors sought to identify predictors of intensive care unit (ICU) admission among children hospitalized with bronchiolitis for ≥24 hours.

Methods: The authors conducted a prospective cohort study during two consecutive bronchiolitis seasons, 2004 through 2006, in 30 U.S. emergency departments (EDs). All included patients were aged <2 years and had a final diagnosis of bronchiolitis. Regular floor versus ICU admissions were compared.

Results: Of 1,456 enrolled patients, 533 (37%) were admitted to the regular floor and 50 (3%) to the ICU. Comparing floor and ICU admissions, multivariate ED predictors of ICU admission were age <2 months (26% vs. 53%; odds ratio [OR] = 4.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.1 to 8.3), an ED visit the past week (25% vs. 40%; OR = 2.2; 95% CI = 1.1 to 4.4), moderate/severe retractions (31% vs. 48%; OR = 2.6; 95% CI = 1.3 to 5.2), and inadequate oral intake (31% vs. 53%; OR = 3.3; 95% CI = 1.6 to 7.1). Unlike previous studies, no association with male gender, socioeconomic factors, insurance status, breast-feeding, or parental asthma was found with ICU admission.

Conclusions: In this prospective multicenter ED-based study of children admitted for bronchiolitis, four independent predictors of ICU admission were identified. The authors did not confirm many putative risk factors, but cannot rule out modest associations.

Ketamine versus Fentanyl

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121389315/abstract

 Abstract

Title:  Subdissociative-dose Ketamine versus Fentanyl for Analgesia during Propofol Procedural Sedation: A Randomized Clinical Trial 
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2008; 15:1–10 © 2008 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine

Objectives: The authors sought to compare the safety and efficacy of subdissociative-dose ketamine versus fentanyl as adjunct analgesics for emergency department (ED) procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) with propofol.

Methods: This double-blind, randomized trial enrolled American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) Class I or II ED patients, aged 14–65 years, requiring PSA for orthopedic reduction or abscess drainage. Subjects received 0.3 mg/kg ketamine or 1.5 μg/kg fentanyl intravenously (IV), followed by IV propofol titrated to deep sedation. Supplemental oxygen was not routinely administered. The primary outcomes were the frequency and severity of cardiorespiratory events and interventions, rated using a composite intrasedation event rating scale. Secondary outcomes included the frequency of specific scale component events, propofol doses required to achieve and maintain sedation, times to sedation and recovery, and physician and patient satisfaction.

Results: Sixty-three patients were enrolled. Of patients who received fentanyl, 26/31 (83.9%) had an intrasedation event versus 15/32 (46.9%) of those who received ketamine. Events prospectively rated as moderate or severe were seen in 16/31 (51.6%) of fentanyl subjects versus 7/32 (21.9%) of ketamine subjects. Patients receiving fentanyl had 5.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.9 to 13.6; p < 0.001) times the odds of having a more serious intrasedation event rating than patients receiving ketamine. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes, apart from higher propofol doses in the ketamine arm.

Conclusions: Subdissociative-dose ketamine is safer than fentanyl for ED PSA with propofol and appears to have similar efficacy.

Delayed Effects of Nitric Acid Exposure

Fatal Pulmonary Edema after Acute Occupational Exposure to Nitric Acid
Published online: 09 October 2008
Christine M. Murphy, Halleh Akbarnia, S. Rutherfoord Rose
DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.03.011
Journal of Emergency Medicine

Background: Nitric acid (HNO3) is a solution of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in water commonly used as an industrial chemical and cleaner. Oxides of nitrogen liberated as nitric acid interact with the environment to cause inhalation injuries. The coexistence of HNO3 with varying oxides of nitrogen likely results in the large continuum of symptoms related to HNO3 exposure and varying times of onset—acute, subacute, and delayed. Furthermore, dyspnea and evidence of acute lung injury may not occur for several hours after exposure and can lead to rapidly progressive acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

Objectives: This case illustrates to physicians and occupational health personnel that HNO3 inhalation may initially appear benign and that onset of severe effects may be delayed.

Case Report: A 66-year-old man developed delayed-onset pulmonary edema, ARDS, and fatal circulatory collapse 53 h after occupational exposure to HNO3.

