Matthew Berkman

Anion Gap as a Screening Tool for Elevated Lactate in Patients with an Increased Risk of Developing Sepsis in the Emergency Department

OBJECTIVES Serum lactate levels are a useful tool in monitoring critically ill patients, especially those who are septic. However, lactate levels are often not routinely drawn or rapidly available in some institutions. The objective of this study was to determine if a readily available anion gap (AG) could be used as a surrogate marker for abnormal lactate level in Emergency Department (ED) patients at risk for sepsis. METHODS Prospective, observational cohort study of consecutive ED patients seen at an urban university tertiary care referral center with 46,000 annual ED visits. ED patients aged 18 years or older presenting with clinically suspected infection were eligible for enrollment if a serum chemistry and lactate levels were drawn during the ED visit. During the 9-month study period, 1419 patients were enrolled. The initial basic chemistry panels, calculated AG, and lactate levels drawn in the ED were collected. We defined, a priori, an AG > 12 and a lactate > 4 mmol/L to be abnormal. Analysis was performed with Students t-test, operating characteristics with 95% confidence intervals, and logistic regression. RESULTS The mean AG was 11.8 (SD 3.6) and the mean lactate was 2.1 (SD 1.3). For an AG > 12, the mean lactate was 2.9 (SD 1.7), compared with 1.8 (SD 0.8) for an AG < 12. The sensitivity of an elevated AG (> 12) in predicting elevated lactate levels (> 4 mmol/L) was 80% (72-87%) and the specificity was 69% (66-71%). Patients with a gap > 12 had a 7.3-fold (4.6-11.4) increased risk of having a lactate > 4 mmol/L. The area under the curve was 0.84. CONCLUSION This study suggests that an elevated AG obtained in the ED is a moderately sensitive and specific means to detect elevated lactate levels in ED patients at risk for sepsis. This information may be somewhat helpful to Emergency Physicians to risk-stratify their patients to provide more aggressive early resuscitation.

Do topical antibiotics help prevent infection in minor traumatic uncomplicated soft tissue wounds

b h i e o e a i s s 3 [Ann Emerg Med. 2013;61:86-88.] Editor’s Note: Emergency physicians must often make decisions about patient management without clear-cut data of sufficient quality to support clinical guidelines or evidence-based reviews. Topics in the Best Available Evidence section must be relevant to emergency physicians, are formally peer reviewed, and must have a sufficient literature base to draw a reasonable conclusion but not such a large literature base that a traditional ”evidence-based” review, meta-analysis, or systematic review can be performed.

Cost of an acting intern: clinical productivity in the academic emergency department.

BACKGROUND A few studies suggest that an increasing clinical workload does not adversely affect quality of teaching in the Emergency Department (ED); however, the impact of clinical teaching on productivity is unknown. OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this study was to determine whether there was a difference in relative value units (RVUs) billed by faculty members when an acting internship (AI) student is on shift. Secondary objectives include comparing RVUs billed by individual faculty members and in different locations. METHODS A matched case-control study design was employed, comparing the RVUs generated during shifts with an Emergency Medicine (EM) AI (cases) to shifts without an AI (controls). Case shifts were matched with control shifts for individual faculty member, time (day, swing, night), location, and, whenever possible, day of the week. Outcome measures were gross, procedural, and critical care RVUs. RESULTS There were 140 shifts worked by AI students during the study period; 18 were unmatchable, and 21 were night shifts that crossed two dates of service and were not included. There were 101 well-matched shift pairs retained for analysis. Gross, procedural, and critical care RVUs billed did not differ significantly in case vs. control shifts (53.60 vs. 53.47, p=0.95; 4.30 vs. 4.27, p=0.96; 3.36 vs. 3.41, respectively, p=0.94). This effect was consistent across sites and for all faculty members. CONCLUSIONS An AI student had no adverse effect on overall, procedural, or critical care clinical billing in the academic ED. When matched with experienced educators, career-bound fourth-year students do not detract from clinical productivity.