scholarly journals MP10: Does arrival pain severity predict stone characteristics or short-term outcomes in emergency department patients with acute renal colic?

CJEM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (S1) ◽  
pp. S45-S46
Author(s):  
G. Splinter ◽  
K. Gourlay ◽  
J. Hayward ◽  
G. Innes

Introduction: Renal colic is among the most painful conditions that patients experience. The main outcome determinants for patients with renal colic are stone size, location and hydronephrosis; however, little is known about the association of pain with these parameters. Our objective was to determine whether more severe pain is associated with larger stones, more proximal stones or more severe hydronephrosis, findings that might suggest the need for advanced imaging, hospitalization or early intervention. Methods: We used administrative data and structured chart review to study all adult emergency department (ED) patients in two cities with a renal colic diagnosis over one-year. Patients with missing imaging results or pain scores were excluded. Triage nurses recorded numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores on arrival. We stratified patients into mild (NRS <4), moderate (NRS 4-7) and severe (NRS 8-10) pain groups, as per CTAS guidelines. Stone size (mm) and location (proximal, middle, distal ureter, or renal) were abstracted from imaging reports, while index admissions were determined from hospital discharge abstracts. We used multivariable linear regression to determine the association of arrival pain with stone characteristics and hydronephrosis severity (primary outcome), and we used multivariable logistic regression to determine the association of pain with index hospitalization (secondary outcome). We also performed a stratified analysis looking at ureteral vs. kidney (intrarenal) stones. Results: We studied 1053 patients, 66% male, with a mean age of 48 years. After controlling for patient and disease characteristics, we found no significant association between pain severity and stone size (b=−0.0004; 95%CI = -0.0015, 0.0008) or stone location (b = 0.0045; 95%CI: -0.020, 0.029). Nor did we find an association between pain and hydronephrosis severity (b = 0.016; 95%CI: -0.053, 0.022, p = 0.418). Stratified analyses using a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons revealed the same absence of associations in the kidney and ureteral stone subgroups. Arrival pain did not predict index admission (OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.59, 1.16). Conclusion: Arrival pain scores are not associated with stone size, stone location or hydronephrosis severity, and do not predict index visit hospitalization in ED patients with renal colic. Severe pain should motivate efforts to minimize treatment delays, but do not suggest the need to modify advanced imaging or admission decisions.

2021 ◽  
pp. 039156032110352
Author(s):  
Georges Abi Tayeh ◽  
Ali Safa ◽  
Julien Sarkis ◽  
Marwan Alkassis ◽  
Nour Khalil ◽  
...  

Background: Acute obstructive pyelonephritis due to urolithiasis represents a medico-surgical emergency that can lead to life-threatening complications. There are still no established factors that reliably predict progression toward acute pyelonephritis in patients presenting with a simple renal colic. Objective: To investigate clinical and paraclinical factors that are associated with the onset of acute obstructive pyelonephritis. Methods: Patients presenting to the emergency department for renal colic with obstructive urolithiasis on imaging were enrolled in the study. Demographic data, vital signs, medical comorbidities, blood test results, urinalysis, and radiological findings were recorded. Obstructive pyelonephritis was defined by the presence of two or more of the following criteria: fever, flank pain or costovertebral angle tenderness, and a positive urine culture. Results: Seventeen patients out of 120 presenting with renal colic, were diagnosed with acute obstructive pyelonephritis (14%). Parameters that were associated with the onset of obstructive pyelonephritis were: diabetes ( p = 0.03), elevated CRP ( p = 0.01), stone size (>5 mm) ( p = 0.03), dilatation of renal pelvis ( p = 0.01), peri-renal fat stranding ( p = 0.02), and positive nitrites on urinalysis ( p < 0.01). Hyperleukocytosis, acute kidney injury, multiple stones, pyuria (>10/mm3), hypertension, and were not associated with the onset of obstructive pyelonephritis. Conclusion: This study showed that known diabetic status, elevated CRP, positive urine nitrites, stone size (>5 mm), pyelic dilatation, and peri-renal fat stranding were associated with the onset of pyelonephritis in patients presenting to the emergency department with obstructive urolithiasis.


