A predictive tool for identification of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative emergency department patients using routine test results.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Joshi RP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7286235 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesTraditional approaches to safety and quality screening in the emergency department (ED) are porous and low yield for identifying adverse events (AEs). A better approach may be in the use of trigger tool methodology. We recently developed a novel ED trigger tool using a multidisciplinary, multicenter approach. We conducted a multicenter test of this tool and assess its performance.MethodsIn design and participants, we studied the ED trigger tool for a 13-month period at four EDs. All patients 18 years and older with Emergency Severity Index acuity levels of 1 to 3 seen by a provider were eligible. Reviewers completed standardized training modules. Each site reviewed 50 randomly selected visits per month. A first-level reviewer screened for presence of predefined triggers (findings that increase the probability of an AE). If no trigger is present, the review is deemed complete. When present, a trigger prompts an in-depth review for an AE. Any event identified is assigned a level of harm using the Medication Event Reporting and Prevention (MERP) Index, ranging from a near miss (A) to patient death (I). Events are noted as present on arrival or in the ED, an act of commission or omission, and are assigned one of four event categories. A second-level physician performs a confirmatory review of all AEs and independently reviews 10% of cases to estimate the false-negative rate. All AEs or potential AEs were reviewed in monthly group calls for consensus on findings. The primary outcome is the proportion of visits in which an AE is identified, overall and by site. Secondary outcomes include categories of events, distribution of harm ratings, and association of AEs with sociodemographic and clinical factors and triggers. We present sociodemographic data and details about AEs and results of logistic regression for associations of AEs with of triggers, sociodemographics, and clinical variables.ResultsWe captured 2594 visits that are representative, within site, of their patient population. Overall, the sample is 64% white, 54% female, and with a mean age of 51. Variability is observed between sites for age, race, and insurance, but not sex. A total of 240 events were identified in 228 visits (8.8%) of which 53.3% were present on arrival, 19.7% were acts of omission, and 44.6% were medication-related, with some variability across sites. A MERP F score (contributing to need for admission, higher level of care, or prolonged hospitalization) was the most common severity level (35.4% of events). Overall, 185 (77.1%) of 240 events involved patient harm (MERP level ≥ E), affecting 175 visits (6.7%). Triggers were present in 951 visits (36.6%). Presence of any trigger was strongly associated with an AE (adjusted odds ratio = 4.6, 95% confidence interval = 3.2-6.6). Ten triggers were individually associated with AEs (adjusted odds ratio = 2.1-7.7). Variability was observed across sites in individual trigger associations, event rates, and categories, but not in severity ratings of events. The overall false-negative rate was 6.1%.ConclusionsThe trigger tool approach was successful in identifying meaningful events. The ED trigger tool seems to be a promising approach for identifying all-cause harm in the ED.
| S-EPMC6343477 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Emergency department (ED) clinicians routinely decide the disposition of patients with suicidal ideation, with potential consequences for patient safety, liability, and system costs and resources. An expert consensus panel recently created a 6-item decision support tool for patients with passive or active suicidal ideation. Individuals scoring a 0 (exhibiting none of the tool's 6 items) are considered "lower risk" and suitable for discharge, while those with non-0 scores are considered "elevated risk" and should receive further evaluation. The current study tested the predictive utility of this tool using existing data from the Emergency Department Safety Assessment and Follow-up Evaluation. ED patients with active suicide ideation (n = 1368) were followed for 12 months after an index visit using telephone assessment and medical chart review. About 1 in 5 patients had attempted suicide during follow-up. Because of the frequency of serious warning signs and risk factors in this population, only three patients met tool criteria for "lower risk" at baseline. The tool had perfect sensitivity, but exceptionally low specificity, in predicting suicidal behavior within 6 weeks and 12 months. In logistic regression analyses, several tool items were significantly associated with suicidal behavior within 6 weeks (suicide plan, past attempt) and 12 months (suicide plan, past attempt, suicide intent, significant mental health condition, irritability/agitation/aggression). Although the tool did not perform well as a binary instrument among those with active suicidal ideation, having a suicide plan identified almost all attempters while suicide plan and past attempt identified over four-fifths of near-term attempts. (PsycINFO Database Record
| S-EPMC6082179 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) is caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2, transmissible both person-to-person and from contaminated surfaces. Early COVID-19 detection among healthcare workers (HCWs) is crucial for protecting patients and the healthcare workforce. Because of limited testing capacity, symptom-based screening may prioritize testing and increase diagnostic accuracy.Methods and findingsWe performed a retrospective study of HCWs undergoing both COVID-19 telephonic symptom screening and nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 assays during the period, March 9-April 15, 2020. HCWs with negative assays but progressive symptoms were re-tested for SARS-CoV-2. Among 592 HCWs tested, 83 (14%) had an initial positive SARS-CoV-2 assay. Fifty-nine of 61 HCWs (97%) who were asymptomatic or reported only sore throat/nasal congestion had negative SARS-CoV-2 assays (P = 0.006). HCWs reporting three or more symptoms had an increased multivariate-adjusted odds of having positive assays, 1.95 (95% CI: 1.10-3.64), which increased to 2.61 (95% CI: 1.50-4.45) for six or more symptoms. The multivariate-adjusted odds of a positive assay were also increased for HCWs reporting fever and a measured temperature ? 37.5°C (3.49 (95% CI: 1.95-6.21)), and those with myalgias (1.83 (95% CI: 1.04-3.23)). Anosmia/ageusia (i.e. loss of smell/loss of taste) was reported less frequently (16%) than other symptoms by HCWs with positive assays, but was associated with more than a seven-fold multivariate-adjusted odds of a positive test: OR = 7.21 (95% CI: 2.95-17.67). Of 509 HCWs with initial negative SARS-CoV-2 assays, nine had symptom progression and positive re-tests, yielding an estimated negative predictive value of 98.2% (95% CI: 96.8-99.0%) for the exclusion of clinically relevant COVID-19.ConclusionsSymptom and temperature reports are useful screening tools for predicting SARS-CoV-2 assay results in HCWs. Anosmia/ageusia, fever, and myalgia were the strongest independent predictors of positive assays. The absence of symptoms or symptoms limited to nasal congestion/sore throat were associated with negative assays.
