Length of Stay of Emergency Department Patients with Stimulant Intoxication Receiving Intravenous Fluid

Intravenous (IV) fluids are routinely administered empirically in the emergency department (ED) for patients presenting with stimulant intoxication (eg, cocaine, methamphetamine, synthetic marijuana), although the literature is sparse regarding the benefits and risks of this practice. Our primary objective in this study was to assess whether empiric administration of IV fluids in the ED is associated with increased discharge length of stay (LOS) among ED patients presenting for stimulant intoxication who were subsequently discharged.

This single-center, retrospective cohort study included 100 patients 18-69 years of age who were discharged from the ED with a non-incidental diagnosis related to stimulant intoxication between May 29, 2020-December 31, 2023, based on International Classification of Diseases code and chart review, in addition to a triage heart rate ≥ 90 beats per minute. We excluded patients if the medical decision-making reflected a clear indication for IV fluids or the presence of pre-defined confounding diagnoses or an uncontrolled factor that would have inherently impacted discharge LOS. Our primary outcome measure was discharge LOS. A multiple linear regression model controlled for the potentially confounding secondary outcome measures of age, sex, alcohol involvement, advanced imaging, sedation, and discharge escort.

A total of 100 patients were included, including 50 (50%) patients who did not receive IV fluids and 50 (50%) patients who did. Median patient age was 35 (interquartile range [IQR] 29-41) and 73% of patients were male. Patients who received IV fluids had a median LOS of 345 minutes (IQR 260-470) vs 305 minutes (IQR 205-413), with multivariable linear regression showing no statistically significant difference (β = 40.3, 95% CI, -13.6 to 94.2, R² = 0.162).

This study suggests that empiric IV fluid administration in stimulant-intoxicated ED patients was not significantly associated with discharge length of stay. Although the observed difference and confidence interval suggest the possibility of a clinically meaningful increase in discharge LOS with empiric IV fluid, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. Time is an important resource in high-volume ED settings, and this study suggest the need for judicious use of IV fluids in the absence of a clear indication.