Pain Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (12) ◽  
pp. 3437-3442
Author(s):  
Hamed Basir Ghafouri ◽  
Niloofar Abazarian ◽  
Mohammadreza Yasinzadeh ◽  
Ehsan Modirian

Abstract Objective To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of intranasal desmopressin alone vs intravenous paracetamol in patients referred to the emergency department with renal colic. Design Randomized clinical trial. Setting This study was conducted in the emergency unit of a university hospital. Subjects Patients referred to the emergency room with renal colic. Primary Outcome Effect of intranasal desmopressin in pain relief in comparison with intravenous paracetamol. Methods In this trial, 240 patients diagnosed with renal colic were randomly divided into two groups to compare the analgesic effect of intravenous paracetamol (15 mg/kg) and intranasal desmopressin spray (40 μg). Pain scores were measured by a numeric rating scale at baseline and after 15, 30, and 60 minutes. Adverse effects and need for rescue analgesic (0.05 mg/kg max 3 mg morphine sulphate) were also recorded at the end of the study. Results Three hundred patients were eligible for the study; however, 240 were included in the final analysis. The patients in the two groups were similar in their baseline characteristics and baseline pain scores. The mean pain score after 15 minutes was more reduced and was clinically significant (&gt;3) in the desmopressin group (P &lt; 0.0001). There was no significant difference between mean pain scores in the two groups after 30 minutes (P = 0.350) or 60 minutes (P = 0.269), but the efficacy of the two drugs was significant in terms of pain reduction (&gt;6). Conclusions Our study showed that intranasal desmopressin is as effective as intravenous paracetamol for renal colic pain management; however, significant clinical reduction in pain score occurred faster with intranasal desmopressin.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-13
Author(s):  
Alireza Esmaili ◽  
◽  
Laleh Borjian ◽  
Mohammadali Jafari ◽  
Sedighe Vaziribozorg ◽  
...  

Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare the effect of intravenous morphine versus lidocaine on renal colic in patients admitted to the emergency department. Methods and Materials: In this clinical trial study, 80 patients with renal colic admitted to the emergency department were included. Patients were divided into two groups randomly, namely Lidocaine and morphine groups. Each patient’s pain score was recorded 5, 10, 15 and 30 minutes after the injection using Numeric Pain Intensity Scale (NPIS). Results: There were significant decreases in mean of pain scores in both groups (p <0.001). Pain reduction was significantly higher in Lidocaine-received group at 30th minutes after injection (p <0.001). Having compared groups in terms of complications, it was found that only dizziness in patients who received Lidocaine was significantly higher than that of the other group (p = 0.016). Conclusion: Considering the significant reduction in pain intensity of all patients, the effect of both medications on the reduction of pain in renal colic is confirmed. Given that pain relief in Lidocaine group was significantly more than that in morphine group after 10 minutes of injection, it can be concluded that Lidocaine is more effective than morphine in controlling renal colic.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 185-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbaros Baseskioglu ◽  
Engin Ozakin ◽  
Hakan Dolgun ◽  
Ebubekir Arslan ◽  
Nurdan Acar ◽  
...  

Objective: Computerized tomography remains the gold standard imaging in renal colic patients. In this study, we develop a scoring system to select patients in emergency department for unnecessary computerized tomography imaging in order to decrease radiation exposure. Methods: Computerized tomography imaging of patients with renal colic in emergency department were retrospectively reviewed. Symptoms, laboratory results were recorded. Significant parameters were determined by univariate and multivariate analysis. Coefficients were found to obtain score points and receiver operating curve was used to find a cut-off value. Results: A total of 123 patients with a mean age of 42 years (18–75 years) were enrolled in the study. About, 20.3% of patients were stone-free in computerized tomography. Mean stone size was 6.1 ± 1.89 mm. According to analysis, four parameters were significant; nausea, stone history, creatinine, and hematuria with a total score 9 called as Osmangazi University STONE score. Cut-off value was found as >3, which computerized tomography imaging is recommended. Conclusion: Osmangazi University STONE score is useful and simple tool in emergency department to reduce unnecessary computerized tomography imaging in renal colic patients and also lowers cost and ionizing radiation exposure.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 824.1-824
Author(s):  
J. Graham ◽  
T. Novosat ◽  
H. Sun ◽  
B. Piper ◽  
J. Boscarino ◽  
...  

