Introduction: While negative consequences of incident delirium on functional and cognitive decline have been widely studied, very limited data is available regarding functional and cognitive outcomes in Emergency Department (ED) patients. The aim of this study was therefore to evaluate the impact of ED stay-associated delirium on older patient's functional and cognitive status at 60 days post-ED visit. Methods: This study is a planned sub-analysis of a large multicentre prospective cohort study (the INDEED study). This project took place between March and July of the years 2015 and 2016 within 5 participating EDs across the province of Quebec. Independent non-delirious patients aged □65, with an ED stay at least 8hrs were monitored until 24hrs post-ward admission. A 60-day follow-up phone assessment was also conducted. Participants were screened for delirium using the validated Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) and the severity of its symptoms was measured using the Delirium Index. Functional and cognitive status were assessed at baseline as well as at the 60-day follow-up using the validated OARS and TICS-m. Results: A total of 608 patients were recruited, 393 of which completed the 60-day follow-up. Sixty-nine patients obtained a positive CAM during ED-stay or within the first 24 hours following ward admission. At 60-days, those patients experienced a loss of 3.1 (S.D. 4.0) points on the OARS scale compared to non-delirious patients who lost 1.6 (S.D. 3.0) (p = 0.03). A significant difference in cognitive function was also noted at 60-days, as delirious patients’ TICS-m score decreased by 2.1 (S.D. 6.2) compared to non-delirious patients, who showed a minor improvement of 0.5 (S.D. 5.8) (p = 0.01). Conclusion: People who developed ED stay-associated delirium have lower baseline functional and cognitive status than non-delirious patients and they will experience a more significant decline at 60 days post-ED visit.

Introduction: Although oral rehydration therapy is recommended for children with acute gastroenteritis (AGE) with none to some dehydration, intravenous (IV) rehydration is still commonly administered to these children in high-income countries. IV rehydration is associated with pain, anxiety, and emergency department (ED) revisits in children with AGE. A better understanding of the factors associated with IV rehydration is needed to inform knowledge translation strategies. Methods: This was a planned secondary analysis of the Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) and Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) randomized, controlled trials of oral probiotics in children with AGE-associated diarrhea. Eligible children were aged 3-48 months and reported > 3 watery stools in a 24-hour period. The primary outcome was administration of IV rehydration at the index ED visit. We used mixed-effects logistic regression model to explore univariable and multivariable relationships between IV rehydration and a priori risk factors. Results: From the parent study sample of 1848 participants, 1846 had data available for analysis: mean (SD) age of 19.1 ± 11.4 months, 45.4% females. 70.2% (1292/1840) vomited within 24 hours of the index ED visit and 34.1% (629/1846) received ondansetron in the ED. 13.0% (240/1846) were administered IV rehydration at the index ED visit, and 3.6% (67/1842) were hospitalized. Multivariable predictors of IV rehydration were Clinical Dehydration Scale (CDS) score [compared to none: mild to moderate (OR: 8.1, CI: 5.5-11.8); severe (OR: 45.9, 95% CI: 20.1-104.7), P < 0.001], ondansetron in the ED (OR: 1.8, CI: 1.2-2.6, P = 0.003), previous healthcare visit for the same illness [compared to no prior visit: prior visit with no IV (OR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.3-2.9); prior visit with IV (OR: 10.5, 95% CI: 3.2-34.8), P < 0.001], and country [compared to Canada: US (OR: 4.1, CI: 2.3-7.4, P < 0.001]. Significantly more participants returned to the ED with symptoms of AGE within 3 days if IV fluids were administered at the index visit [30/224 (13.4%) versus 88/1453 (6.1%), P < 0.001]. Conclusion: Higher CDS scores, antiemetic use, previous healthcare visits and country were independent predictors of IV rehydration which was also associated with increased ED revisits. Knowledge translation focused on optimizing the use of antiemetics (i.e. for those with dehydration) and reducing the geographic variation in IV rehydration use may improve the ED experience and reduce ED-revisits.

Introduction: Delirium is a frequent pathology in the elderly presenting to the emergency department (ED) and is seldom recognised. This condition is associated with many medical complications and has been shown to increase the hospital length-of-stay. The objective of this study was to identify the predictor factors of developing delirium in this high-risk population. Methods: Design: This study was part of the multicenter prospective cohort INDEED study. Participants: Patients aged 65 and older, initially free of delirium and with an ED stay of 8h or longer, were followed up to 24h after ward admission. Measures: Clinical and demographic variables were collected by interview and chart review. A research professional assessed their delirium status twice daily using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM). Analyses: A classification tree was used to select predictors and cut-points that minimized classification error of patients with incident delirium. After literature review, nineteen predictors were considered for inclusion in the model (eight non-modifiable and eleven modifiable factors). Results: Among the 605 patients included in this study, incident delirium was detected by the CAM in 69 patients (11.4%). In total, fourteen variables were included in a preliminary model, of which six were intrinsic to the patient and eight were modifiable in the ED. Variables with the greatest impact in the prediction of delirium includes age, cognitive status, ED length of stay, autonomy in daily activities, fragility and mobility during their hospital stay. The diagnostic performance of the model applied to the study sample gave a sensitivity of 78.3% (95% CI: 66.7 to 87.3), a specificity of 100.0% (95% CI: 99.3 to 100.0), a PPV of 100.0% (95% CI: 93.4 to 100.0) and a NPV of 97.3% (95% CI: 95.6 to 98.5). Conclusion: The delirium risk model developed in this study shows promising results with elevated sensitivity and specificity values. Considering the limited ability to predict and detect delirium among physicians, the potential increase in sensitivity provided by this tool could be beneficial to patients. This model will ultimately serve to identify high-risk patients with the goal of developing strategies to alter modifiable risk factors and subsequently decrease the incidence of delirium in this population.

