Background:
Magnesium deficiency may play a role in the pathogenesis of migraines and other headaches. Studies in outpatient clinics have found that magnesium administered intravenously (IV) reduces headache pain. We investigated the effectiveness of IV magnesium in patients with acute benign headache who presented to the emergency department (ED).
Methods:
This randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial compared 2 g of IV magnesium versus placebo for the treatment of patients with acute benign headache who presented to the EDs of two teaching hospitals. Pre- and post-treatment pain scores were measured on a 100-mm visual analog pain scale.
Results:
Forty-two patients were randomized, 21 in each treatment group. Treatment groups had similar baseline characteristics. After treatment, placebo recipients reported an 8-mm median improvement in pain, and magnesium recipients had a 3-mm improvement (p = 0.63). We found no statistically significant difference between groups for any secondary outcomes; however, the patients who received magnesium had significantly (p = 0.03) more side effects than did those in the placebo group.
Conclusions:
We found no benefit to using IV magnesium to treat patients with acute benign headache who present to the ED.
Background
In the 2011 US hospital prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use 50% of patients received antimicrobial medications on the survey date or day before. More hospitals have since established antimicrobial stewardship programs. We repeated the survey in 2015 to determine antimicrobial use prevalence and describe changes since 2011.
Methods
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Emerging Infections Program sites in 10 states each recruited ≤25 general and women’s and children’s hospitals. Hospitals selected a survey date from May–September 2015. Medical records for a random patient sample on the survey date were reviewed to collect data on antimicrobial medications administered on the survey date or day before. Percentages of patients on antimicrobial medications were compared; multivariable log-binomial regression modeling was used to evaluate factors associated with antimicrobial use.
Results
Of 12 299 patients in 199 hospitals, 6084 (49.5%; 95% CI, 48.6–50.4%) received antimicrobials. Among 148 hospitals in both surveys, overall antimicrobial use prevalence was similar in 2011 and 2015, although the percentage of neonatal critical care patients on antimicrobials was lower in 2015 (22.8% vs 32.0% [2011]; P = .006). Fluoroquinolone use was lower in 2015 (10.1% of patients vs 11.9% [2011]; P < .001). Third- or fourth-generation cephalosporin use was higher (12.2% vs 10.7% [2011]; P = .002), as was carbapenem use (3.7% vs 2.7% [2011]; P < .001).
Conclusions
Overall hospital antimicrobial use prevalence was not different in 2011 and 2015; however, differences observed in selected patient or antimicrobial groups may provide evidence of stewardship impact.
The TT method produced significantly higher SBPs. The authors were unable to demonstrate that the increased SBPs were secondary to the thoracic compression component because the rescuers did not reach the predetermined SCF in the TF groups. In this swine model of infant CPR, TT chest compression is an easier and more effective method.
IMPORTANCECurrent information on the characteristics of patients who develop sepsis may help in identifying opportunities to improve outcomes. Most recent studies of sepsis epidemiology have focused on changes in incidence or have used administrative data sets that provided limited patientlevel data. OBJECTIVE To describe sepsis epidemiology in adults. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective cohort study reviewed the medical records, death certificates, and hospital discharge data of adult patients with sepsis or septic shock who were discharged from the hospital between October 1, 2014, and September 30, 2015. The convenience sample was obtained from hospitals in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Emerging Infections Program in 10 states (California,
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.