Conclusion: This case serves to increase awareness among emergency physicians, as well as occupational health personnel, that patients exposed to HNO3 may initially be asymptomatic. Patients should be evaluated and observed regardless of the severity or benign nature of symptoms, which occur immediately after exposure, as the most severe symptoms are often delayed in onset and rapidly progressive.

OMNI Postings of 10/14/08

On this date in 1960, JFK proposed the concept of a “Peace Corps” to a University of Michigan audience. All the male students ran out prepared to enlist until they discovered that it wasn’t spelled “P-I-E-C-E Corps.
But I digress…
1)  This J Emerg Med study compares IV Compazine & IV Phenergan as single-agent therapy to treat undifferentiated headache.  Each subject (n = 70) was randomized to receive either intravenous promethazine 25 mg or prochlorperazine 10 mg, and graded the intensity of their headache on serial 100-mm visual analog scales (VAS). Compazine won in the rate of headache reduction and rate of home drowsiness, with similar rates of akathesia, nausea resolution, patient satisfaction, and headache recurrence within 5 days of discharge.
2)  This NY Times article is reporting on the rise of a Strep pneumoniae variant, 19A, that is becoming an increase source of meningitis and pneumonia in kids.  The vaccine has worked.  By 2002, rates of infection from these bacteria had dropped as much as 80 percent in some places. But progress has now stalled, and infection with a particular type of pneumococcus, Serotype 19A, is steadily rising.  Why?  Because the vaccine wasn’t created for 19A and a few other variants.  Since 2001, rates of  invasive pneumococcal diseases have crept upward, to more than 10 per 100,000 children from about 2 per 100,000. A fourfold increase in life-threatening infections has also occurred among the elderly.
3)  This study looked at patient rounding in the ER by nurses at regular intervals.  The three rounding protocols combined reduced LWBS (Left Without Being Seen) by 23.4%, leaving AMA by 22.6%, falls by 58.8%, call light use by 34.7%, and approaches to the nursing station by 39.5%. Patient satisfaction ratings for overall care and pain management increased significantly.  One protocol had nurses round every 30 minutes!  I’m not sure many ERs have enough nurses to dedicate one to round that frequently.  However, a volunteer doing the same rounding might bring similar results in terms of patient satisfaction.  Wouldn’t it be interesting if hannibal Lector was doing patient rounds.  Then you would have to devise another category:  (EWBS) Eaten Without Being Seen. 
4)  We learn about barium appendicoliths, but who has seen one?  I have… once.  Anyway, this is an abstract of a case report plus an x-ray image of what one looks like on a KUB
5)  This study looked at how flu shots in kids impacted the frequency of ER visits a couple of years ago.  It didn’t.  Kids under 5 with respiratory complaints still flooded the ERs and clinics in multiple cities during flu season.  Why?  Because the vaccine strain several years ago did not optimally match  with the flu strain that was hitting the population.
All the best,
Paul R.

Pneumococcal Vaccine, 19A & Kids

NY Times, 10/14/08 (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/health/14vacc.html?sq=+%22American%20Medical%20Association%22&st=nyt&scp=1&pagewanted=print): 

A highly drug-resistant germ has become a common cause of meningitis, pneumonia and other life-threatening conditions in young children. The culprit — a strain of strep bacteria — can conquer almost all antibiotics in pediatrics, and has dodged a vaccine otherwise credited with causing the number of serious infections in children to plummet.

Since 2000, American toddlers have been immunized against Streptococcus pneumoniae, or pneumococcus, an organism that preys largely on children younger than 5 and the elderly. Pneumococcal meningitis can be fatal, and survivors are often left with deafness and other lifelong neurological problems.

And by most measures, the vaccine has worked: by 2002, rates of infection from these bacteria had dropped as much as 80 percent in some places. But progress has now stalled, and infection with a particular type of pneumococcus, Serotype 19A, is steadily rising.

“It’s very much a concern,” said Bernard Beall, a pneumococcal expert at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Last year, in The Journal of the American Medical Association, pediatricians described an outbreak of Serotype 19A ear infections in Rochester that could be cured only by surgically implanting tubes, or by turning to adult medicines not yet tested for safety in children.

A greater worry, however, is the frequency of meningitis, pneumonia and bloodstream infections from Serotype 19A. Since 2001, rates of these and other invasive pneumococcal diseases have crept upward, to more than 10 per 100,000 children from about 2 per 100,000. A fourfold increase in life-threatening infections has also occurred among the elderly.

