Anna Holdgate

We determined whether the addition of hyoscine butylbromide (Buscopan) reduces the amount of opioid analgesia required and the need for ongoing opioid analgesia in acute renal colic. Patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute renal colic were prospectively randomized to receive Buscopan or placebo in addition to morphine and intravenous fluids, with or without indomethacin. Observations and pain scores were recorded 15 every minutes during the first hour then hourly thereafter. Morphine was administered in 2.5 mg increments until pain relief was achieved. Recordings were ceased at 4 hours or on discharge from the emergency department, whichever occurred first. The diagnosis of renal colic was confirmed by computerized tomography. The dose of morphine (mg/kg) and the proportion of patients who required further morphine were compared between the 2 groups. Of the 192 patients randomized, data were available for 178 on an intent to treat basis. A total of 85 patients received Buscopan while 93 received placebo in addition to standard therapy. Patients in the Buscopan group required a median of 0.12 mg/kg of morphine while those in the placebo group received a median of 0.11 mg/kg, and this difference was not significant (p =0.4). There was also no significant difference in the proportion of patients who required additional morphine, 33% in the Buscopan group and 38% in the placebo group (p =0.5). Subgroup analysis of the 138 patients with a confirmed stone also showed no difference between the groups. There is no evidence that Buscopan reduces opioid requirements or the need for ongoing opioid analgesia in acute renal colic.

Aim:  To examine the impact of a ‘next day’ outpatient clinic, the Early Pregnancy Problem Service, on patients presenting to the Emergency Department with pain or bleeding in the first trimester of pregnancy. This clinic was established in June 1996.Methods:  This was a retrospective study involving patients presenting to the Emergency Department with pain or bleeding in early pregnancy. Data was collected from the Emergency Department Information System and the medical records and then compared over the same 2‐month periods in different years. These were in, 1996 (preclinic), 1997, 2000 and 2003. The primary outcome was length of stay in the Emergency Department for women with first trimester pain or bleeding that did not require hospital admission. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of such patients presenting and re‐presenting to the Emergency Department.Results:  Following establishment of the clinic there was a significant reduction in the median length of stay in the Emergency Department for patients who were discharged (136 mins in 1996 vs 107 mins in 2003; P < 0.001). There were non‐significant reductions in the proportion of patients presenting to the Emergency Department (1.5% in 1996 vs 1.1% in 2003; P = 0.09) and the number re‐presenting (16% in 1996 vs 7% in 2003; P = 0.15).Conclusion:  Following the introduction of the Early Pregnancy Problem Service, women presenting with first trimester pain or bleeding who did not require emergency hospital admission spent significantly less time in the Emergency Department.

To review the incidence, mechanisms of injury, diagnosis and treatment of injuries to the major branches of the thoracic aorta within the thoracic cavity following blunt trauma. Medline, Embase and Cochrane were searched using appropriate key word and MeSH headings. Full text articles were retrieved where there was any information relating to the mechanism of injury, incidence of injury, diagnosis, treatment or outcome in patients with injuries to the brachiocephalic, subclavian or carotid arteries within the thoracic cavity following blunt chest trauma. The reported incidence of these injuries varied widely, most injuries were related to rapid deceleration injuries or falls. Diagnosis depends on a high level of clinic suspicion and appropriate investigations include helical CT scanning and arteriography. Treatment options have expanded in recent years with the use of endovascular stents; however, the optimal treatment remains uncertain. Aortic branch injuries must be actively excluded in patients with suspicious mechanisms of injury. Guidelines determining appropriate investigative pathways and methods of treatment should be developed at all trauma centres.

Objective To examine the relative benefits and disadvantages of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids for the management of acute renal colic. Data sources Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Medline, Embase, and reference lists of retrieved articles. Review methods Randomised controlled trials comparing any opioid with any NSAID in acute renal colic if they reported any of the following outcomes: patient rated pain, time to pain relief, need for rescue analgesia, rate of recurrence of pain, and adverse events. Results 20 trials totalling 1613 participants were identified. Both NSAIDs and opioids led to clinically important reductions in patient reported pain scores. Pooled analysis of six trials showed a greater reduction in pain scores for patients treated with NSAIDs than with opioids. Patients treated with NSAIDs were significantly less likely to require rescue analgesia (relative risk 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.93). Most trials showed a higher incidence of adverse events in patients treated with opioids. Compared with patients treated with opioids, those treated with NSAIDs had significantly less vomiting (0.35, 0.23 to 0.53). Pethidine was associated with a higher rate of vomiting. Conclusions Patients receiving NSAIDs achieve greater reductions in pain scores and are less likely to require further analgesia in the short term than those receiving opioids. Opioids, particularly pethidine, are associated with a higher rate of vomiting.

