Emergency department bounceback characteristics for patients diagnosed with COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The global healthcare burden of COVID-19 continues to rise. There is currently limited information regarding the disease progression and the need for hospitalizations in patients who present to the Emergency Department (ED) with minimal or no symptoms.Objectives
This study identifies bounceback rates and timeframes for patients who return to the ED due to COVID-19 after initial discharge on the date of testing.Methods
Using the NorthShore University Health System's (NSUHS) Enterprise Data Warehouse (EDW), we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of patients who were tested positive for COVID-19 and were discharged home on the date of testing. A one-month follow-up period was included to ensure the capture of disease progression.Results
Of 1883 positive cases with initially mild symptoms, 14.6% returned to the ED for complaints related to COVID-19. 56.9% of the mildly symptomatic bounceback patients were discharged on the return visit while 39.5% were admitted to the floor and 3.6% to the ICU. Of the 1120 positive cases with no initial symptoms, only four returned to the ED (0.26%) and only one patient was admitted. Median initial testing occurred on day 3 (2-5.6) of illness, and median ED bounceback occurred on day 9 (6.3-12.7). Our statistical model was unable to identify risk factors for ED bouncebacks.Conclusion
COVID-19 patients diagnosed with mild symptoms on initial presentation have a 14.6% rate of bounceback due to progression of illness.
SUBMITTER: Haag A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8054547 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionPatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can present with chest pain. However, the characteristics of this chest pain are unknown. We performed a single-centre observational study to review and summarise chest pain characteristics in COVID-19 patients at first presentation to the emergency department (ED).MethodsWe collected data on characteristics of 'chest pain' reported by COVID-19 patients who attended the ED of Bernhoven Hospital, the Netherlands from 4 through 30 March 2020.ResultsWe included 497 COVID-19 patients, of whom 83 (17%) reported chest pain upon presentation to the ED. Chest pain characteristics were: present since disease onset (88%), retrosternal location (43%), experienced as compressing/pressure pain (61%), no radiation (61%) and linked to heavy coughing (39%). Patients who reported chest pain were younger than those without chest pain (61 vs 73 years; p < 0.001). Patients with syncope were older (75 vs 72 years; p = 0.017), had a shorter duration of symptoms (5 vs 7 days; p < 0.001) and reported fewer respiratory complaints (68% vs 90%; p < 0.001) than those without syncope. Patients with new-onset atrial arrhythmias presented with a shorter duration of symptoms (5 vs 7 days; p = 0.013), experienced fewer respiratory complaints (72% vs 89%; p = 0.012) and more frequently had a history of cardiovascular disease (79% vs 50%; p = 0.003) than patients who presented without arrythmias.ConclusionChest pain and other cardiac symptoms were frequently observed in COVID-19 patients. Treating physicians should be aware that chest pain, arrhythmias and syncope can be presenting symptoms of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC9589604 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has altered behaviors in the general population, as well as processes in the healthcare industry. Patients may be afraid to pursue care in the emergency department (ED) due to perceived risk of infection. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of COVID-19 on ED metrics.MethodsAt one metropolitan trauma center ED, we conducted a review of all visits from February to May in 2020 and compared findings with the same months from 2019.ResultsA total of 34,213 ED visits occurred during the study periods (18,471 in 2019 and 15,742 in 2020), with a decline in patient visits occurring after state emergency declarations. In 2020, patients were less likely to be female and more likely to arrive by ambulance. Diagnoses in the musculoskeletal, neurologic, and genitourinary categories occurred in lower proportions in 2020; toxicology, psychiatry, and infectious diseases occurred in higher proportions. In contrast to other insurance categories, Medicare patients comprised a larger share of ED visits in 2020 compared to 2019.DiscussionDespite relatively low local prevalence of COVID-19, we report decreases in ED volume for some medical diagnosis categories. A volume rebound occurred in May 2020, but did not reach 2019 levels. Public health officials should encourage local populations to seek emergency care when concerned, and could consider programs to provide transportation. Patients should continue to protect themselves with social distancing and masks.
| S-EPMC7481071 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the emergency department (ED) visits of cardiovascular disease (CVD) patients. The customized data of the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) from 2017 to 2020 were analyzed. CVD patients were defined by the code 'V192' based on the NHIS coverage benefit expansion policy. The number of ED visits of CVD patients, as well as executed procedures in 2020 (during the pandemic), were compared to the corresponding average numbers in 2018 and 2019 (prepandemic). Stratification by age group, residential area and hospital location was performed. The number of ED visits of newly diagnosed CVD patients decreased by 2.1% nationwide in 2020 (2018-2019: 97,041; 2020: 95,038) and decreased the most (by 14.1%) in March (2018-2019: 8539; 2020: 7334). However, the number of executed procedures increased by 1.1% nationwide in 2020 (2018-2019: 74,696; 2020: 75,520), while it decreased by 11.9% in April (2018-2019: 6603; 2020: 5819). The most notable decreases in the number of newly diagnosed CVD patients (31.7%) and procedures (29.2%) in March 2020 were observed in the Daegu·Gyeongbuk area. CVD patients living in the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic may experience difficulty accessing healthcare facilities and receiving proper treatment.