The vaccine, Prevnar, is aimed at seven types of bacteria that were responsible for 70 to 80 percent of pneumococcal illness during the 1990s. Because pneumococci come in 91 forms, experts have worried from the start whether bacteria that were just as deadly, but not wiped out by the vaccine, might move in as opportunists when the competition suddenly vanished.

“Nature abhors a vacuum,” said Dr. Steven Black of Cincinnati Children’s Hospital. Indeed, almost all pneumococcal infections among American children today are caused by versions not covered by the vaccine, and 19A is leading the way. “People hoped against hope it wouldn’t happen,” he said.

The vaccine’s manufacturer, Wyeth, says it has been working quickly to develop a new product to counter 19A and five other pneumococcal variations, along with the original seven. The company will release results of the first large studies of the newer version this month at an infectious disease meeting in Washington.

“There was no point where we said to ourselves, ‘We missed it, we need to put in 19A,’ ” said Emilio A. Emini, head of vaccine research and development for Wyeth. The company was always prepared to remake the product, he said.

Once a new vaccine demonstrates that it can protect against pneumococcus, it must work its way through the approval process — passing tests of effectiveness and safety — before it can be licensed. Researchers will also try to determine whether young children who have been immunized with the old Prevnar should be revaccinated to protect themselves from 19A.

The remodeling of a vaccine so soon after its approval is highly unusual, but so was the effort to tackle pneumococcus.

The bacteria live in the nose and throat, usually as microbial freeloaders of no consequence. Occasionally — often after a simple viral infection — pneumococci slip into inner areas of the body and cause disease. Weaker immune systems in the very young and the very old leave them most vulnerable. (The pneumonia shot in older people includes 19A, but many elderly people have not received the immunization.)

Not all of the 91 incarnations of pneumococcal bacteria are dangerous. They developed so much variety by mingling in the back of the throat, exchanging genetic material as eagerly as children trading Halloween candy. The variation in genes slightly alters how the bacteria function and how they are received by the immune system.

For vaccine manufacturers, pneumococci’s diversity presented a challenge: how to teach the immune system to recognize a target that may look a little different from child to child. “This is the most complex biological product ever made,” Dr. Emini said.

Serotype 19A was around in the 1990s, though uncommon, and the vaccine includes a similar version called 19F. The hope in 2000 was that 19F looked enough like 19A to set off an immune reaction. It did not.

Experts say it is hard to know what role the introduction of Prevnar may have played in the rise of the bacteria, which was gaining momentum in some countries before the vaccine’s adoption. For example, researchers from GlaxoSmithKline, which is introducing its own pneumococcal vaccine, reported last month that Serotype 19A became more common in Belgium from 2001 to 2004 — years when pneumococcal vaccination was rare in that country. Similar reports have emerged from China, South Korea and Israel.

Pneumococci ebb and flow in natural cycles, and some types have gained a survival advantage by growing resistant to a host of drugs. The vaccine may have simply amplified natural trends..

“I don’t think anyone can tell you the relative contributions of these factors,” said Dr. Sheldon L. Kaplan of Texas Children’s Hospital in Houston. This summer, he and his colleagues described a growing number of cases of drug-resistant mastoiditis, an infection of an inner-ear bone, from 19A.

Experts are now watching to see how forcefully the organism will spread before the new immunization arrives. Wyeth says it hopes to file an application with the Food and Drug Administration in 2009.

Disease experts also wonder what organisms like 19A mean for the future of pneumococcal infections. Public health experts once hoped the infection could be defeated, but it now appears that pneumococci may be playing a game of cat and mouse.

“The pneumococcus has shown an extraordinary ability to evolve to our strategies,” said Dr. Beall of the C.D.C.

Yet he and others are quick to say that immunization remains highly effective, even if it leaves some children behind. “This is not a failure of the vaccine,” said Dr. George H. McCracken Jr. of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas. Even with the rise of 19A, children are much less likely to become ill from pneumococcal infections.

Dr. McCracken hopes that researchers will one day avoid threats like 19A entirely by developing a vaccine that primes the immune system to recognize some element common to all 91 types of pneumococci — in the way a quiche, an omelet and a custard pie are all versions of eggs. But until such an immunization comes along, he said, pediatricians will be forced to battle the pneumococcus as they always have, by trying to stay one strain ahead of its game.

