CJEM Articles: Paul Rosenberg
Displaying 1-4 of 4 results
-
May
2013
15
3
Jacques Lee, Marianne Samuel, Norman Epstein, Paul Rosenberg
Objective:
Many emergency physicians (EPs) order “confirmatory” abdominal computed tomography (CT) in young flank pain patients, despite a high clinical suspicion of renal colic and the risk of radiation exposure. We measured the adverse outcome rate among flank pain patients identified as not requiring abdominal CT by the EP on a data form, regardless of whether CT was eventually ordered. Our secondary objective was to describe diagnoses other than renal colic identified by CT in this population.
Methods:
We conducted a prospective observational study at two community EDs. We asked staff EPs to complete a data sheet on patients ages 18 to 50 years with a first episode of flank pain, recording 1) if the flank pain was consistent with renal colic and 2) if the EP felt abdominal CT was indicated. Adverse outcomes (defined a priori as urgent surgical procedures, disability, or death) were assessed by research assistants at 4 weeks using telephone follow-up and a hospital records search.
Results:
We enrolled 389 patients; 353 completed follow-up (91%). The average age was 38.8 years, and 72.0% were male. Of 212 patients identified in the “CT not indicated” group, 2 had another diagnosis identified (unruptured diverticulitis and a ruptured ovarian cyst), but none had adverse outcomes (95% CI 0–1.4).
Conclusions:
Adverse events were rare (< 1.5%) among patients < 50 years old with flank pain when CT was not required according to the clinical assessment of the EP. Future research should assess the adverse outcomes of withholding CT in low-risk patients using a larger patient sample. -
January
2012
14
1
Paul Rosenberg
-
January
2004
6
1
Paul Rosenberg
-
May
2002
4
3
Donald MacIntosh, Michael Kroll, Paul Rosenberg, Warren McIsaac
Background: Reducing the number of unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions given for common respiratory infections has been recommended as a way to limit bacterial resistance. This study assessed the validity of a clinical sore throat score in 2 community emergency departments (EDs) and its impact on antibiotic prescribing. We also attempted to improve on this approach by using a rapid streptococcal antigen test.
Methods: A total of 126 patients with new upper respiratory tract infections accompanied by sore throat were assessed by a physician. Pharyngeal swabs were obtained for a rapid test and throat culture, and information was gathered to determine the sore throat score. The sensitivity and specificity of the score approach were compared with usual physician care based on the rapid test results.
Results: Of the 126 cases of new upper respiratory infections with sore throat, physicians who followed their usual care routine, guided by the rapid test results, prescribed antibiotics for 46 patients. Of the 46 prescriptions, 18 were given to patients with culture-negative results for group A streptococcal (GAS) pharyngitis. Use of the sore throat score would not have reduced the number of prescriptions but would have missed only 1 patient with a positive culture result (p < 0.05). The rapid test was not as sensitive as throat culture.
Conclusion: An explicit clinical score approach to the management of GAS pharyngitis is valid in a community ED setting and could improve the pattern of antibiotic prescribing. While the addition of a rapid streptococcal antigen test significantly decreased the sensitivity of detecting GAS infections, a combined approach consisting of the clinical score and throat culture for patients with negative results on the rapid test would decrease antibiotic prescribing and telephone follow-up without decreasing the sensitivity of detecting GAS infection.

