Timothy F. Platts-Mills

Background: Snakebite envenoming causes an estimated 81,000–138,000 deaths and more than 400,000 cases of permanent disability each year, disproportionately affecting low-resource regions. Antivenom is the only approved treatment but requires intravenous administration. We evaluated intravenous followed by oral varespladib as adjunctive therapy to antivenom in hospitalized patients with snakebite envenoming. Methods and findings: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial in India (CTRI/2023/10/058782) and the USA (NCT05717062), patients with snakebite envenoming were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive varespladib or placebo, both in addition to standard of care including antivenom. For elapid envenoming, the primary endpoint was time to recovery of 5-second head-lift. For viper envenoming, the primary endpoint was area under the curve (AUC) from baseline to Day 14 of a 3-item Snakebite Severity Score (SSS). Between June 3 ^rd , 2023, and October 19 ^th , 2024, 140 patients were randomized and 139 were analyzed (73 varespladib; 66 placebo). Study drug was initiated a mean of 7.3 hours after the bite and 3.3 hours after antivenom. Among elapid-bite patients, mean time to head-lift recovery was 27.6 hours with varespladib vs. 36.2 hours with placebo (p = 0.6). Among viper-bite patients, SSS AUC to Day 14 was 660 with varespladib vs. 629 with placebo (p = 0.7). No serious adverse event occurred with varespladib. Conclusions: In this trial in which varespladib was initiated on average 7 hours after snakebite and several hours after antivenom, late adjunctive varespladib did not meet the primary endpoint. Interpretation of these results is limited by heterogeneity in the snake species responsible for envenoming and the associated differences in venom composition, clinical manifestations, and antivenom treatments.

Objective: About one million United States emergency department (ED) visits annually are due to acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) symptoms. Characterizing the presentation of ED symptoms among ADHF patients may improve clinical care; however, sex and age differences in ED chief complaints have not been thoroughly investigated. In this paper, we describe differences in chief complaints and comorbid conditions for ED patients with ADHF diagnoses, stratified by sex and age.Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of adults presenting to North Carolina EDs using the North Carolina Disease Event Tracking and Epidemiologic Collection Tool (NC DETECT), a statewide syndromic surveillance system, between 2010 and 2016, screening for patients with a diagnosis of ADHF. We evaluated frequencies of chief complaint categories for ED visits and comorbid conditions, stratified by sex and age, and computed standardized differences.Results: The most common chief complaints were dyspnea (19.1%), chest pain (13.5%), and other respiratory complaints (13.4%). In the 18–44 years age group, women were more likely than men to report nausea/vomiting (6.7% vs. 4.1%) and headache (4.2% vs. 2.0%). In those 45–64 and ≥65 years, complaints were similar by sex. When stratified by age group alone, the 18–44 and 45–64 years age groups had more complaints of chest pain, whereas balance issues, weakness, and confusion were more common in the ≥65 years age group.Conclusion: Differences in atypical ADHF symptoms were seen in in ED patients based on sex and age. Understanding the variation in ADHF symptoms among ED patients can facilitate the identification of ED patients with ADHF and improve management of ADHF-related symptoms.

Background: This study describes long length of stay during emergency department (ED) visits and hospital admissions, barriers to discharge, and discharge solutions for geriatric patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective medical record review of a random sample of 150 ED patients and 150 inpatients with long length of stay (LOS) encounters. Cohorts were characterized by demographics, social determinants of health (e.g., health insurance, housing), medical comorbidities at admission, discharge care coordination, and final disposition. Results: In the ED, the primary barrier to discharge was inadequate inpatient bed availability (63%). In the inpatient setting, barriers to discharge were predominantly due to a demonstrated medical requirement for continued hospitalization (55%), followed by difficulty with coordinating discharge to a skilled nursing facility or rehabilitation center (22%). Discussion: Among long LOS ED patients, discharge delays were often the result of unavailable inpatient beds and services. Reducing the LOS for ED patients may require further investigation as to which hospital services are most frequently utilized by geriatric patients and structuring inpatient bed allocation to prevent extended patient boarding in the ED. Reducing long inpatient LOS may require early identification of high-risk patients and strengthening of relationships with community-based services.

Background: Chronic musculoskeletal pain (MSP) affects more than 40% of adults aged 50 years and older and is the leading cause of disability in the USA. Older adults with chronic MSP are at risk for analgesic-related side effects, long-term opioid use, and functional decline. Recognizing the burden of chronic MSP, reducing the transition from acute to chronic pain is a public health priority. In this paper, we report the protocol for the Brief EducaTional Tool to Enhance Recovery (BETTER) trial. This trial compares two versions of an intervention to usual care for preventing the transition from acute to chronic MSP among older adults in the emergency department (ED).Methods: Three hundred sixty patients from the ED will be randomized to one of three arms: full intervention(an interactive educational video about pain medications and recovery-promoting behaviors, a telecare phone call from a nurse 48 to 72 h after discharge from the ED, and an electronic communication containing clinical information to the patient’s primary care provider);video-only intervention(the interactive educational video but no telecare or primary care provider communication); orusual care. Data collection will occur at baseline and at 1 week and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after study enrollment. The primary outcome is a composite measure of pain severity and interference. Secondary outcomes include physical function, overall health, opioid use, healthcare utilization, and an assessment of the economic value of the intervention.Discussion: This trial is the first patient-facing ED-based intervention aimed at helping older adults to better manage their MSP and reduce their risk of developing chronic pain. If effective, future studies will examine the effectiveness of implementation strategies.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.govNCT04118595. Registered on 8 October 2019.