Introduction: Prevalence and incidence of delirium in older patients admitted to acute and long-term care facilities ranges between 9.6% and 89% but little is known in the context of emergency department (ED) incident delirium. Literature regarding the incidence of delirium in the ED and its potential impacts on hospital length of stay (LOS), functional status and unplanned ED readmissions is scant, its consequences have yet to be clearly identified in order to orient modern acute medical care. Methods: This study is part of the multicenter prospective cohort INDEED study. Three Canadian EDs completed the two years prospective study (March-July 2015 and Feb-May 2016). Patients aged 65 years old, initially free of delirium with an ED stay 8hours were followed up to 24h after ward admission. Patients were assessed 2x/day during their entire ED stay and up to 24 hours on hospital ward by research assistants (RA). The primary outcome of this study was incident delirium in the ED or within 24 h of ward admission. Functional and cognitive status were assessed using validated Older Americans’ Resources and Services and the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status- modified tools. The Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) was used to detect incident delirium. ED and hospital administrative data were collected. Inter-observer agreement was realized among RA. Results: Incident delirium was not different between sites, nor between phases, nor between times from one site to another. All phases confounded, there is between 7 to 11% of ED related incident delirious episodes. Differences were seen in ED LOS between sites in non-delirious patients, but also between some sites for delirious participants (p<0.05). Only one site had a difference in ED LOS between their delirious and non-delirious patients, respectively of 52.1 and 40.1 hours (p<0.05). There is also a difference between sites in the time between arrival to the ED and the incidence of delirium (p=0.003). Kappa statistics were computed to measure inter-rater reliability of the CAM. Based on an alpha of 5%, 138 patients would allow 80% power for an estimated overall incidence proportion of 15 % with 5% precision.. Other predictive delirium variables, such as cognitive status, environmental factors, functional status, comorbidities, physiological status, and ED and hospital length of stay were similar between sites and phases. Conclusion: The fact that incidence of delirium was the same for all sites, despite the differences of ED LOS and different time periods suggest that many other modifiable and non-modifiable factors along LOS influenced the incidence of ED induced delirium. Emergency physician should concentrate on improving senior-friendly environment for the ED.

Introduction: It is documented that physicians and nurses fail to detect delirium in more than half of cases from various clinical settings, which could have serious consequences for seniors and for our health care system. The present study aimed to describe the rate of documented incident delirium in 5 Canadian Emergency departments (ED) by health professionals (HP). Methods: This study is part of the multicenter prospective cohort INDEED study. Patients aged 65 years old, initially free of delirium with an ED stay 8hours were followed up to 24h after ward admission. Delirium status was assessed twice daily using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) by trained research assistants (RA). HP reviewed patient charts to assess detection of delirium. HP had no specific routine detection of delirious ED patients. Inter-observer agreement was realized among RA. Comparison of detection between RA and HP was realized with univariate analyses. Results: Among the 652 included patients, 66 developed a delirium as evaluated with the CAM by the RA. Among those 66 patients, only 10 deliriums (15.2%) were documented in the patients medical file by the HP. 54 (81.8%) patients with a CAM positive for delirium by the RA were not recorded by the HP, 2 had incomplete charts. The delirium index was significantly higher in the HP reported group compared to the HP not reported, respectively 7.1 and 4.5 (p<0.05). Other predictive delirium variables, such as cognitive status, functional status, comorbidities, physiological status, and ED and hospital length of stay were similar between groups. Conclusion: It seems that health professionals missed 81.8% of the potential delirious ED patients in comparison to routine structured screening of delirium. HP could identify patients with a greater severity of symptoms. Our study points out the need to better identify elders at risk to develop delirium and the need for fast and reliable tools to improve the screening of this disorder.

