Dataset Information

Portable Chest Radiography as an Exclusionary Test for Adverse Clinical Outcomes During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Chest radiography (CXR) often is performed in the acute setting to help understand the extent of respiratory disease in patients with COVID-19, but a clearly defined role for negative chest radiograph results in assessing patients has not been described.

Research question

Is portable CXR an effective exclusionary test for future adverse clinical outcomes in patients suspected of having COVID-19?

Study design and methods

Charts of consecutive patients suspected of having COVID-19 at five EDs in New York City between March 19, 2020, and April 23, 2020, were reviewed. Patients were categorized based on absence of findings on initial CXR. The primary outcomes were hospital admission, mechanical ventilation, ARDS, and mortality.

Results

Three thousand two hundred forty-five adult patients, 474 (14.6%) with negative initial CXR results, were reviewed. Among all patients, negative initial CXR results were associated with a low probability of future adverse clinical outcomes, with negative likelihood ratios of 0.27 (95% CI, 0.23-0.31) for hospital admission, 0.24 (95% CI, 0.16-0.37) for mechanical ventilation, 0.19 (95% CI, 0.09-0.40) for ARDS, and 0.38 (95% CI, 0.29-0.51) for mortality. Among the subset of 955 patients younger than 65 years and with a duration of symptoms of at least 5 days, no patients with negative CXR results died, and the negative likelihood ratios were 0.17 (95% CI, 0.12-0.25) for hospital admission, 0.09 (95% CI, 0.02-0.36) for mechanical ventilation, and 0.09 (95% CI, 0.01-0.64) for ARDS.

Interpretation

Initial CXR in adult patients suspected of having COVID-19 is a strong exclusionary test for hospital admission, mechanical ventilation, ARDS, and mortality. The value of CXR as an exclusionary test for adverse clinical outcomes is highest among young adults, patients with few comorbidities, and those with a prolonged duration of symptoms.

SUBMITTER: Pagano A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7844357 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Chest radiography has not been validated for its prognostic utility in evaluating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Purpose To analyze the prognostic value of a chest radiograph severity scoring system for younger (nonelderly) patients with COVID-19 at initial presentation to the emergency department (ED); outcomes of interest included hospitalization, intubation, prolonged stay, sepsis, and death. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, patients between the ages of 21 and 50 years who presented to the ED of an urban multicenter health system from March 10 to March 26, 2020, with COVID-19 confirmation on real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction were identified. Each patient's ED chest radiograph was divided into six zones and examined for opacities by two cardiothoracic radiologists, and scores were collated into a total concordant lung zone severity score. Clinical and laboratory variables were collected. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between clinical parameters, chest radiograph scores, and patient outcomes. Results The study included 338 patients: 210 men (62%), with median age of 39 years (interquartile range, 31-45 years). After adjustment for demographics and comorbidities, independent predictors of hospital admission (n = 145, 43%) were chest radiograph severity score of 2 or more (odds ratio, 6.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.5, 11; P < .001) and obesity (odds ratio, 2.4 [95% CI: 1.1, 5.4] or morbid obesity). Among patients who were admitted, a chest radiograph score of 3 or more was an independent predictor of intubation (n = 28) (odds ratio, 4.7; 95% CI: 1.8, 13; P = .002) as was hospital site. No significant difference was found in primary outcomes across race and ethnicity or those with a history of tobacco use, asthma, or diabetes mellitus type II. Conclusion For patients aged 21-50 years with coronavirus disease 2019 presenting to the emergency department, a chest radiograph severity score was predictive of risk for hospital admission and intubation. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Project description:IntroductionA chest X-ray (CXR), taken in full inspiration, is important to ensure pathology in the lungs will not be missed. To achieve this, effective communication on breathing instructions for patients is crucial. During the COVID-19 pandemic, radiographers in Sengkang General Hospital (SKH) were challenged when performing CXR for the patients whose native language is not English. Most of these patients were foreign workers living in the same dormitory which had formed the largest COVID-19 cluster in Singapore. These dormitory residents found it difficult to understand and adhere to breathing instructions, resulting in a suboptimal degree of inspiration when the CXRs were taken. This may ultimately affect the diagnostic value of the radiographs. This paper aims to share and evaluate how radiographers tackled this issue and continued to acquire fully-inspired CXR for the dormitory residents despite the language barrier.MethodsUsing a combination of online survey and retrospective analysis of the rejection rates of CXR done over the period of early April to early June, a team of radiographers evaluated the effectiveness of using audio recordings in managing the issue of not achieving a fully inspired CXR for patients due to language barrier.ResultsThe rejection rate for CXR due to suboptimal inspiration decreased from 26% to 9% upon implementation of the audio recordings. 92.3% of the CXRs taken within this period also fulfilled the criteria of a fully-inspired CXR, as evidenced by having at least 9 posterior ribs seen above the right hemi-diaphragm. Survey results found a fairly balanced number of radiographers who agreed and disagreed that a fully-inspired CXR was achieved for most of their patients after utilisation of translation manuals and audio recordings.ConclusionAfter the implementation of audio recordings, the decrease in rejection rate of CXR and an audit which demonstrated that CXR quality was upheld had proven that the radiographers successfully achieved fully-inspired CXR for suspected COVID-19 patients. This confirmed that using pre-recorded audio instructions was an efficient intervention albeit being a one-way communication, leads to more accurate imaging results, aligning with existing literature on communication experiences between radiographers and patients. Moreover, the decreased rejection rate of CXRs had increased department efficiency consequently reducing departmental expenses in the long run.Implications of practiceGiven that we have an ageing population and the vast majority of the elderly converse in their various dialects, positive feedback from radiographers presented opportunities to expand the translation manual and audio recordings to include local dialects. These can be seamlessly integrated in CXR and other procedures in the hospital setting. To ensure that the translations are culturally sensitive, attention should be paid to the translation process of instructions into other languages and local dialects by enlisting the help of native speakers.

