No abstract

IntroductionOur goal was to assess whether use of a standardized clinical protocol improves efficiency for patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with symptoms of transient ischemic attack (TIA).MethodsWe performed a structured, retrospective, cohort study at a large, urban, tertiary care academic center. In July 2012 this hospital implemented a standardized protocol for patients with suspected TIA. The protocol selected high-risk patients for admission and low/intermediate-risk patients to an ED observation unit for workup. Recommended workup included brain imaging, vascular imaging, cardiac monitoring, and observation. Patients were included if clinical providers determined the need for workup for TIA. We included consecutive patients presenting during a six-month period prior to protocol implementation, and those presenting between 6–12 months after implementation. Outcomes included ED length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, use of neuroimaging, and 90-day risk of stroke or TIA.ResultsFrom 01/2012 to 06/2012, 130 patients were evaluated for TIA symptoms in the ED, and from 01/2013 to 06/2013, 150 patients. The final diagnosis was TIA or stroke in 45% before vs. 41% after (p=0.18). Following the intervention, the inpatient admission rate decreased from 62% to 24% (p<0.001), median ED LOS decreased by 1.2 hours (5.7 to 4.9 hours, p=0.027), and median total hospital LOS from 29.4 hours to 23.1 hours (p=0.019). The proportion of patients receiving head computed tomography (CT) went from 68% to 58% (p=0.087); brain magnetic resonance (MR) imaging from 83% to 88%, (p=0.44) neck CT angiography from 32% to 22% (p=0.039); and neck MR angiography from 61% to 72% (p=0.046). Ninety-day stroke or recurrent TIA among those with final diagnosis of TIA was 3% for both periods.ConclusionImplementation of a TIA protocol significantly reduced ED LOS and total hospital LOS.

INTRODUCTION: In August of 2020, the 4th International Neuroscience Nursing Research Symposium was held. The purpose of the symposium was to share neuroscience nursing research from around the world. One of the topics thought most notable that stimulated a crucial conversation was how different countries assessed pain and their use of opioids for pain management. BACKGROUND: Neuroscience nurses are global. What is not known is their experience with and what challenges exist with pain management for human beings in their country. Crossing geographic and cultural boundaries, pain affects all human beings. Each culture has unique values and beliefs regarding pain. Patient barriers, pivotal in this article, included poverty, poor health literacy, opioid phobia, and cultural as well as social beliefs. RESULTS: Neuroscience nurses from Australia, Brazil, Germany, Singapore, India, Ghana, Kenya, Philippines, South Africa, and the United States each collaborated to provide a short summary of assessing pain and use of opioids for pain management for the neuroscience patient. CONCLUSION: Neuroscience patients have varying degrees of pain based on many factors. Various countries have religious, spiritual, and cultural traditions that influence the reporting and management of pain. Pain assessment and management can be challenging, especially for the neuroscience nurses around the world.