| S-EPMC10764744 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study objectiveTo describe characteristics and outcomes of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients with new supplemental oxygen requirements discharged from a large public urban emergency department (ED) with supplemental oxygen.MethodsThis observational case series describes the characteristics and outcomes of 360 consecutive COVID-19 patients with new supplemental oxygen requirements discharged from a large urban public ED between April 2020 and March 2021 with supplemental oxygen. Primary outcomes included 30-day survival and 30-day survival without unscheduled inpatient admission. Demographic and clinical data were collected through a structured chart review.ResultsAmong 360 patients with COVID-19 discharged from the ED with supplemental oxygen, 30-day survival was 97.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 95.3 to 98.9%; n=351), and 30-day survival without unscheduled admission was 81.1% (95% CI 76.7 to 85.0%; n=292). A sensitivity analysis incorporating worst-case-scenario for 12 patients without complete follow-up 30 days after index visit yields 30-day survival of 95.5% (95% CI 92.5 to 97.2%; n=343), and 30-day survival without unscheduled admission of 78.9% (95% CI 74.3 to 83.0%; n=284). Among study patients, 32.2% (n=116) had a nadir ED oxygen saturation of <90%, among these 30-day survival was 97.4% (95% CI 92.6 to 99.4%; n=113), and 30-day survival without unscheduled admission was 76.7% (95% CI 68.8 to 84.1%; n=89).ConclusionCOVID-19 patients with new supplemental oxygen requirements discharged from the ED had survival comparable to COVID-19 ED patients with mild exertional hypoxia treated with supplemental oxygen in other settings, and this held true when the analysis was restricted to patients with nadir ED index visit oxygen saturations <90%. Discharge of select COVID-19 patients with supplemental oxygen from the ED may provide a viable alternative to hospitalization, particularly when inpatient capacity is limited.
| S-EPMC9629795 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveProning has been shown to improve oxygenation and mortality in certain populations of intubated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Small observational analyses of COVID-19 patients suggest awake proning may lead to clinical improvement. Data on safety and efficacy is lacking. We sought to describe the effect of proning on oxygenation in nonintubated COVID-19 patients. We also evaluated feasibility, safety, and other physiological and clinical outcomes associated with this intervention.MethodsWe conducted a prospective, observational cohort study of nonintubated patients with COVID-19 who underwent proning per an Emergency Department (ED) clinical protocol. Patients with mild to moderate respiratory distress were included. We calculated change in oxygenation by comparing the oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (SpO2:FiO2) during the five minutes prior to proning and first 30 min of proning. We also captured data on respiratory rate, duration of proning, need for intubation, intensive care unit admission, survival to discharge.ResultsFifty-two patients were enrolled. Thirty were excluded for not meeting protocol inclusion criteria or missing baseline oxygenation data, leaving 22 for analysis. The SpO2:FiO2 ratio increased by a median of 5 (IQR: 0-15) in the post-proning period compared to the pre-proning period (median: 298 (IQR: 263-352) vs 295 (IQR: 276-350), p = 0.01). Respiratory rate did not change significantly between time periods. No immediate adverse events occurred during proning. Five patients (23%) were intubated within 48 h of admission.ConclusionEarly, awake proning may be feasible in select COVID-19 patients and was associated with improved oxygenation.
| S-EPMC7713606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) might present neurological symptoms. We aimed to evaluate the frequency of them at the moment of emergency department (ED) visit and their impact in the prognosis.MethodsRetrospective cohort study including all consecutive hospitalized cases between March 8th and April 11th, 2020. Covid-19 diagnosis was confirmed by polymerase chain reaction test and/or serology. We compared, in patients with and without neurological symptoms on admission, demographic, clinical presentation, and frequency and type of abnormal laboratory values. We analyzed the variables that were associated with in-hospital all-cause mortality by Cox-regression log-rank test.ResultsWe included 576 hospitalized patients, 250 (43.3%) female, aged 67.2 years. At the moment of ED visit, 320 (55.6%) described neurological symptoms, including anosmia (146, 25.3%), myalgia (139, 24.1%), headache (137, 23.8%), and altered mental status (98, 17.0%). Neurological symptoms started the first symptomatic day in 198 (54.2%) cases. Patients with neurological symptoms presented later to the ED (7.9 versus. 6.6 days, p = .019). Only four (0.6%) cases had no typical Covid-19 general symptoms, and only six (1.9%) had a normal laboratory results, for a sensitivity of 98.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 96.6%-99.6%) and 98.1% (95% CI: 95.7%-99.2%), respectively. In the multivariate Cox-regression of mortality predictors, anosmia (HR: 0.358, 95%CI: 0.140-0.916) and altered mental status (HR: 1.867, 95%CI: 1.162-3.001) were significant.ConclusionNeurological symptoms were the most frequent extrapulmonary symptoms. They were present in half of the Covid-19 patients at the time of the ED visit. Anosmia on admission was an independent predictor of lower in-hospital mortality and altered mental status on admission predicted in-hospital mortality.