Introduction: Inadequate pain management in children is ubiquitous in the emergency department (ED). As the current national opioid crisis has highlighted, physicians are caught between balancing pain management and the risk of long term opioid dependence. This study aimed to describe pediatric emergency physicians (PEPs) willingness to prescribe opioids to children in the ED and at discharge. Methods: A unique survey tool was created using published methodology guidelines. Information regarding practices, knowledge, attitudes, perceived barriers, facilitators and demographics were collected. The survey was distributed to all physician members of Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC), using a modified Dillmans Tailored Design method, from October to December 2017. Results: The response rate was 49.7% (124/242); 53% (57/107) were female, mean age was 43.6 years (+/− 8.7), and 58% (72/124) had pediatric emergency subspecialty training. The most common first line ED pain medication was ibuprofen for mild, moderate and severe musculoskeletal injury (MSK-I)-related pain (94.4% (117/124), 89.5% (111/124), and 62.9% (78/124), respectively). For moderate and severe MSK-I, intranasal fentanyl was the most common opioid for first (35.5% (44/124) and 61.3% (76/124), respectively) and second line pain management (41.1% (51/124) and 20.2% (25/124), respectively). 74.8% (89/119) of PEPs reported that an opioid protocol would be helpful, specifically for morphine, fentanyl, and hydromorphone. Using a 0-100 scale, physicians minimally worried about physical dependence (13.3 +/−19.3), addiction (16.6 +/−19.8), and diversion of opioids (32.8+/−26.4) when prescribing short-term opioids to children. They reported that the current opioid crisis minimally influenced their willingness to prescribe opioids (30.0 +/−26.2). Physicians reported rarely (36%; 45/125) or never (28%; 35/125) completing a screening risk assessment prior to prescribing opioids. Conclusion: Ibuprofen remains the most common medication recommended for MSK-I pain in the ED and at discharge. Intranasal fentanyl was the top opioid for all pain intensities. PEPs are minimally concerned regarding dependence, addiction, and the current opioid crisis when prescribing short-term opioids to children. There is an urgent need for robust evidence regarding the dependence and addiction risk for children receiving short term opioids in order to create knowledge translation tools for ED physicians. Opioid specific protocols for both in the ED and at discharge would likely improve physician comfort in responsible and adequate pain management for children.

Introduction: Gastroenteritis accounts for 1.7 million emergency department visits by children annually in the United States. We conducted a double-blind trial to determine whether twice daily probiotic administration for 5 days, improves outcomes. Methods: 886 children aged 348 months with gastroenteritis were enrolled in six Canadian pediatric emergency departments. Participants were randomly assigned to twice daily Lactobacillus rhamnosus R0011 and Lactobacillus helveticus R0052, 4.0 x 109 CFU, in a 95:5 ratio or placebo. Primary outcome was development of moderate-severe disease within 14 days of randomization defined by a Modified Vesikari Scale score 9. Secondary outcomes included duration of diarrhea and vomiting, subsequent physician visits and adverse events. Results: Moderate-severe disease occurred in 108 (26.1%) participants administered probiotics and 102 (24.7%) participants allocated to placebo (OR 1.06; 95%CI: 0.77, 1.46; P=0.72). After adjustment for site, age, and frequency of vomiting and diarrhea, treatment assignment did not predict moderate-severe disease (OR, 1.11, 95%CI, 0.80 to 1.56; P=0.53). In the probiotic versus placebo groups, there were no differences in the median duration of diarrhea [52.5 (18.3, 95.8) vs. 55.5 (20.2, 102.3) hours; P=0.31], vomiting [17.7 (0, 58.6) vs. 18.7 (0, 51.6) hours; P=0.18], physician visits (30.2% vs. 26.6%; OR 1.19; 95% CI0.87. 1.62; P=0.27), or adverse events (32.9% vs. 36.8%; OR 0.83; 95%CI 0.62. 1.11; P=0.21). Conclusion: In children presenting to an emergency department with gastroenteritis, twice daily administration of 4.0 x 109 CFU of a Lactobacillus rhamnosus/helveticus probiotic does not prevent development of moderate-severe disease or improvements in other outcomes measured.

Introduction: Children with moderate cellulitis are often treated with IV antibiotics in the hospital setting, as per recommendations. Previously in our hospital, a protocol using daily IV ceftriaxone with follow-up at the day treatment center (DTC) was used to avoid admission. In 2013, a new protocol was implanted and suggested the use of high dose (HD) oral cephalexin with follow-up at the DTC for those patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the HD cephalexin protocol to treat moderate cellulitis in children as outpatient. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted. Children were included if they presented to the ED between January 2014 and 2016 and were diagnosed with a moderate cellulitis sufficiently severe to request a follow up at DTC and who were treated according to the standard of care with the HD oral cephalexin (100 mg/kg/day) protocol. Descriptive statistics for clinical characteristics of patients upon presentation, as well as for treatment characteristics in the ED and DTC were analyzed. Treatment failure was defined as: need for admission at the time of DTC evaluation, change for IV treatment in DTC or return visit to the ED. Outcomes were compared to historic controls treated with IV ceftriaxone at the DTC, where admission was avoided in 80% of cases. Results: During the study period, 682 children with cellulitis were diagnosed in our ED. Of these, 117 patients were treated using the oral HD cephalexin outpatient protocol. Success rate was 89.5% (102/114); 3 patients had an alternative diagnosis at DTC. Treatment failure was reported in 12 cases; 10 patients (8.8%) required admission, one (0.9%) received IV antibiotics at DTC, and one (0.9%) had a return visit to the ED without admission or change to the treatment. This compares favorably with the previous study using IV ceftriaxone (success rate of 80%). No severe deep infections were reported or missed; 4 patients required drainage. The mean number of visits per patient required at the DTC was 1.6. Conclusion: Treatment of moderate cellulitis requiring a follow-up in a DTC, using an oral outpatient protocol with HD cephalexin is a secure and effective option. By reducing hospitalization rate and avoiding the need for painful IV insertion, HD cephalexin is a favourable option in the management of moderate cellulitis for pediatric patients, when no criteria of toxicity are present.