Predicting Bacteremia

Who Needs a Blood Culture? A Prospectively Derived and Validated Prediction Rule
Nathan I. Shapiro, Richard E. Wolfe, Sharon B. Wright, Richard Moore, David W. Bates
The Journal of Emergency Medicine – October 2008 (Vol. 35, Issue 3, Pages 255-264, DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.04.001)
 

Abstract 

Objective:  The study objective was to derive and validate a clinical decision rule for obtaining blood cultures in Emergency Department (ED) patients with suspected infection. This was a prospective, observational cohort study of consecutive adult ED patients with blood cultures obtained. The study ran from February 1, 2000 through February 1, 2001.

Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to derivation (2/3) or validation (1/3) sets. The outcome was “true bacteremia.” Features of the history, co-morbid illness, physical examination, and laboratory testing were used to create a clinical decision rule. Among 3901 patients, 3730 (96%) were enrolled with 305 (8.2%) episodes of true bacteremia. A decision rule was created with “major criteria” defined as: temperature > 39.5°C (103.0°F), indwelling vascular catheter, or clinical suspicion of endocarditis. “Minor criteria” were: temperature 38.3–39.4°C (101–102.9°F), age > 65 years, chills, vomiting, hypotension (systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg), neutrophil% > 80, white blood cell count > 18 k, bands > 5%, platelets < 150 k, and creatinine > 2.0. A blood culture is indicated by the rule if at least one major criterion or two minor criteria are present. Otherwise, patients are classified as “low risk” and cultures may be omitted.

Results: Only 4 (0.6%) low-risk patients in the derivation set and 3 (0.9%) low-risk patients in the validation set had positive cultures. The sensitivity was 98% (95% confidence interval [CI] 96–100%) (derivation) and 97% (95% CI 94–100%) (validation).

Conclusion:  We developed and validated a promising clinical decision rule for predicting bacteremia in patients with suspected infection.

Prochlorperazine vs. Promethazine for Headache

Prochlorperazine vs. Promethazine for Headache Treatment in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Trial
James E. Callan, Mark A. Kostic, Ethan A. Bachrach, Thomas S. Rieg
The Journal of Emergency Medicine – October 2008 (Vol. 35, Issue 3, Pages 247-253, DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2007.09.047)
 

Abstract 

Background:  Headache is a very common medical complaint. Four to six percent of the population will have a debilitating headache in their lifetime; and 1–2% of all Emergency Department (ED) visits involve patients with headaches. Although promethazine is used frequently, it has never been studied as a single-agent treatment in undifferentiated headache. We hypothesized that promethazine would be superior to prochlorperazine in the treatment of headache.

Methods: We conducted a prospective, double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial on patients presenting to our ED between May and August 2005 with a chief complaint of headache. Each subject was randomized to receive either intravenous promethazine 25 mg or prochlorperazine 10 mg, and graded the intensity of their headache on serial 100-mm visual analog scales (VAS). Patients with dystonic reactions or akathesia were treated with diphenhydramine. Adequate pain relief was defined as an absolute decrease in VAS score of 25 mm. After discharge from the ED, patients were queried regarding the recurrence of headache symptoms, the need for additional pain medications, and the occurrence of any side effects since discharge.

Results: Thirty-five patients were enrolled in each group. Both drugs were shown to be effective in treatment of headaches. Prochlorperazine provided a faster rate of pain resolution and less drowsiness when compared to promethazine. Both medications were individually effective as abortive therapy for headache. Prochlorperazine was superior to promethazine in the rate of headache reduction and rate of home drowsiness, with similar rates of akathesia, nausea resolution, patient satisfaction, and headache recurrence within 5 days of discharge.

Barium Appendicitis

Barium Appendicitis after Upper Gastrointestinal Imaging
Nathan M. Novotny, Keith D. Lillemoe, Mark E. Falimirski
The Journal of Emergency Medicine – 09 October 2008 (10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.04.017)

ABSTRACT

Background: Barium appendicitis (BA) is a rarely seen entity with fewer than 30 reports in the literature. However, it is a known complication of barium imaging.

Objective: To report a case of BA in a patient whose computed tomography (CT) scan was initially read as foreign body ingestion.