| S-EPMC7319316 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Early detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the emergency department (ED) is a crucial necessity, especially in settings of overcrowding: establishing a pre-diagnostic test probability of infection would help to triage patients and reduce diagnostic errors, and it could be useful in resource-limited countries. Here, we established and validated a clinical predictor of infection based on routine admission hematological parameters. The diagnostic model was developed by comparing 85 consecutive patients with symptomatic COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR with 85 symptomatic, SARS-CoV-2-negative controls. Abnormal hematological parameters significantly (p < 0.05) associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection were used to derive a "cumulative score" between 0 and 16. The model was validated in an independent cohort of 170 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. Several routine hematology parameters were significantly (p < 0.05) associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. A "cumulative score" score ≥7 discriminated COVID-19-postive patients from controls with a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 100% (p < 0.001). The high sensitivity of the predictive model was confirmed in the prospective validation set, and the cumulative score (i) predicted SARS-CoV-2 positivity even when the first oro-nasopharyngeal swab RT-PCR result was reported as a false negative in both cohorts and (ii) resulted to be independent from disease severity. The cumulative score based on routine blood parameters can be used to predict an early and accurate diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in symptomatic patients, thereby facilitating triage and optimizing early management and isolation from the COVID-19 free population, particularly useful in overcrowding situations and in resource-poor settings.
| S-EPMC8471783 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe outcome of emergency medicine (EM) training is to produce physicians who can competently run an emergency department (ED) shift. However, there are few tools with supporting validity evidence specifically designed to assess multiple key competencies across an entire shift. The investigators developed and gathered validity evidence for a novel entrustment-based tool to assess a resident's ability to safely run an ED shift.MethodsThrough a nominal group technique, local and national stakeholders identified dimensions of performance that are reflective of a competent ED physician and are required to safely manage an ED shift. These were included as items in the Ottawa Emergency Department Shift Observation Tool (O-EDShOT), and each item was scored using an entrustment-based rating scale. The tool was implemented in 2018 at the University of Ottawa Department of Emergency Medicine, and quantitative data and qualitative feedback were collected over 6 months.ResultsA total of 1,141 forms were completed by 78 physicians for 45 residents. An analysis of variance demonstrated an effect of training level with statistically significant increases in mean O-EDShOT scores with each subsequent postgraduate year (p < 0.001). Scores did not vary by ED treatment area. Residents rated as able to safely run the shift had significantly higher mean ± SD scores (4.8 ± 0.3) than those rated as not able (3.8 ± 0.6; p < 0.001). Faculty and residents reported that the tool was feasible to use and facilitated actionable feedback aimed at progression toward independent practice.ConclusionsThe O-EDShOT successfully discriminated between trainees of different levels regardless of ED treatment area. Multiple sources of validity evidence support the O-EDShOT as a tool to assess a resident's ability to safely run an ED shift. It can serve as a stimulus for daily observation and feedback making it practical to use within an EM residency program.
| S-EPMC7592826 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundReverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) assays are used to test for infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. RT-PCR tests are highly specific and the probability of false positives is low, but false negatives are possible depending on swab type and time since symptom onset.AimTo determine how the probability of obtaining a false-negative test in infected patients is affected by time since symptom onset and swab type.MethodsWe used generalised additive mixed models to analyse publicly available data from patients who received multiple RT-PCR tests and were identified as SARS-CoV-2 positive at least once.ResultsThe probability of a positive test decreased with time since symptom onset, with oropharyngeal (OP) samples less likely to yield a positive result than nasopharyngeal (NP) samples. The probability of incorrectly identifying an uninfected individual due to a false-negative test was considerably reduced if negative tests were repeated 24 hours later. For a small false-positive test probability (<0.5%), the true number of infected individuals was larger than the number of positive tests. For a higher false-positive test probability, the true number of infected individuals was smaller than the number of positive tests.ConclusionNP samples are more sensitive than OP samples. The later an infected individual is tested after symptom onset, the less likely they are to test positive. This has implications for identifying infected patients, contact tracing and discharging convalescing patients who are potentially still infectious.