Background:Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common disease that varies in severity among patients. A standardized definition to classify patients into different severity levels is lacking, however, due to the disease’s complex pathogenesis and presentation. Prior studies have shown associations between pain severity and higher healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs. We investigated an association between pain severity and higher healthcare resource utilization by examining the use of specific OA-related treatments across pain intensity levels in a large, integrated health system’s OA population over an 18-year period.Objectives:Our aim was to compare use of medications and other treatments among OA patients experiencing mild, moderate, or severe pain.Methods:This was a retrospective study of electronic health records from 2001 to 2018 at Geisinger, an integrated health system in Pennsylvania. Patients were included with a diagnosis code for OA (ICD-9: 715.*, ICD-10 M15-19) on a problem list or encounter or an OA-specific procedure (hip or knee replacement, arthroscopy or injection). We examined pain scores (0-10 scale, with 10 being worst pain) taken after the first OA diagnosis date and defined pain episodes starting on the pain score’s date and lasting for 90 days. If a new pain score was measured before 90 days elapsed, the episode was extended for an additional 90 days, with this process repeated as necessary. Each episode was categorized as mild (pain score 0-3), moderate (4-6), or severe (7-10) based on initial score, and patients could contribute multiple episodes to the analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to quantify treatment utilization during each patients’ mild, moderate and severe episodes. Percentages of patients who had any use of 10 medication types (tramadol, non-tramadol opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), injectable corticosteroids, acetaminophen, salicylates, duloxetine, homeopathic medications, other topical medications, and other over-the-counter (OTC) medications were compared across pain episode types. Percentages of patients with knee or hip surgeries, spine or joint imaging procedures (x-ray, computed tomography or magnetic resonance) and consults to OA-related care (pain management, orthopedics or physical medicine and rehabilitation) were also compared. All analyses used logistic regression with p-values <0.05 considered significant.Results:We identified 290,897 patients with OA, representing 34% of the health system population in 2018; 58% were female with mean age of 49 years and mean BMI of 30.5 kg/m2. A total of 801,144 pain episodes were defined, with 75% of patients having at least one pain score. The two most frequently occurring pain scores were 0 (17%) and 5 (13%), and pain episodes were classified as 43% mild, 32% moderate and 25% severe. Significantly higher percentages of patients used certain medication types (NSAIDs, injectable corticosteroids, non-tramadol opioid, duloxetine) in both moderate and severe pain episodes as compared to mild episodes, but other medication types were less likely to be used as pain severity increased (acetaminophen, salicylates, homeopathic medications, other OTC medications). Knee or hip surgeries, imaging, and consults to OA-related specialists were all consistently significantly more likely to occur in patients during moderate or severe pain episodes versus mild episodes (relative risk ratios of 1.76, 1.25 and 1.35 for moderate vs mild, respectively, and 2.00, 1.44 and 1.46 for severe vs mild, all p-values <0.05).Conclusion:While pain is generally recognized to be a subjective measure that could be influenced by other unmeasured factors and can be confounded with treatment effectiveness, it is nevertheless the primary symptom of OA. It is important to understand the relationship between pain intensity and treatment utilization, and our results support an overall association between pain and utilization but provide new details on the extent to which it depends on specific utilization type.Acknowledgements:Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company for sponsoring this study.Disclosure of Interests:Jove Graham Grant/research support from: I am an employee of Geisinger which received financial support from Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company in connection with the development of this abstract, Tonia Novosat Grant/research support from: I am an employee of Geisinger which received financial support from Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company in connection with the development of this abstract, Haiyan Sun Grant/research support from: I am an employee of Geisinger which received financial support from Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company in connection with the development of this abstract, Brian Piper Grant/research support from: I am an employee of Geisinger which received financial support from Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company in connection with the development of this abstract, Joseph Boscarino Grant/research support from: I am an employee of Geisinger which received financial support from Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company in connection with the development of this abstract, Vanessa Duboski Grant/research support from: I am an employee of Geisinger which received financial support from Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company in connection with the development of this abstract, Melissa Kern Grant/research support from: I am an employee of Geisinger which received financial support from Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company in connection with the development of this abstract, Eric Wright Grant/research support from: I am an employee of Geisinger which received financial support from Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company in connection with the development of this abstract, Rebecca Robinson Shareholder of: Eli Lilly & Co., Employee of: Eli Lilly & Co., Edward Casey Shareholder of: Pfizer, Inc., Paid instructor for: As an employee of Pfizer, Inc. this is part of my role., Employee of: Pfizer, Inc., Craig Beck Shareholder of: Pfizer, Inc., Employee of: Pfizer, Inc., Jerry Hall Shareholder of: Eli Lilly & Co., Employee of: Eli Lilly & Co., Patricia Schepman Shareholder of: Pfizer, Inc., Employee of: Pfizer, Inc.


