April 4, 2019

Background: Computed tomography (CT) scans using IV contrast agents are one of the most common imaging modalities used in the emergency department (ED). The reason for this is no secret. CT scans with IV contrast offer a large amount of information on patients when limited information is available, they are diagnostic of many conditions with good performance characteristics, and they are often requested by consultants.   Many patients get suboptimal studies without IV contrast due to fear of contrast induced nephropathy (CIN). However, more recent studies suggest that with the use of iso- and low-osmolar contrast agents (almost universally used today) this concern is unwarranted.  Most studies on this topic have focused on unselected populations, and not focused on patient groups at higher risk for AKI, including those with sepsis.

February 26, 2019

Online educational resources, social media, and asynchronous education increasingly dominate innovation and continuing medical education for practicing emergency physicians. The “Free Open-Access Medical Education” (FOAM) movement has utilized the power of global connectivity to drive narrowing of the knowledge translation window, however critics have urged caution and warned of error, as many of these resources lack peer review or quality control [1]. REBEL EM is an online educational resource widely used throughout the FOAM community, garnering an average of 3,000 - 30,000 views/engagements per educational post, and satisfying all quality indicators that have been previously identified as markers of reliability and usability for digital scholarship [2]. To this end, we at REBEL EM are conducting a survey looking at rates of certain medication usage in the treatment of renal colic.  This is the follow up survey after the publication of the LIDOKET trial.

February 18, 2019

Background: The use of intravenous lidocaine for analgesia in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with renal colic has gained recent traction and interest, and was previously explored on the REBEL EM blog. Literature has been mixed, with one trial (Soleimanpour 2012) demonstrating analgesic benefit, but two smaller trials (Firouzian 2016) (Motamed 2017) finding no such role for IV lidocaine. Nonetheless, uptake has been brisk (Fitzpatrick 2016). The authors of this study (The LIDOKET Trial) sought to better define the utility of IV lidocaine for the treatment of renal colic.

February 13, 2019

Online educational resources, social media, and asynchronous education increasingly dominate innovation and continuing medical education for practicing emergency physicians. The “Free Open-Access Medical Education” (FOAM) movement has utilized the power of global connectivity to drive narrowing of the knowledge translation window, however critics have urged caution and warned of error, as many of these resources lack peer review or quality control.REBEL EM is an online educational resource widely used throughout the FOAM community, garnering an average of 3,000 - 30,000 views/engagements per educational post, and satisfying all quality indicators that have been previously identified as markers of reliability and usability for digital scholarship.To this end, we at REBEL EM are conducting a survey looking at rates of certain medication usage in the treatment of renal colic.

June 29, 2018

Background: Ureteric (renal) colic is a common, painful condition encountered in the Emergency Department (ED). Sustained contraction of smooth muscle in the ureter as a kidney stone passes the length of the ureter leads to pain. The majority of stones will pass spontaneously (i.e. without urologic intervention). For over a decade, calcium channel blockers (i.e. nifedipine) and, more commonly, alpha adrenoreceptor antagonists (i.e. tamsulosin) have been employed in the treatment of ureteral colic for their potential ability to increase stone passage, reduce pain medication use and reduce urologic interventions. These interventions were mostly based on poor methodologic studies and meta-analyses of these flawed studies (Hollingsworth 2016)

Over the past 3-4 years, a small number of higher-quality RCTs have been published (Ferre 2009, Pickard 2015, Furyk 2016). These studies have demonstrated a lack of benefit for routine use of alpha blockers. However, secondary outcomes suggest a possible benefit in larger stones (> 6 mm). In spite of recent multiple studies, the use of alpha blockers remains an area of active debate.

0