| S-EPMC7994975 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has extracted devastating tolls. Despite its pervasiveness, robust information on disease characteristics in the emergency department (ED) and how that information predicts clinical course remain limited.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of the first ED visit from SARS-CoV-2-positive patients in our health system, from February 21, 2020 to April 5, 2020. We reviewed each patient's ED visit(s) and included the first visit with symptoms consistent with COVID-19. We collected demographic, clinical, and treatment variables from electronic health records and structured manual chart review. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the association between patient characteristics and 2 primary outcomes: a critical outcome and hospitalization from index visit. Our critical outcome was defined as death or advanced respiratory support (high flow nasal cannula or greater) within 21 days.ResultsOf the first 1030 encounters, 801 met our inclusion criteria: 15% were over age 75 years, 47% were female, and 24% were non-Hispanic white. We found 161 (20%) had a critical outcome and 393 (49%) were hospitalized. Independent predictors of a critical outcome included a history of hypertension, abnormal chest x-ray, elevated neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN), measured fever, and abnormal respiratory vital signs (respiratory rate, oxygen saturation). Independent predictors of hospitalization included abnormal pulmonary auscultation, elevated BUN, measured fever, and abnormal respiratory vital signs.ConclusionsIn this large, diverse study of ED patients with COVID-19, we have identified numerous clinical characteristics that have independent associations with critical illness and hospitalization.
| S-EPMC8382683 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: In December 2019, an invasive viral outbreak, the Corona Virus Disease 19 spread to the whole world. An international cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate how healthcare workers in Emergency departments dealt with this pandemic. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to 180 healthcare workers around the world during May and June of the year 2020. Results: A total of 134 HCW from 23 countries responded with a majority of Emergency physicians (36.8%). The PCR testing is available in 72.9% of the hospitals. Different architectural strategies were used to isolate suspected cases in the Emergency department (ED). Half of the institutions would not allow visitors, while the other half, restricted visiting hours and the number of visitors. Triage for suspected patients relied in 82.8% on symptoms. Almost 98% of HCW used a combination of mask, gloves, gown and face shield. Around 65% of the HCW have a tendency to discharge more patients from the ED than what they were used to. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic made a major change within the emergency departments worldwide.
| S-EPMC9098677 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe the impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic on emergency department (ED) admissions for urgent diagnoses.MethodsFrom January 1, 2019, until December 31, 2020, patients older than 18 years who attended the ED at University Hospital of Leuven (UZ Leuven, Belgium) were included. Urgent diagnoses selected in the First Hour Quintet were collected. The periods of the pandemic waves in 2020 were analyzed and compared with the same time period in 2019.ResultsDuring the first wave of the pandemic, 16 075 patients attended the ED compared with 16 893 patients during the comparison period in 2019. The proportion of patients having one of the diagnoses of the First Hour Quintet was similar between the periods (4.4% vs 4.5%). During the second wave, 14 739 patients attended the ED compared with 18 704 patients during the same period in 2019; 5.6% of patients had a diagnosis of the First Hour Quintet compared with 4.3% of patients in the comparison period.ConclusionThis study showed a decrease in the number of patients attending the ED during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further studies are needed to determine for which conditions patients visited the ED less.
| S-EPMC9343343 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImproving the quality of cancer care and reducing preventable health system use are goals of increasing importance to health practitioners and policy makers. Emergency department (ED) visits are often cited as a source of preventable health system use, however, few studies have described the incidence of ED use by recently diagnosed cancer patients in population-based samples, and no study has addressed the full spectrum of cancer types.ObjectiveTo describe ED use by recently diagnosed cancer patients.MethodsCalifornia Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development data and the California Cancer Registry were used to describe ED use in the year after a cancer diagnosis (2009-2010). The incidence of ED use was tabulated by cancer type. Logistic regression and recycled predictions were used to examine ED use adjusting for confounding factors.ResultsMost ED visits (68%) occurred within 180 days of diagnosis. The incidence of ED use for all cancer types examined was 17% within 30 days, 35% within 180 days and 44% within 365 days of diagnosis. ED use varied by cancer type (5%-39% within 30 days of diagnosis; 14% -62% within 180 days; and 22%-69% within 365 days). Patterns of ED use by cancer type remained similar after accounting for demographic and socioeconomic factors.LimitationsThose common to administrative and registry datasets. Specifically, we were unable to account for ED visits in relation to cancer treatment dates and comorbid conditions.ConclusionsCancer patients use EDs at higher rates than previously reported, with considerable variability by cancer type. Future research should examine reasons for ED visits by cancer type and identify predictors of ED use, including treatment and comorbid conditions.
| S-EPMC7673305 | biostudies-literature