| S-EPMC7812420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:False negative tests for SARS-CoV-2 are common and have important public health and medical implications. We tested the hypothesis of diurnal variation in viral shedding by assessing the proportion of positive versus negative SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests and cycle time (Ct) values among positive samples by the time of day. Among 86,342 clinical tests performed among symptomatic and asymptomatic patients in a regional health care network in the southeastern United States from March to August 2020, we found evidence for diurnal variation in the proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests, with a peak around 1400 h and 1.7-fold variation over the day after adjustment for age, sex, race, testing location, month, and day of week and lower Ct values during the day for positive samples. These findings have important implications for public health testing and vaccination strategies.
| S-EPMC8599649 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study objectiveOur institution experienced a change in SARS-CoV-2 testing policy as well as substantial changes in local COVID-19 prevalence, allowing for a unique examination of the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 testing and emergency department (ED) length of stay.MethodsThis was an observational interrupted time series of all patients admitted to an academic health system between March 15, 2020, and September 30, 2020. Given testing limitations from March 15 to April 24, all patients receiving SARS-CoV-2 tests were symptomatic. On April 24, testing was expanded to all ED admissions. The primary and secondary outcomes were ED length of stay and number needed to test to obtain a positive, respectively.ResultsA total of 70,856 patients were cared for in the EDs during the 7-month period. The testing change increased admission length of stay by 1.89 hours (95% confidence interval 1.39 to 2.38). The number needed to test was 2.5 patients and was highest yield on April 1, 2020, when the state positivity rate was 39.7%; however, the number needed to test exceeded 170 patients by Sept 1, 2020, at which point the state positivity rate was 0.5%.ConclusionAlthough universal SARS-CoV-2 testing of ED admissions may meaningfully support mitigation and containment efforts, the clinical cost of testing all admissions amid low community positivity is notable. In our system, universal ED SARS-CoV-2 testing was associated with a 24% increase in admission length of stay alongside the detection of only 1 positive case every other day. Given the known harms and risks of ED boarding and crowding, solutions must be developed to support regular operational flow while balancing infection prevention needs.
| S-EPMC8424016 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We describe an emergency department (ED)-based, Latino patient focused, unblinded, randomized controlled trial to empirically test if automated bilingual computerized alcohol screening and brief intervention (AB-CASI), a digital health tool, is superior to standard care (SC) on measures of alcohol consumption, alcohol-related negative behaviors and consequences, and 30-day treatment engagement. The trial design addresses the full spectrum of unhealthy drinking from high-risk drinking to severe alcohol use disorder (AUD). In an effort to surmount known ED-based alcohol screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment process barriers, while addressing racial/ethnic alcohol-related health disparities among Latino groups, this trial will purposively use a digital health tool and seek enrollment of English and/or Spanish speaking self-identified adult Latino ED patients. Participants will be randomized (1:1) to AB-CASI or SC, stratified by AUD severity and preferred language (English vs. Spanish). The primary outcome will be the number of binge drinking days assessed using the 28-day timeline followback method at 12 months post-randomization. Secondary outcomes will include mean number of drinks/week and number of episodes of driving impaired, riding with an impaired driver, injuries, arrests, and tardiness and days absent from work/school. A sample size of 820 is necessary to provide 80% power to detect a 1.14 difference between AB-CASI and SC in the primary outcome. Showing efficacy of this promising bilingual ED-based brief intervention tool in Latino patients has the potential to widely and efficiently expand prevention efforts and facilitate meaningful contact with specialized treatment services.
| S-EPMC8252296 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We describe an emergency department (ED)-based, Latino patient focused, unblinded, randomized controlled trial to empirically test if automated bilingual computerized alcohol screening and brief intervention (AB-CASI), a digital health tool, is superior to standard care (SC) on measures of alcohol consumption, alcohol-related negative behaviors and consequences, and 30-day treatment engagement. The trial design addresses the full spectrum of unhealthy drinking from high-risk drinking to severe alcohol use disorder (AUD). In an effort to surmount known ED-based alcohol screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment process barriers, while addressing racial/ethnic alcohol-related health disparities among Latino groups, this trial will purposively use a digital health tool and seek enrollment of English and/or Spanish speaking self-identified adult Latino ED patients. Participants will be randomized (1:1) to AB-CASI or SC, stratified by AUD severity and preferred language (English vs. Spanish). The primary outcome will be the number of binge drinking days assessed using the 28-day timeline followback method at 12 months post-randomization. Secondary outcomes will include mean number of drinks/week and number of episodes of driving impaired, riding with an impaired driver, injuries, arrests, and tardiness and days absent from work/school. A sample size of 820 is necessary to provide 80% power to detect a 1.14 difference between AB-CASI and SC in the primary outcome. Showing efficacy of this promising bilingual ED-based brief intervention tool in Latino patients has the potential to widely and efficiently expand prevention efforts and facilitate meaningful contact with specialized treatment services.
| S-EPMC7721867 | biostudies-literature