            1

Case Report: An 18-year-old man presented with right lower quadrant pain after upper gastrointestinal imaging 2 weeks prior. A CT scan was obtained of his abdomen and pelvis that revealed a finding that was interpreted as a foreign body at the area of the terminal ileum. A plain X-ray study of the abdomen revealed radiopaque appendicoliths. Pathology confirmed the diagnosis of barium appendicitis.

Conclusions: BA is a rare entity and the pathogenesis is unclear. Shorter intervals between barium study and presentation with appendicitis usually correlate with fewer complications.

ER Rounding & Patient Satisfaction

The Effects of Emergency Department Staff Rounding On Patient Safety and Satisfaction

Published online: 09 October 2008
Christine M. Meade, Julie Kennedy, Jay Kaplan
DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.03.042
Journal of Emergency Medicine, The, http://www.jem-journal.com/article/S0736-4679%2808%2900464-2/abstract

ABSTRACT

Background: Two recent inpatient studies documented that regular nursing staff rounding increased patient safety and satisfaction. However, the effect of systematic emergency department (ED) staff rounding on patient safety and satisfaction has not been adequately tested.

                                         1

Study Objective: The objective of this study was to test the effectiveness of three different rounding techniques.

Methods: An 8-week study using a quasi-experimental, non-equivalent group, time-sampling design was conducted in 28 EDs. The three rounding protocols were: 1) rounds every 30 min; 2) rounds every hour; 3) rounds every hour with an Individualized Patient Care tactic (IPC; patients were asked to name their most important expectation for the ED visit). Baseline data were collected the first 4 weeks; rounding was done the second 4 weeks. Outcome measures compared the baseline to the rounding period data for patients who left without being seen (LWBS), those leaving against medical advice (AMA), patient satisfaction, call light use, and nursing station encounters.

Results: The three rounding protocols combined reduced LWBS by 23.4%, leaving AMA by 22.6%, falls by 58.8%, call light use by 34.7%, and approaches to the nursing station by 39.5%. Patient satisfaction ratings for overall care and pain management increased significantly. The protocol using the IPC tactic produced the most significantly improved outcomes.

Conclusions: Rounding in the ED reception and treatment areas is effective and improves outcomes. Further research should determine the optimal design for rounding considering the mixed shifts in EDs, seek ways to increase communicating delays to patients, and investigate how to integrate rounding with physician activities.

 
 

Gender & Pedestrian/MVAs

Automobile versus Pedestrian Injuries: Does Gender Matter?
Published online: 09 October 2008
Margaret J. Starnes, Pantelis Hadjizacharia, Linda S. Chan, Demetrios Demetriades
DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.03.012
Journal of Emergency Medicine, The, http://www.jem-journal.com/article/S0736-4679%2808%2900363-6/abstract
ABSTRACT

Background: Automobile vs. pedestrian (AVP) injuries cause substantial morbidity and mortality. Gender may be an important factor in determining the anatomic distribution and severity of these injuries. The objective of this study was to examine the effect of gender on the nature and severity of automobile vs. pedestrian injuries and the outcome.

Methods: Trauma registry study that included all AVP pedestrian injuries admitted during a 14-year period to a Level I trauma center. The following variables were included in an Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA) file for the purpose of this study: age, gender, body area Abbreviated Injury Score, Injury Severity Score, specific fractures (pelvic, spine, femur, tibia), survival, and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay.

Results: The study population included 6965 patients, 67.3% of whom were male. Overall, 20.7% were in the age group < 15 years, 60.5% in the age group 15–55 years, 7.6% in the age group 56–65 years, and 11.1% in the age group > 65 years. Pelvic fractures were significantly more common in females than males (20.7% vs. 11.4%, respectively, p < 0.0001). This difference was present in all age groups, but especially in the groups 56–65 years (28.5% vs. 12.3%, respectively, p < 0.0001) and > 65 years (32.5% vs. 15.7%, respectively, p < 0.0001). Males in the age group 15–55 years were significantly more likely to suffer tibia fractures (31.8% vs. 25.7%, respectively, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed no difference in survival or ICU stay between the two genders, but there was a significantly longer hospital stay in males 15–65 years.

Conclusions: Gender plays a significant role in the incidence of pelvic and tibial fractures but has no effect on survival or ICU stay, but male patients in the age group 15–65 years had a significantly longer hospital stay.