Comparison of Patient Questionnaires and Plasma Assays in Intentional Drug Overdoses

Deliberate drug poisoning with slight symptoms on admission: are there predictive factors for intensive care unit referral? A three-year retrospective study

Deliberate drug poisoning leads to 1% of emergency department (ED) admissions. Even if most patients do not exhibit any significant complication, 5% need to be referred to an intensive care unit (ICU). Emergency physicians should distinguish between low- and high-acuity poisoned patients at an early stage to avoid excess morbidity. Our aim was to identify ICU transfer factors in deliberately self-poisoned patients without life-threatening symptoms on admission. We performed a 3-year retrospective observational study in a university hospital. Patients over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of deliberate drug poisoning were included. Clinical and toxicological data were analysed with univariate tests between groups (ED stay versus ICU transfer). Factors associated with ICU admission were then included in a logistic regression analysis. Two thousand five hundred and sixty-five patients were included. 63.2% were women, and median age was 40 (28-49). 142 patients (5.5%) were transferred to ICU. Cardiac drugs [adjusted OR (aOR) = 19.81; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 7.93-49.50], neuroleptics (aOR = 2.78; 95% CI: 1.55-4.97) and meprobamate (aOR = 2.71; 95% CI: 1.27-5.81) ingestions were significantly linked to ICU admission. A presumed toxic dose ingestion (aOR = 2.27; 95% CI: 1.28-4.02), number of ingested tablets (aOR = 1.01; 95% CI: 1.01-1.02 for each tablet) and delay between ingestion and ED arrival <2 hr (aOR = 2.85; 95%CI: 1.62-5.03) were also factors for ICU referral. The Glasgow Coma Scale was the only clinical feature associated with ICU admission (aOR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.44-1.70 for each point loss). These results suggest that emergency physicians should pay particular attention to toxicological data on ED admission to distinguish between low- and high-acuity self-poisoned patients.

Factors associated with choice of psychotropic drugs used for intentional drug overdose

INTRODUCTION

Knowledge of the factors influencing the choice of drugs used for intentional drug overdose (IDO) may allow the reduction of IDO lethality.

OBJECTIVES

To assess with which frequency subjects with intentional overdose of psychotropic drugs ingest their own psychotropic drug treatment, and whether prescription of a drug may be a factor influencing the choice of drugs used for the IDO.

METHODS

Demographic characteristics, psychiatric history, and currently prescribed psychotropic drug treatment were collected for all the patients (n = 1,654) admitted to an emergency department (ED) for IDO with psychotropic drugs (anxiolytics, hypnotics, antidepressants, neuroleptics and mood stabilizers) over a period of 18 months. Drugs ingested for the IDO were compared in subjects who had ingested at least one psychotropic drug that was prescribed for them and subjects who had ingested psychotropic drugs not prescribed for them using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Two-thirds of the patients ingested during the IDO at least one of their own prescribed psychotropic drugs. Compared with the subjects who had ingested psychotropic drugs not prescribed for them, they were more likely to have a history of psychiatric hospitalization (OR 4.2; 95%CI 3.1-5.5), of being a psychiatric outpatient (OR 3.9; 95%CI 3.0-5.1), of parasuicide (OR 2.5; 95%CI 1.9-3.3) and a serious IDO (OR 2; 95%CI 1.4-2.9). Independently from age and psychiatric hospitalization history, they ingested during the IDO more often antidepressants (OR 4.4; 95%CI 3.0-6.4), antipsychotics (OR 2.9; 95%CI 1.7-4.8) and mood stabilizers (OR 4.1; 95%CI 1.6-10.7). No association was found with prescription for overdose of hypnotic (OR 1.1; 95%CI 0.8-1.5), anxiolytic (OR 1.2; 95%CI 0.9-1.7) or paracetamol (OR 1.0; 95%CI 0.5-2.1).

CONCLUSION

Prescription of the psychotropic drugs plays an important role in the choice of the drugs ingested for the IDO. It might make potentially "dangerous" drugs available for the patient. Physicians have always to balance the benefit of the treatment against the risk of drug overdose.

Clinical assessment compared to laboratory screening in acutely poisoned patients

Acute poisonings may require identification of the toxic agents. It is impossible for routine laboratories to provide a full spectrum of toxicological analyses, and clinicians should know the reliability of the clinical diagnoses of toxic agents. We performed a 1-year study of hospitalized acute poisonings to determine the agreement between the clinical assessment on admission and serum laboratory tests for eight common toxic agents. Blood samples were drawn in 665 (70%) of the 947 admissions. The total number of laboratory found agents (967) exceeded the clinically suspected (871) by 11%. The agreement between the clinical assessment and laboratory analyses was good for ethanol and paracetamol ( κ = 0.70 for both), whereas only moderate or fair for other agents ( κ 0.22–0.51). Sensitivities of the clinical assessments compared to the laboratory results were better for common than rare agents, and better for higher than lower serum concentrations. The four most common agents (ethanol, benzodiazepines, paracetamol, and opiates) had overall sensitivity of 82% for higher-than-median serum concentrations, whereas the other agents had sensitivities ranging from 14% to 71% for higher-than-median concentrations. The reliability of the clinical diagnoses varied to such an extent that agents, which are important to recognize for specific treatment, should be tested for.

Accuracy of information on substance use recorded in medical charts of patients with intentional drug overdose

Psychoactive substance use is a risk factor for suicidal behavior and current intoxication increases the likelihood of serious intentional drug overdose (IDO). The objective was to assess the accuracy of information on substance use recorded in medical charts using toxicological assays as a reference in subjects admitted for IDO to an emergency department. Patients (n=1190) consecutively admitted for IDO were included. Information on substance use was recorded in routine practice by the emergency staff and toxicological assays (cannabis, opiate, buprenorphine, amphetamine/ecstasy, cocaine, LSD) were carried out in urine samples collected as part of routine management. The information on substance use was recorded in medical charts for 24.4% of subjects. A third of subjects (27.5%) were positive for toxicological assays. Recorded substance use allowed correct classification of nearly 80% of subjects. However, specificity (88.6%) was better than sensitivity (54.2%). Compared with toxicological assays, medical records allowed identification of only half of the subjects with current substance use. The usefulness of systematic toxicological assays during hospitalization for IDO should be assessed in further studies exploring whether such information allows medical management to be modified and contributes to improving prognosis.

Prognostic impact of psychoactive substances use during hospitalization for intentional drug overdose

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether current use of psychoactive substance(s) is a prognostic factor during hospitalization for intentional drug overdose (IDO).

METHOD

Current intoxication with psychoactive substance(s) [cannabis, opiate, buprenorphine, amphetamine/ecstasy, cocaine, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD)] was identified using toxicological urinalysis in 671 patients with IDO. An IDO was a priori defined as serious if associated with one of the following events: death, hospitalization in intensive care unit longer than 48 h, respiratory support, use of vasopressive drugs, cardiac massage or dialysis.

RESULTS

Subjects positive for toxicological assays were twice as likely to present with serious IDO (OR = 1.9, 95% CI: 1.3-2.8, P = 0.001), independently from a large range of confounding factors. The risk of serious IDO was especially marked in subjects using LSD, buprenorphine or opiates.

CONCLUSION

Systematic investigation of substance use could be important to adapt medical management of subjects with IDO in general hospital, but also in primary care and psychiatric settings.