Background: Malnutrition is a complex and costly condition that is common among older adults in the United States (US), with up to half at risk for malnutrition. Malnutrition is associated with several non-medical (i.e., social) factors, including food insecurity. Being at risk for both malnutrition and food insecurity likely identifies a subset of older adults with complex care needs and a high burden of social vulnerability (e.g., difficulty accessing or preparing meals, lack of transportation, and social isolation). US emergency departments (EDs) are a unique and important setting for identifying older patients who may benefit from the provision of health-related social services. This paper describes the protocol development for the Building Resilience and InDependence for Geriatric Patients in the Emergency Department (BRIDGE) study. BRIDGE was designed to assess the feasibility of an ED-based screening process to systematically identify older patients who are at risk for malnutrition and food insecurity and link them to health-related social services to address unmet social needs and support their health and well-being. Methods: Phase 1 efforts will be formative and focused on identifying screening tools, establishing screening and referral workflows, and conducting initial feasibility testing with a cohort of older patients and ED staff. In phase 2, which includes process and outcome evaluation, the screening and referral process will be piloted in the ED. A partnership will be formed with an Area Agency on Aging (AAA) identified in phase 1, to assess resource needs and identify community-based social services for older ED patients who screen positive for both malnutrition risk and food insecurity. Data on screening, referrals, linkage to community-based social services, and patient-reported quality of life and healthcare utilization will be used to assess feasibility. Discussion: The tools and workflows developed and tested in this study, as well as learnings related to forming and maintaining cross-sector partnerships, may serve as a model for future efforts to utilize EDs as a setting for bridging the gap between healthcare and social services for vulnerable patients.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize assessments of a patient's ability to report elder abuse within the context of an emergency department (ED)–based screen for elder abuse. DESIGN: Cross‐sectional study in which participants were screened for elder abuse and neglect. SETTING: Academic ED in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Patients, aged 65 years and older, presenting to an ED for acute care were assessed by trained research assistants or nurses. MEASUREMENTS: All patients completed the four‐item Abbreviated Mental Test 4 (AMT4), then completed a safety interview (using the Emergency Department Senior Abuse Identification tool) designed to detect multiple domains of elder abuse and received a physical examination. Based on the cognitive assessment and safety interview, assessors ranked their confidence in the patient's ability to report abuse as absolutely confident, confident, somewhat confident, or not confident. To assess interrater reliability, two assessors independently rated confidence for a subset of patients. RESULTS: Assessors suspected elder abuse in 18 of 276 patients (6.5%). Assessors were absolutely confident in the patient's ability to report abuse for 95.7% of patients, confident for 2.5%, somewhat confident for 1.5%, and not confident for 0.3%. Among patients with an AMT4 of 4 (n = 249), assessors were confident or absolutely confident in 100% of patients. Among patients with an AMT4 of less than 4 (n = 27), they were confident or absolutely confident in the patient's ability to report abuse for 81% of patients, including 11 of 12 patients with mild cognitive impairment and 7 of 11 patients with severe cognitive impairment. For patients receiving paired evaluations (n = 131), agreement between assessors regarding patient ability to report abuse was 97% (κ = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: In this sample of older adults receiving care in an ED, research assistants and nurses felt that the vast majority were able to report elder abuse, including many patients with cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:170–175, 2019

Background: Deploying accurate computable phenotypes in pragmatic trials requires a trade-off between precise and clinically sensical variable selection. In particular, evaluating the medical encounter to assess a pattern leading to clinically significant impairment or distress indicative of disease is a difficult modeling challenge for the emergency department. Objective: This study aimed to derive and validate an electronic health record–based computable phenotype to identify emergency department patients with opioid use disorder using physician chart review as a reference standard. Methods: A two-algorithm computable phenotype was developed and evaluated using structured clinical data across 13 emergency departments in two large health care systems. Algorithm 1 combined clinician and billing codes. Algorithm 2 used chief complaint structured data suggestive of opioid use disorder. To evaluate the algorithms in both internal and external validation phases, two emergency medicine physicians, with a third acting as adjudicator, reviewed a pragmatic sample of 231 charts: 125 internal validation (75 positive and 50 negative), 106 external validation (56 positive and 50 negative). Results: Cohen kappa, measuring agreement between reviewers, for the internal and external validation cohorts was 0.95 and 0.93, respectively. In the internal validation phase, Algorithm 1 had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.96 (95% CI 0.863-0.995) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.98 (95% CI 0.893-0.999), and Algorithm 2 had a PPV of 0.8 (95% CI 0.593-0.932) and an NPV of 1.0 (one-sided 97.5% CI 0.863-1). In the external validation phase, the phenotype had a PPV of 0.95 (95% CI 0.851-0.989) and an NPV of 0.92 (95% CI 0.807-0.978). Conclusions: This phenotype detected emergency department patients with opioid use disorder with high predictive values and reliability. Its algorithms were transportable across health care systems and have potential value for both clinical and research purposes.