D. Robinson

Comparison of quantitative EEG to current clinical decision rules for head CT use in acute mild traumatic brain injury in the ED

STUDY OBJECTIVE We compared the performance of a handheld quantitative electroencephalogram (QEEG) acquisition device to New Orleans Criteria (NOC), Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR), and National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study II (NEXUS II) Rule in predicting intracranial lesions on head computed tomography (CT) in acute mild traumatic brain injury in the emergency department (ED). METHODS Patients between 18 and 80 years of age who presented to the ED with acute blunt head trauma were enrolled in this prospective observational study at 2 urban academic EDs in Detroit, MI. Data were collected for 10 minutes from frontal leads to determine a QEEG discriminant score that could maximally classify intracranial lesions on head CT. RESULTS One hundred fifty-two patients were enrolled from July 2012 to February 2013. A total 17.1% had acute traumatic intracranial lesions on head CT. Quantitative electroencephalogram discriminant score of greater than or equal to 31 was found to be a good cutoff (area under receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.93) to classify patients with positive head CT. The sensitivity of QEEG discriminant score was 92.3 (95% CI, 73.4-98.6), whereas the specificity was 57.1 (95% CI, 48.0-65.8). The sensitivity and specificity of the decision rules were as follows: NOC 96.1 (95% CI, 78.4-99.7) and 15.8 (95% CI, 10.1-23.6); CCHR 46.1 (95% CI, 27.1-66.2) and 86.5 (95% CI, 78.9-91.7); NEXUS II 96.1 (95% CI, 78.4-99.7) and 31.7 (95% CI, 23.9-40.7). CONCLUSION At a sensitivity of greater than 90%, QEEG discriminant score had better specificity than NOC and NEXUS II. Only CCHR had better specificity than QEEG discriminant score but at the cost of low (<50%) sensitivity.

Effectiveness of an urban emergency department call-back system in the successful linkage to treatment of sexually transmitted infections.

Objectives There is a high incidence of asymptomatic sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in emergency department (ED) patients. There is no historical indication, physical examination finding, or rapidly available laboratory testing specific for detecting STIs in women. This study was conducted to describe the performance of an ED call-back system for STI screening and linkage to care for treatment. Success was defined as the ability to contact STI-positive women who were undertreated and confirm their return for definitive treatment. Methods This retrospective, observational study of women 16 years and older evaluated those undertreated for STIs in the ED during the 13-month study period. A structured chart review was performed to determine the proportion of patients returning to an affiliated hospital ED or clinic for treatment after contact by telephone or letter. Results Of 361 patients identified as undertreated, 29.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.7–34.1) did not return for definitive treatment. The method of contact was associated with patient return for treatment. Of the 276 patients contacted by telephone, 19.6% did not return for treatment (95% CI 14.9–24.3); of the 83 patients contacted by letter, 60.2% did not return for treatment (95% CI 49.7–70.8; P < 0.0001). Conclusions A large proportion of patients undertreated for an STI did not return despite a notification of need for further treatment. This study had a high rate of successful telephone contact (76.5%), but contact did not substantially increase the overall proportion of patients who were linked to care and returned to the ED for treatment.