Introduction: Appropriate pain management relies on the use of valid, reliable and age-appropriate tools that are validated in the setting in which they are intended to be used. The aim of the study was to assess the psychometric properties of pain scales commonly used in children presenting to the pediatric emergency department (PED) with an acute musculoskeletal injury. Methods: Convergent validity was assessed by determining the Spearman’s correlations and the agreement using the Bland-Altman method between the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) and Color Analogue Scale (CAS). Responsiveness to change was determined by performing the Wilcoxon signed-rank test between the pre-post analgesia mean scores. Reliability of the scales was estimated using relative (Spearman’s correlation, Intraclass Correlation Coefficient) and absolute indices (Coefficient of Reliability). Results: A total of 495 participants was included in the analyses. Mean age was 11.9 ±2.7 years and participants were mainly boys (55.3%). Correlation between each pair of scales was 0.79 (VAS/FPS-R), 0.92 (VAS/CAS) and 0.81 (CAS/FPS-R). Limits of agreement (80%CI) were -2.71 to 1.27 (VAS/FPS-R), -1.13 to 1.15 (VAS/CAS) and -1.45 to 2.61 (CAS/FPS-R). Responsiveness to change was demonstrated by significant differences in mean pain scores, among the three scales, between pre- and post-medication administration (p<0.0001). ICC and CR estimates suggested acceptable reliability for the three scales at 0.79 and ±1.49 for VAS, 0.82 and ±1.35 for CAS, and 0.76 and ±1.84 for FPS-R. Conclusion: The scales demonstrated good psychometric properties with a large sample of children with acute pain in the PED. The VAS and CAS showed a stronger convergent validity, while FPS-R was not in agreement with the other scales. Clinically, VAS and CAS scales can be used interchangeably to assess pain intensity of children with acute pain.

Introduction: Oral sweet solutions have been accepted as effective pain reducing agents for neonates. However studies in the Emergency Department (ED) setting have conflicting results. The objective is to compare the efficacy of an oral sucrose solution versus placebo in reducing pain in children 1 to 3 months of age during nasopharyngeal aspiration (NPA) in the ED. Methods: A randomized, double-blinded, placebo controlled clinical trial was conducted in a pediatric university-affiliated hospital ED. Participants from 1 to 3 months of age requiring NPA were recruited and randomly allocated to receive 2 mls of an 88% sucrose solution (SUC) or 2 mls of a placebo solution (PLA) orally, 2 mins before NPA. The primary outcome was the mean difference in pain scores at 1 min post NPA as assessed by the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) Pain Scale. Secondary outcomes were the difference in pain scores using the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS), crying time, heart rate and adverse events. Results: 72 participants were recruited and completed the study, 37 (group SUC) and 35 (group PLA) respectively. Both groups had similar demographic and clinical characteristics and baseline FLACC and NIPS pain scores (all p=value >0.4). The mean difference in FLACC scores compared to baseline was 3.3 (2.5-4.1) (SUC) vs. 3.2 (2.3-4.1) (PLA) (p=.94) at 1 min and -1.2 (-1.7 to 0.7) (SUC) vs. -0.8 (-1.5 to -0.1) (PLA) (p=.66) at 3 mins after NPA. For the NIPS scores, it was 2.3 (1.6-3.0) (SUC) vs. 2.5 (1.8-3.2) (PLA) (p=.86) at 1 min and -1.2 (-1.6 to -0.8) (SUC) vs. -0.8 (-1.3 to 0.2) (PLA) (p=.59) 3 mins after NPA. There was no difference in the mean crying time, 114 (98-130) secs (SUC) vs. 109 (92-126) secs (PLA) (p=.81). No significant difference was found in participants’ heart rate at 1 min 174 (154-194) BPM (SUC) vs. 179 (160-198) BPM (PLA) (p=.32) and at 3 mins 165 (143-187) BPM (SUC) vs. 164 (142-186) BPM (PLA) (p=.86) after NPA. Three patients had vomiting during the procedure (2 PLA and 1 SUC), and one had an episode of chocking (PLA). Conclusion: In infants 1 to 3 months of age undergoing nasopharyngeal aspiration in the ED, administration of an oral sweet solution did not statistically decrease pain scores as measured by the FLACC and NIPS scales. Participants’ heart rate and crying time were not significantly decreased when sucrose was provided.