Renal colic is a common cause of acute severe pain. Both opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are recommended for treatment, but the relative efficacy of these drugs is uncertain. To examine the benefits and disadvantages of NSAIDs and opioids for the management of pain in acute renal colic. We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register (May 2003), the Cochrane Central Register of Randomised Controlled Trials (CENTRAL - The Cochrane Library issue 2, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 - 31 January 2003), EMBASE (1980 - 31 January 2003) and handsearched reference lists of retrieved articles. Most recent search date: January 2005 Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any opioid with any NSAID, regardless of dose or route of administration were included. Data was extracted and quality assessed independently by two reviewers, with differences resolved by discussion. Dichotomous outcomes are reported as relative risk (RR) and measurements on continuous scales are reported as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analysis by study quality, drug type and drug route have been performed where possible to explore reasons for heterogeneity. Twenty trials from nine countries with a total of 1613 participants were identified. Both NSAIDs and opioids lead to clinically significant falls in patient-reported pain scores. Due to unexplained heterogeneity these results could not be pooled although 10/13 studies reported lower pain scores in patients receiving NSAIDs. Patients treated with NSAIDs were significantly less likely to require rescue medication (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93, P = 0.007), though most of these trials used pethidine. The majority of trials showed a higher incidence of adverse events in patients treated with opioids, but there was significant heterogeneity between studies so the results could not be pooled. There was significantly less vomiting in patients treated with NSAIDs (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.53, P < 0.00001). In particular, patients receiving pethidine had a much higher rate of vomiting compared with patients receiving NSAIDs. Gastrointestinal bleeding and renal impairment were not reported. Both NSAIDs and opioids can provide effective analgesia in acute renal colic. Opioids are associated with a higher incidence of adverse events, particularly vomiting. Given the high rate of vomiting associated with the use of opioids, particularly pethidine, and the greater likelihood of requiring further analgesia, we recommend that if an opioid is to be used it should not be pethidine.

Objectives: To test the agreement between the visual analogue scale (VAS) and a verbal numeric rating scale (VNRS) in measuring acute pain, and measure the minimum clinically significant change in VNRS.Methods: Patients scored their pain by the VAS and the VNRS, then re‐scored their pain every 30 min for up to 2 h. Patients also recorded whether their pain had improved or worsened. Agreement between scores was evaluated, and where patients scored their pain as ‘a bit worse’ or ‘a bit better’ the mean change in VNRS was calculated.Results: A total of 309 paired observations were obtained from 79 patients. The VAS and VNRS were highly correlated (r = 0.95, 95% CI 0.94–0.96). The VNRS was significantly higher than the VAS for the paired observations, with 95% of the differences between VAS and VNRS lying between −2.3 and 1.3 cm. The minimum clinically significant difference in VNRS was 1.4 cm (95% CI 1.2–1.6).Conclusions: The VNRS performs as well as the VAS in assessing changes in pain. However, although the VAS and VNRS are well correlated, patients systematically score their pain higher on the VNRS, with an unacceptably wide distribution of the differences.

To assess the accuracy of emergency physicians and trainees in the interpretation of noncontrast helical computed tomography (NCHCT) for suspected renal colic by examining the interrater reliability between emergency department (ED) clinicians and radiologists. Information was collected prospectively on all ED patients undergoing NCHCT for suspected renal colic over a 12-month period. Emergency physicians and trainees were asked to report the absence or presence of specific renal parameters (renal tract abnormality, calculus, hydroureter, hydronephrosis, perinephric stranding, and renal parenchymal edema) and nonrenal parameters (nonrenal abnormality, free gas, free fluid, and aortic diameter >3 cm). These reports were compared with the formal radiology report, which was used as the reference standard. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and kappa coefficient were calculated for each of the parameters. Over the 12-month period, 212 patients underwent NCHCT for suspected renal colic, of whom 127 had both ED and formal radiological reporting. There was an excellent degree of interrater reliability between the ED clinicians and the radiologists (kappa > 0.75) for the presence of renal tract abnormality and renal tract calculus. There was intermediate interrater reliability (kappa 0.4-0.75) for nonrenal tract abnormalities, hydroureter, hydronephrosis, and perinephric stranding. Four patients had potentially significant nonrenal abnormalities missed by ED clinicians. Emergency clinicians are able to identify renal calculi with a high degree of accuracy but may miss important nonrenal abnormalities. Therefore, all patients without evidence of renal tract calculus on NCHCT must have early and appropriate follow-up.