2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luma Mahmoud Issa ◽  
Kasper Højgaard Thybo ◽  
Daniel Hägi-Pedersen ◽  
Jørn Wetterslev ◽  
Janus Christian Jakobsen ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectivesIn this sub-study of the ‘Paracetamol and Ibuprofen in Combination’ (PANSAID) trial, in which participants were randomised to one of four different non-opioids analgesic regimen consisting of paracetamol, ibuprofen, or a combination of the two after planned primary total hip arthroplasty, our aims were to investigate the distribution of participants’ pain (mild, moderate or severe), integrate opioid use and pain to a single score (Silverman Integrated Approach (SIA)-score), and identify preoperative risk factors for severe pain.MethodsWe calculated the proportions of participants with mild (VAS 0–30 mm), moderate (VAS 31–60 mm) or severe (VAS 61–100 mm) pain and the SIA-scores (a sum of rank-based percentage differences from the mean rank in pain scores and opioid use, ranging from −200 to 200%). Using logistic regression with backwards elimination, we investigated the association between severe pain and easily obtainable preoperative patient characteristics.ResultsAmong 556 participants from the modified intention-to-treat population, 33% (95% CI: 26–42) (Group Paracetamol + Ibuprofen (PCM + IBU)), 28% (95% CI: 21–37) (Group Paracetamol (PCM)), 23% (95% CI: 17–31) (Group Ibuprofen (IBU)), and 19% (95% CI: 13–27) (Group Half Strength-Paracetamol + Ibuprofen (HS-PCM + IBU)) experienced mild pain 6 h postoperatively during mobilisation. Median SIA-scores during mobilisation were: Group PCM + IBU: −48% (IQR: −112 to 31), Group PCM: 40% (IQR: −31 to 97), Group IBU: −5% (IQR: −57 to 67), and Group HS-PCM + IBU: 6% (IQR: −70 to 74) (overall difference: p=0.0001). Use of analgesics before surgery was the only covariate associated with severe pain (non-opioid: OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.29–0.82, weak opioid 0.56, 95% CI: 0.28–1.16, reference no analgesics before surgery, p=0.02).ConclusionsOnly one third of participants using paracetamol and ibuprofen experienced mild pain after total hip arthroplasty and even fewer experienced mild pain using each drug alone as basic non-opioid analgesic treatment. We were not able, in any clinically relevant way, to predict severe postoperative pain. A more extensive postoperative pain regimen than paracetamol, ibuprofen and opioids may be needed for a large proportion of patients having total hip arthroplasty. SIA-scores integrate pain scores and opioid use for the individual patient and may add valuable information in acute pain research.


2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (S1) ◽  
pp. i42-i48
Author(s):  
Barbara A Gabella ◽  
Jeanne E Hathaway ◽  
Beth Hume ◽  
Jewell Johnson ◽  
Julia F Costich ◽  
...  

BackgroundIn 2016, the CDC in the USA proposed codes from the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) for identifying traumatic brain injury (TBI). This study estimated positive predictive value (PPV) of TBI for some of these codes.MethodsFour study sites used emergency department or trauma records from 2015 to 2018 to identify two random samples within each site selected by ICD-10-CM TBI codes for (1) intracranial injury (S06) or (2) skull fracture only (S02.0, S02.1-, S02.8-, S02.91) with no other TBI codes. Using common protocols, reviewers abstracted TBI signs and symptoms and head imaging results that were then used to assign certainty of TBI (none, low, medium, high) to each sampled record. PPVs were estimated as a percentage of records with medium-certainty or high-certainty for TBI and reported with 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsPPVs for intracranial injury codes ranged from 82% to 92% across the four samples. PPVs for skull fracture codes were 57% and 61% in the two university/trauma hospitals in each of two states with clinical reviewers, and 82% and 85% in the two states with professional coders reviewing statewide or nearly statewide samples. Margins of error for the 95% CI for all PPVs were under 5%.DiscussionICD-10-CM codes for traumatic intracranial injury demonstrated high PPVs for capturing true TBI in different healthcare settings. The algorithm for TBI certainty may need refinement, because it yielded moderate-to-high PPVs for records with skull fracture codes that lacked intracranial injury codes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document