Introduction: Data regarding adverse events (AEs) (unintended harm to the patient from health care provided) among children seen in the emergency department (ED) are scarce despite the high risk setting and population. The objective of our study was to estimate the risk and type of AEs, and their preventability and severity, among children treated in pediatric EDs. Methods: Our prospective cohort study enrolled children <18 years of age presenting for care during 21 randomized 8 hr-shifts at 9 pediatric EDs from Nov 2014 to October 2015. Exclusion criteria included unavailability for follow-up or insurmountable language barrier. RAs collected demographic, medical history, ED course, and systems level data. At day 7, 14, and 21 a RA administered a structured telephone interview to all patients to identify flagged outcomes (e.g. repeat ED visits, worsening/new symptoms, etc). A validated trigger tool was used to screen admitted patients’ health records. For any patients with a flagged outcome or trigger, 3 ED physicians independently determined if an AE occurred. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients with an AE related to ED care within 3 weeks of their ED visit. Results: We enrolled 6377 (72.0%) of 8855 eligible patients; 545 (8.5%) were lost to follow-up. Median age was 4.4 years (range 3 months to 17.9 yrs). Eight hundred and seventy seven (13.8%) were triaged as CTAS 1 or 2, 2638 (41.4%) as CTAS 3, and 2839 (44.7%) as CTAS 4 or 5. Top entrance complaints were fever (11.2%) and cough (8.8%). Flagged outcomes/triggers were identified for 2047 (32.1%) patients. While 252 (4.0%) patients suffered at least one AE within 3 weeks of ED visit, 163 (2.6%) suffered an AE related to ED care. In total, patients suffered 286 AEs, most (67.9%) being preventable. The most common AE types were management issues (32.5%) and procedural complications (21.9%). The need for a medical intervention (33.9%) and another ED visit (33.9%) were the most frequent clinical consequences. In univariate analysis, older age, chronic conditions, hospital admission, initial location in high acuity area of the ED, having >1 ED MD or a consultant involved in care, (all p<0.001) and longer length of stay (p<0.01) were associated with AEs. Conclusion: While our multicentre study found a lower risk of AEs among pediatric ED patients than reported among pediatric inpatients and adult ED patients, a high proportion of these AEs were preventable.

Introduction: Delirium is a very prevalent cognitive impairment in elderly inpatients, but it often goes undetected, especially in the emergency department (ED). The tools currently available to screen or diagnose patients at risk of delirium are very time-consuming and are impossible to systematically perform in the ED environment. For this reason, short tests are necessary to screen for delirium in this fast-paced setting. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of the French version of the Rapid Assessment Test for Delirium (4AT) for the detection of delirium and cognitive impairment in older patients. The 4AT takes less than 2 minutes to administer, which is a great advantage on the others tests. Methods: The study was conducted in four emergency departments across the province of Québec. Participants were independent or semi-independent patients aged 65 and older, admitted to hospital and who had an 8-hour exposure to the ED. The Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS) was administered at the initial interview and the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) as well as the 4AT were administered to patients twice a day during their ED or hospital stay. The 4AT’s sensitivity and specificity were compared to that of the CAM (for delirium), and to that of the TICS (for cognitive impairment). Results: 324 patients were included in the study, with a mean age of 76 years old. Among the recruited participants, 21 (6.5%) had a prevalent delirium according to the CAM, and 30 (10.2%) had an incident delirium. According to the 4AT, 48 patients (14.9%) had cognitive impairment and 81 (25.2%) had a prevalent delirium. According to the TICS, 87 patients (29.2%) have cognitive impairment. The 4AT has a sensitivity of 68,4% (IC 95% : 47,5-89,3) and a specificity of 73.2% (IC 95% : 67,8-78,7) for delirium, and a sensitivity of 50% (IC 95% : 35,9-64,1) and a specificity of 87,0% (IC 95% : 81,2-92) for cognitive impairment. Conclusion: The French Version of the 4AT could be a fast and reliable screening tool for delirium and cognitive impairment in ED. Further research is necessary for its validation in the ED.

Introduction: Cognitive dysfunction is getting more common in geriatric emergency department (ED) patients, as the number of seniors visiting our EDs is increasing. ED guidelines recommend a systematic mental status screening for seniors presenting to the ED. As the existing tools are not suitable for the busy ED environment, we need quicker and easier ways to assess altered mental status, such as the O3DY. The purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness of the French version of the O3DY to screen for cognitive dysfunction in seniors presenting to the ED. Methods: This is a planned sub-study of the INDEED project, which was conducted between February and May 2016 in 4 hospitals across the province of Québec. Inclusion criteria were: patients aged ≥65, with an 8-hour ED stay, admitted on a care unit, independent or semi-independent in their activities of daily living. Exclusion criteria were: patient living in a long-term nursing facility, with an unstable medical condition, pre-existing psychiatric condition or severe dementia, a delirium within the 8-hour exposure to the ED. A trained research assistant collected the following data upon initial interview: socio-demographic information, cognitive assessment (TICS-m), functional assessment (OARS) and delirium screening (CAM). The O3DY was also administered at initial interview and during patient follow-ups, as well as the CAM. Results: This study population was composed of 305 participants, of which 47.7% were men. Mean age was 76 years old (SD: 10.8). Nine of these participants had a previous history of dementia. 151 of these participants (47,04%) had a negative O3DY and 154 (47,98%) a positive O3DY at the initial encounter. When compared to the CAM, the O3DY presents a sensitivity of 85.0% (95% CI [62.1, 96.8]) and a specificity of 57.7% (95% CI [51.8, 63.6]) for prevalent delirium. When compared to the TICS, the O3DY presents a sensitivity of 76.7% (95% CI [66.4, 85.2]) and a specificity of 68.1% (95% CI [61.3, 74.3]) for cognitive impairment. The combined measure presents a sensitivity of 76.7% (95% CI [66.6, 84.9]) and a specificity of 68.4% (95% CI [61.7, 74.5]). Conclusion: A negative result to the O3DY indicates the absence of prevalent delirium or undetected cognitive impairment. The O3DY could be a useful tool for the triage nurses in the ED.

