Importance: Hypogonadism is defined by consistently low serum testosterone levels in conjunction with clinical symptoms. Testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) can be used to achieve physiologic levels of testosterone. Testosterone deficiency is associated with increased mortality and poorer health outcomes. Purpose: To compare rates of mortality, atrial fibrillation (AF), stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and prostate cancer in hypogonadal men who received TRT versus those who did not. Methods: The TriNetX database was utilized to access deidentified, retrospective propensity matched EMR data from 57 participating health care organizations between 2005 to 2020. Cohorts included males 40 to 80 years old diagnosed with hypogonadism who were prescribed TRT versus no TRT. Propensity matching was performed to reduce bias and balance confounding factors between the 2 groups. The following 3-year outcomes were analyzed: mortality, AF, stroke, MI, and prostate cancer. Results: There were 163,456 male patients identified with hypogonadism, and 133,584 were included after propensity matching. There was a lower mortality rate, (3.1% vs 3.6%; RR, 0.886; P < .001), decreased risk of AF (3.6% vs 4.0%; RR 0.900; P < .001), less stroke (1.6% vs 1.8%; RR, 0.898; P < .011), and fewer cases of prostate cancer (1.9% vs 2.9%; RR 0.648; P < .001) for patients on TRT. Conclusions: Using TRT is associated with moderately lower rates of mortality, atrial fibrillation, stroke, and prostate cancer in hypogonadal men versus no TRT. There is potential for missed cases of stroke, prostate cancer, and cardiovascular disease incidence not captured by the database. As prescriptions of TRT increase, understanding risks and benefits will help guide future practice.

Background The use of physician satisfaction scores to evaluate emergency medicine physicians’ performance and compensation is controversial. Prior studies have shown that the clinical environment may influence scores. This study compared satisfaction scores for the same physician at different emergency departments (ED). Differences in their individual score may indicate the ED environment could be as important as the physician’s interaction. Methods Press Ganey satisfaction scores were obtained for physicians at three EDs—Grand Strand, South Strand and North Strand—between July 2018 and June 2019. Included physicians worked at all 3 facilities and had at least 6 patient satisfaction surveys at each site. The Press Ganey scale ranges from 1–5, with 1 as "very poor" and 5 as "very good". Using top-box methodology, the total physician score was generated from the average of 4 questions: courtesy, keeping patients informed, patient comfort and listening. We utilized descriptive statistics to compare scores for all physicians at each of the 3 sites. In addition, each physician’s top box scores were averaged by site for analysis (two-way ANOVA) to determine if individual physician scores varied in different EDs. Results Fourteen physicians met inclusion criteria. Physicians at the main ED had an average total score of 73.37 ± 6.08 (SD) versus 76.5 ± 8.87 and 85.09 ± 7.75 at the 2 free standing EDs. Two-way ANOVA showed that the Press Ganey scores were significantly different for individual physicians between the newer free-standing ED and either the main ED or the other free-standing ED, p<0.001 and p=0.014, respectively. The observed difference between the main ED and the older free-standing ED was not statistically significant, p=0.111. When applying the same analysis to the 4 individual physician questions, the significant differences or trends persisted. Conclusion Physician satisfaction scores demonstrated a significant variance depending on where they practiced. The highest patient satisfaction scores were received at the newest of the 3 facilities with individual rooms. The findings suggest that Press Ganey scores may not be reliable when comparing patient satisfaction scores for providers who practice in different EDs.

Objectives: The emergence of COVID‐19 has revealed its association with croup. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes of COVID‐19 related croup to non‐COVID‐19 related croup during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Introduction: As fentanyl has become more readily available, opioid-related morbidity and mortality in the United States has increased dramatically. Preliminary studies suggest that high-affinity, partial mu-opioid receptor agonists such as the combination product buprenorphine-naloxone may reduce mortality from overdose and promote remission. With the escalating prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD), it is essential to evaluate the effectiveness of opioid agonists like buprenorphine-naloxone. This study examines mortality and remission rates for OUD patients prescribed buprenorphine-naloxone to determine the efficacy of this treatment toward these outcomes. Methods: We carried out a retrospective analysis using the US Collaborative Network database in TriNetX, examining de-identified medical records from nearly 92 million patients across 56 healthcare organizations. The study spanned the years from January 1, 2017–May 13, 2022. Cohort 1 included OUD patients who began buprenorphine-naloxone treatment within one-year post-diagnosis, while Cohort 2, the control group, consisted of OUD patients who were not administered buprenorphine. The study measured mortality and remission rates within a year of the index event, incorporating propensity score matching for age, gender, and race/ethnicity. Results: Prior to propensity matching, we identified a total of 221,967 patients with OUD. Following exclusions, 61,656 patients treated with buprenorphine-naloxone showed 34% fewer deaths within one year of diagnosis compared to 159,061 patients who did not receive buprenorphine (2.6% vs 4.0%; relative risk [RR] 0.661; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.627–0.698; P < 0.001). The remission rate was approximately 1.9 times higher in the buprenorphine-naloxone group compared to the control group (18.8% vs 10.1%; RR 1.862; 95% CI 1.812–1.914; P < 0.001). After propensity matching, the effect on mortality decreased but remained statistically significant (2.6% vs 3.0%; RR 0.868; 95% CI 0.813–0.927; P < 0.001) and the remission rate remained consistent (18.8% vs 10.4%; RR 1.812; 95% CI 1.750–1.876; P < 0.001). Number needed to treat for benefit was 249 for death and 12 for remission. Conclusion: Buprenorphine-naloxone was associated with significantly reduced mortality and increased remission rates for patients with opioid use disorder and should be used as a primary treatment. The recognition and implementation of treatment options like buprenorphine-naloxone is vital in alleviating the impact of OUD.

Introduction With the growing acceptance of transgender individuals, the number of gender affirmation surgeries has increased. Transgender individuals face elevated depression rates, leading to an increase in suicide ideation and attempts. This study evaluates the risk of suicide or self-harm associated with gender affirmation procedures. Methods This retrospective study utilized de-identified patient data from the TriNetX (TriNetX, LLC, Cambridge, MA) database, involving 56 United States healthcare organizations and over 90 million patients. The study involved four cohorts: cohort A, adults aged 18-60 who had gender-affirming surgery and an emergency visit (N = 1,501); cohort B, control group of adults with emergency visits but no gender-affirming surgery (N = 15,608,363); and cohort C, control group of adults with emergency visits, tubal ligation or vasectomy, but no gender-affirming surgery (N = 142,093). Propensity matching was applied to cohorts A and C. Data from February 4, 2003, to February 4, 2023, were analyzed to examine suicide attempts, death, self-harm, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) within five years of the index event. A secondary analysis involving a control group with pharyngitis, referred to as cohort D, was conducted to validate the results from cohort C. Results Individuals who underwent gender-affirming surgery had a 12.12-fold higher suicide attempt risk than those who did not (3.47% vs. 0.29%, RR 95% CI 9.20-15.96, p < 0.0001). Compared to the tubal ligation/vasectomy controls, the risk was 5.03-fold higher before propensity matching and remained significant at 4.71-fold after matching (3.50% vs. 0.74%, RR 95% CI 2.46-9.024, p < 0.0001) for the gender affirmation patients with similar results with the pharyngitis controls. Conclusion Gender-affirming surgery is significantly associated with elevated suicide attempt risks, underlining the necessity for comprehensive post-procedure psychiatric support.