Objective There is an absence of nationally representative data describing pediatric patients who use emergency medical services (EMS) and the factors associated with EMS use by children. This study characterizes pediatric emergency department (ED) visits for which the patient arrived by EMS and identifies factors associated with those visits using a nationally representative database. Methods A secondary analysis of the ED component of the 1997–2000 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey was performed. The dependent variable was the mode of arrival to the ED (EMS vs. not EMS), and independent variables were grouped into four domains: demographic, clinical, system, and service characteristics. Bivariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted. Results There were 110.9 million ED visits by children aged <19 years between 1997 and 2000. Pediatric patients constituted 27.3% of all ED visits during this time, and 7.9 million (7.1%) of these patients arrived via EMS. Pediatric patients represented 13% of all EMS transports. The annual EMS utilization rate by children was 26 per 1,000, compared with 66 per 1,000 in the adult population (p < 0.001). Sixteen percent of children transported by EMS were admitted to the hospital. Sixty-two percent of pediatric patients arriving at the ED by EMS were transported as a result of injury or poisoning. Characteristics significantly associated with arrival by EMS in the final multivariate model included demographic (age, African American race, urban residence), clinical (need for greater immediacy of care, illnesses associated with certain diagnoses), and service (greater number of diagnostic services) variables. Conclusions Pediatric patients transported by EMS are more likely to have injuries and poisoning, and have higher-acuity illness than those arriving at the ED by other means. The epidemiology of pediatric EMS use may have important operational, training, and public health implications and requires further study.

No abstract

Objective[mh2] To evaluate the single dose pharmacokinetics of an intravenous dose of lorazepam in pediatric patients treated for status epilepticus (SE) or with a history of SE. Study design Ten hospitals in the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) enlisted patients 3 months to 17 years with convulsive SE (STATUS) or for a traditional PK study (ELECTIVE). Sparse sampling was used for STATUS and intensive sampling for ELECTIVE. Noncompartmental analyses were performed on ELECTIVE, and served to nest compartmental population PK analysis for both cohorts. Results 48 STATUS and 15 ELECTIVE patients were enrolled. Median age was 7 years, 2 months. The population PK parameters were: clearance 1.2 mL/min/kg, half-life 16.8 hours, volume of distribution 1.5 L/kg. Based on the PK model, a 0.1 mg/kg dose is expected to achieve concentrations of approximately 100 ng/mL and maintain concentrations above 30–50 ng/mL for 6–12 hours. A second dose of 0.05 mg/kg would achieve desired therapeutic serum levels for approximately 12 hours without excessive sedation. Age-dependent dosing is not necessary beyond using a maximum initial dose of 4 mg. Conclusions Lorazepam PK in convulsive status epilepticus is similar to previous PK measured in pediatric patients with cancer, except for longer half-life and similar to adult PK parameters except for increased clearance.

Purpose Results of a study to determine the effect of a pharmacist-led opioid task force on emergency department (ED) opioid use and discharge prescriptions are presented. Methods An observational evaluation was conducted at a large tertiary care center (ED volume of 115,000 visits per year) to evaluate selected opioid use outcomes before and after implementation of an ED opioid reduction program by interdisciplinary task force of pharmacists, physicians, and nurses. Volumes of ED opioid orders and discharge prescriptions were evaluated over the entire 25-month study period and during designated 1-month preimplementation and postimplementation periods (January 2017 and January 2018). Opioid order trends were evaluated using linear regression analysis and further investigated with an interrupted time series analysis to determine the immediate and sustained effects of the program. Results From January 2017 to January 2018, ED opioid orders were reduced by 63.5% and discharge prescriptions by 55.8% from preimplementation levels: from 246.8 to 90.1 orders and from 85.3 to 37.7 prescriptions per 1,000 patient visits, respectively. Over the entire study period, there were significant decreases in both opioid orders (β, –78.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], –88.0 to –68.9; R2, 0.93; p < 0.0001) and ED discharge prescriptions (β, –24.4; 95% CI, –27.9 to –20.9; R2, 0.90; p < 0.001). The efforts of the task force had an immediate effect on opioid prescribing practices; results for effect sustainability were mixed. Conclusion A clinical pharmacist–led opioid reduction program in the ED was demonstrated to have positive results, with a more than 50% reduction in both ED opioid orders and discharge prescriptions.

Objectives To describe the perspective of research personnel on issues of informed consent in a time-sensitive clinical study under emergency circumstances. Methods The authors convened concurrent focus groups of research staff and investigators involved in a pharmacokinetic study of lorazepam for status epilepticus. Moderators led discussion with open-ended questions on selected issues of parental consent, communication and understanding, patient assent, and comparison to other types of studies. Focus group transcripts were analyzed to identify themes and sub-themes from the discussions. Results Most themes and sub-themes were identified in both research staff and investigator focus groups. Focus group discussion points were categorized into three main themes: barriers to and enablers of informed consent, barriers to and enablers of actual enrollment, and overall ethical concerns about the research. Many of the issues identified were unique to emergency research. Conclusions From the perspectives of research staff and investigators enrolling patients in a time-sensitive emergency department study, the authors identified several areas of concern that should be addressed when planning future emergency studies.