Introduction: Delirium is a dreadful complication in seniors’ acute care. Many studies are available on the incidence of delirium, however ED-induced delirium is far less studied. We aim to evaluate the incidence and impact of ED-induced delirium among older non-delirious admitted ED patients who have prolonged ED stays (≥ 8 hours). Methods: This prospective INDEED study phase 1 included patients recruited from 4 Canadian EDs. Inclusion criteria: 1) Patients aged 65 and over; 2) ED stay ≥ 8 hours; 3) Patient is admitted to the hospital; 4) Patient is non-delirious upon arrival and at the end of the first 8 hours; 5) Independent or semi-independent patient. Eligible patients were assessed by a research assistant after an 8 hour exposition to the ED and evaluated twice a day up to 24h after ward admission. Patients’ functional and cognitive status were assessed using validated OARS and TICS-m tools. The Confusion Assessment Method was used to detect incident delirium. Hospital length of stays (LOS) were obtained. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to evaluate outcomes. Results: Of the 380 patients prospectively followed, mean age was 76.5 (± 8.9), male represent 50% and 16.5% very old seniors (> 85 y.o.). The overall incidence of ED-induced delirium was 8.4%. Distribution by the 4 sites was: 10%, 13.8%, 5.5% & 13.4%. The mean ED LOS varied from 29 to 48 hours. The mean hospital LOS was increase by 6.1 days in the delirious patients compared to non-delirious patient (p<0.05). Increase mean hospital LOS distribution by site was by: 6.9, 8.5, 4.3 and 5.2 days for the ED-induced delirium patients. Conclusion: ED-induced delirium was recorded in nearly one senior out of ten after a minimal 8 hour exposure in the ED environment. An episode of delirium increases hospital LOS by about a week and therefore could contribute to ED overcrowding.

Introduction: Recognition of life-threatening conditions, such as brain tumours, remains a challenge among pediatric patients. Few studies have described the implication of initial presentation, clinical evolution and healthcare system factors in diagnosis delay of brain tumours in children. We aimed to determine the clinical presentation patterns and health care trajectory of children with a diagnosis of primary brain tumour. Methods: A retrospective chart review in a pediatric university-affiliated hospital was conducted. Participants were all patients less than 18 years of age diagnosed with a brain tumour by neuroimaging between Jan 2003 and Dec 2014. Data were extracted from an institutional tumour registry and medical records. Results: From the registry, 288 patients were identified. The mean age at time of diagnosis was 7.44 ± 0.29 years. Most tumours were infra-tentorial (55%) and had astrocytic origin (29%). The majority (35%) had consulted only once prior to diagnosis, while 14% had consulted at least 4 times prior to diagnosis. The mean time between the onset of symptoms and diagnosis was 147 ± 19 days. The mean time between symptoms onset and first consultation was 84 ± 14 days. The most frequent symptoms and signs at onset and diagnosis were respectively: headache (44% vs 59%, p<0.01), nausea and vomiting (31% vs 58%, p<0.01) and abnormalities of gait (10% vs 32%, p<0.01). 129 patients (45%) were diagnosed in an Emergency Department (ED). Symptoms and signs that differed significantly for those diagnosed in an ED were: headache (71% vs 42%, p<0.01), nausea and vomiting (73 % vs 32%, p<0.01), lethargy (26% vs 9%, p<0.01), weight loss (15% vs 3%, p<0.01), irritability (9% vs 0%, p<0.01) and endocrine abnormality (2% vs 8%, p=0.02). Clinical presentations of infants up to one year of age (14%) differed from other age groups. They presented mostly with growth abnormality (46%), macrocephaly (40%), irritability (40%), development abnormalities (18%) and sun-setting eyes sign (10%). Conclusion: In this large comprehensive cohort, we have found that the diagnosis of primary brain tumours is most frequently made in the ED. Different clinical presentations have been identified and varied between different settings of diagnosis and different age groups.