Project description:BackgroundThe impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on adverse perinatal outcomes remains unclear.ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate whether COVID-19 is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes in a large national dataset and to examine the rates of adverse outcomes during the pandemic compared with the rates of adverse outcomes during the prepandemic period.Study designThis observational cohort study included 683,905 patients, between the ages of 12 and 50, hospitalized for childbirth and abortion between January 1, 2019, and May 31, 2021. During the prepandemic period, 271,444 women were hospitalized for childbirth. During the pandemic, 308,532 women were hospitalized for childbirth, and 2708 women had COVID-19. The associations between COVID-19 and inhospital adverse perinatal outcomes were examined using propensity score-adjusted logistic regression.ResultsWomen with COVID-19 were more likely to experience both early and late preterm birth (adjusted odds ratios, 1.38 [95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.7] and 1.62 [95% confidence interval, 1.3-1.7], respectively), preeclampsia (adjusted odds ratio, 1.2 [95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.4]), disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (adjusted odds ratio, 1.57 [95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.2]), pulmonary edema (adjusted odds ratio, 2.7 [95% confidence interval, 1.1-6.3]), and need for mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 8.1 [95% confidence interval, 3.8-17.3]) than women without COVID-19. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of stillbirth among women with COVID-19 (16/2708) and women without COVID-19 (174/39,562) (P=.257). There was no difference in adverse outcomes among women who delivered during the pandemic vs prepandemic period. Combined inhospital mortality was significantly higher for women with COVID-19 (147 [95% confidence interval, 3.0-292.0] vs 2.5 [95% confidence interval, 0.0-7.5] deaths per 100,000 women). Women diagnosed with COVID-19 within 30 days before hospitalization were more likely to experience early preterm birth, placental abruption, and mechanical ventilation than women diagnosed with COVID-19 >30 days before hospitalization for childbirth (4.0% vs 2.4% for early preterm birth [adjusted odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.7]; 2.2% vs 1.2% for placental abruption [adjusted odds ratio, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-3.4]; and 0.9% vs 0.1% for mechanical ventilation [adjusted odds ratio, 13.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-107.2]).ConclusionWomen with COVID-19 had a higher prevalence of adverse perinatal outcomes and increased in-hospital mortality, with the highest risk occurring when the diagnosis was within 30 days of hospitalization, raising the possibility of a high-risk period.