Introduction: Delirium is a frequent complication among seniors in the emergency department (ED). This condition is often underdiagnosed by ED professionals even though it is associated with functional & cognitive decline, longer hospital length of stay, institutionalization and death. Frailty is increasingly recognized as an independent predictor of adverse events in seniors and screening for frailty in EDs has recently been recommended. The aim of this study was to assess if screening seniors for frailty in EDs could help identify those at risk of ED-induced delirium. Methods: This study is part of the Incidence and Impact measurement of Delirium Induced by ED-Stay study, an ongoing multicenter prospective cohort study in 5 Quebec EDs. Patients were recruited after 8 hours in the ED exposure & followed up to 24h after ward admission. Frailty was assessed at ED admission using the Canadian Study of Health and Aging-Clinical Frailty Scale (CSHA-CFS) which classified seniors from robust (1/7) to severely frail (7/7). Seniors with CSHA-CFS ≥ 5/7 were considered frail. Delirium was assessed using the Confusion assessment method and Delirium Index. Results: Of the 380 patients recruited, mean age was 76.5 (±8.9). Male were 50%. Mean stay in the ED was 1.4 day (±0.82). Preliminary data show an incidence of ED-induced delirium of 8.4%. Average frailty score at baseline was 3.5/7. 72 patients were considered frail, while 289 were considered robust. Among the frail seniors, there were 48.4% (30-66%) patients with ED-induced delirium vs 17.9% (13.7-22.0] in the non-frail ones (p<0.0001). Conclusion: Increased frailty appears to be associated with increased ED-induced delirium. Screening for frailty at emergency triage could help ED professionals identify seniors at higher risk of ED-induced delirium. Further studies are required to confirm the importance of the association between frailty and ED-induced delirium

Introduction: Delirium is a common medical complication among seniors in hospital setting. In the emergency department (ED), its prevalence varies between 7 & 14%. Delirium is associated with increased mortality & longer hospital stay. This condition is also associated with functional & cognitive decline in hospitalized seniors and higher risk of institutionalization up to 2 years after their discharge. However, no data is currently available for ED patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between ED-induced delirium and functional & cognitive decline in seniors at 60 days. Methods: This study is part of the Incidence and Impact measurement of Delirium Induced by ED-Stay (INDEED) study, an ongoing multicenter prospective cohort study in 5 Quebec EDs. Patients were recruited after 8 hours in the ED and followed up to 24h after admission. A 60-day follow-up phone assessment was also conducted. Delirium was measured by the validated Confusion Assessment Method & the Delirium Index. Functional status was measured by the validated OARS. Cognitive status was measured using the validated TICS-M. Functional and cognitive decline were obtained by comparing the baseline and 60-days follow-up scores. Results: 380 seniors were recruited and 280 had 60-day follow-up data available. ED-induced delirium was 8.4% of seniors. There was a difference in mean functional decline among seniors with and without ED-induced delirium 2.95(1.23-4.67) vs 1.55(1.20-1.91, pwlicoxon= 0.05] Proportion of seniors showing a decline ≥2 points on the OARS was significantly higher In those with ED-induced delirium (65,0 % vs 40.18 %, p=0.03). Seniors with ED-induced delirium also showed a significant decline in mean TICS scores [3.31 (0,82-5.84) vs -0.01((-.071-0.75)), pwlicoxon =0.009]. There was no significant difference in the proportions of seniors showing a decline ≥ 3 OARS points between those with or without delirium (p=0.06). Conclusion: ED-induced delirium seems to be associated with poor functional and cognitive outcomes in older patients 60 days after discharge from the hospital. Further studies are required to confirm clinical importance ED-induced delirium delayed complication.

Introduction: Background: A single-agent approach to children’s moderate to severe pain is often inadequate. To date, no studies have evaluated the combined use of oral morphine and ibuprofen for optimal pain management of children presenting to an Emergency Department (ED) for musculoskeletal (MSK) trauma. Objective: To assess the efficacy of a combination of oral morphine and ibuprofen for pain management in children with MSK trauma in the ED. Methods: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centered, three-arm, randomized clinical trial of 500 patients was conducted at three pediatric tertiary care EDs. Patients 6 to 17 years of age, who presented to the ED with a MSK trauma, and a score >30 mm on the 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale were eligible to participate. Patients were randomized (in a 2:1:1 ratio) to receive (orally): (a) morphine (0.2mg/kg) + ibuprofen (10mg/kg) (Group MOR + IBU) or (b) morphine (0.2 mg/kg) + placebo (Group MOR) or (c) ibuprofen (10mg/kg) + placebo (Group IBU). Primary outcome was pain intensity score under 30 mm (mild pain) at 60-minutes (T-60) after treatment administration. Results: A total of 456 patients were included in analyses: 177 (MOR + IBU), 188 (MOR), 91 (IBU). Mean age was 11.9 + 2.7 years, with a majority of boys (55.3%) and soft tissue injuries (62%). There were no differences in baseline characteristics in the three groups. Baseline mean pain score was 60.9 + 16.2 mm. Only 30% (MOR + IBU), 29% (MOR) and 30% (IBU) of patients reached a pain score under 30 mm at T-60 (p=0.83). Mean pain scores at T-60 were 42.3 + 23.2 mm (MOR + IBU), 43.8 + 23.1 mm (MOR) and 42.3 + 23.3 mm (IBU) (p=0.83). No severe adverse events were observed in any of the groups, at any of the study measurement points. Conclusion: Combination of morphine with ibuprofen did not provide any additional pain relief for children with MSK injuries, in the ED. None of the study medication provided optimal pain management, as the majority of children did not reach the WHO definition of mild pain. Alternative analgesic combinations should be investigated to optimize pain relief of children who present to the ED with MSK injuries.

Introduction: The PECARN head CT scan rule helps to identify children at risk of clinically important Traumatic Brain Injury (ciTBI) but many children fall in a grey zone while applying the rule (observation vs. CT scan). The C-3PO rule identifies children at risk of skull fracture. The Ste-Justine Head Trauma pathway comprises both rules for the management of all children younger than two years who suffered a head trauma. The primary objective of this study was to measure the capacity of the Ste-Justine Head Trauma pathway to identify children with ciTBI. Methods: This was a retrospective study of all children younger than two years old who visited a university affiliated pediatric emergency department (ED) for a head trauma between Sept. 2013 and Aug. 2015. Participants were all patients admitted for a head trauma and a randomly selected sample of 5% of non-admitted patients. Independent variables of the algorithm were recorded for each patient. The primary outcome was the presence of a ciTBI defined by any of the following secondary to TBI: death, neurosurgery, intubation of more than 24 hours or hospitalization for more than one night. Participants were identified using the computerized database of the ED and all charts were reviewed using a standardized report form. The primary analysis was the proportion of children with ciTBI accurately identified using the pathway. A secondary analysis was to compare the performance of the pathway in comparison to the PECARN rule alone. Results: During the study period a total of 2,258 children were seen in the ED for head trauma. The charts of all hospitalized (n=100) and a sample (n= 101) of non-hospitalized children were reviewed. A ciTBI was found in 26 participants (3 neurosurgical interventions, 4 intubated and 26 admitted > one night). Among them, 18 were classified at high risk, 7 at moderate risk and 1 at low risk according to the clinical pathway. Using the PECARN rule alone would have classified 17 at high risk, 5 at moderate risk and 4 at low risk. Using the pathway to the entire population would yield the following risk of cTBI: High-risk: 25%; moderate risk: 1%; low risk < 0.1%. Conclusion: The Ste-Justine Head Trauma pathway effectively identifies children younger than two years at risk of ciTBI following head trauma while triaging effectively children at low risk. The pathway is more sensitive than the PECARN rule to identify children at risk of ciTBI.

Introduction: Oral sweet solutions have been accepted as effective analgesics for procedures in the neonatal population. However, there have been a limited number of trials in older infants. These studies have conflicting results. The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy of an oral sucrose solution versus placebo in reducing pain during urethral catheterization in infants 1 to 3 months old in the Emergency Department (ED). Methods: A randomized, double-blind clinical trial was conducted in a pediatric university-affiliated hospital ED. Infants, 1 to 3 months of age, were recruited and randomly allocated to receive 2 ml of 88% sucrose solution (SUC) or 2 ml of placebo solution (PLA) orally, 2 minutes before planned urethral catheterization. The primary outcome measure was the difference in pain scores as assessed by the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) Pain Scale at 1 min post procedure. Secondary outcome measures were the difference in pain scores using the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS), crying time and variations in heart rate. Results: Seventy-six participants were recruited and completed the study, 37 (group SUC) and 39 (group PLA) respectively. The mean difference in FLACC scores compared to baseline was 5.62 ± 1.32 (SUC) vs. 6.21 ± 1.15 (PLA) (p=.51) during catheterization, 2.70 ± 1.21 (SUC) vs. 2.26 ± 1.41 (PLA) at 1 min (p=.64) and 0.66 ± 1.32 (SUC) vs. 1.26 ± 1.00 (PLA) at 3 mins (p=.38). For the NIPS scores, it was 4.27 ± 1.06 (SUC) vs. 4.69 ± 0.92 (PLA) (p=.56) during procedure, 2.05 ± 0.91 (SUC) vs. 1.97 ± 1.19 (PLA) (p=.92) at 1 min and 0.49 ± 0.89 (SUC) vs. 0.89 ± 0.97 (PLA) (p=.54) at 3 mins. The difference in the mean crying time was not different between both groups: 99 ± 34 secs (SUC) vs. 100 ± 25 (PLA) (p=.99). No significant difference was found in participants’ heart rate variations during procedure 23 ± 8 BPM (SUC) vs. 26 ± 7 (PLA) (p=.60), after 1 min 19 ± 12 BPM (SUC) vs. 17 ± 7 (PLA) (p=.76) and after 3 mins -1 ± 12 BPM (SUC) vs. 3 ± 6 (PLA) (p=.53). Conclusion: In infants 1 to 3 months of age undergoing urethral catheterization in the ED, administration of an oral sweet solution did not statistically decrease pain scores as measured by the FLACC and NIPS scales. Participants’ heart rate variations and crying time were not significantly decreased when sucrose was provided.