Dataset Information

Clinical characteristics of COVID-19 patients evaluated in the emergency department: A retrospective cohort study of 801 cases.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Coronavirus 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.

Methods

We 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.

Results

Of 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.

Conclusions

In 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.

SUBMITTER: Cotton DM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8382683 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesOne major goal of the emergency department (ED) is to decide, whether patients need to be hospitalised or can be sent home safely. We aim at providing criteria for these decisions without knowing the SARS-CoV-2 test result in suspected cases.SettingTertiary emergency medicine.ParticipantsAll patients were treated at the ED of the Charité during the pandemic peak and underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing. Patients with positive test results were characterised in detail and underwent a 14-day-follow-up.Primary and secondary outcome measuresLogistic regression and classification and regression tree (CART) analyses were performed to identify predictors (primary endpoint), which confirm safe discharge. The clinical endpoint was all-cause mortality or need for mechanical ventilation during index stay or after readmission.ResultsThe primary test population of suspected COVID-19 consisted of n=1255 cases, 45.2% were women (n=567). Of these, n=110 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (8.8%). The median age of SARS-CoV-2-positive cases was 45 years (IQR: 33-66 years), whereas the median age of the group tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 was 42 years (IQR: 30-60 years) (p=0.096). 43.6% were directly admitted to hospital care.CART analysis identified the variables oxygen saturation (<95%), dyspnoea and history of cardiovascular (CV) disease to distinguish between high and low-risk groups. If all three variables were negative, most patients were discharged from ED, and the incidence of the clinical endpoint was 0%. The validation cohort confirmed the safety of discharge using these variables and revealed an incidence of the clinical endpoint from 14.3% in patients with CV disease, 9.4% in patients with dyspnoea and 18.2% in patients with O2 satuaration below 95%.ConclusionsBased on easily available variables like dyspnoea, oxygen saturation, history of CV disease, approximately 25% of patients subsequently confirmed with COVID-19 can be identified for safe discharge.Trial registration numberDRKS00023117.

Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can be associated with myocardial injury. Identification of at-risk patients and mechanisms underlying cardiac involvement in COVID-19 remains unclear. During hospitalization for COVID-19, high troponin level has been found to be an independent variable associated with in-hospital mortality and a greater risk of complications. Electrocardiographic (ECG) abnormalities could be a useful tool to identify patients at risk of poor prognostic. The aim of our study was to assess if specific ECGs patterns could be related with in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients presenting to the ED in a European country.MethodsFrom February 1st to May 31st, 2020, we conducted a multicenter study in three hospitals in France. We included adult patients (≥ 18 years old) who visited the ED during the study period, with ECG performed at ED admission and diagnosed with COVID-19. Demographic, comorbidities, drug exposures, signs and symptoms presented, and outcome data were extracted from electronic medical records using a standardized data collection form. The relationship between ECG abnormalities and in-hospital mortality was assessed using univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses.ResultsAn ECG was performed on 275 patients who presented to the ED. Most of the ECGs were in normal sinus rhythm (87%), and 26 (10%) patients had atrial fibrillation/flutter on ECG at ED admission. Repolarization abnormalities represented the most common findings reported in the population (40%), with negative T waves representing 21% of all abnormalities. We found that abnormal axis (adjusted odds ratio: 3.9 [95% CI, 1.1-11.5], p = 0.02), and left bundle branch block (adjusted odds ratio: 7.1 [95% CI, 1.9-25.1], p = 0.002) were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality.ConclusionsECG performed at ED admission may be useful to predict death in COVID-19 patients. Our data suggest that the presence of abnormal axis and left bundle branch block on ECG indicated a higher risk of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients who presented to the ED. We also confirmed that ST segment elevation was rare in COVID-19 patients.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To investigate the appropriateness of cases presenting to the emergency department (ED) following ambulance-based secondary telephone triage. DESIGN:A pragmatic retrospective cohort analysis of all the planned and unplanned ED presentations within 48 hours of a secondary telephone triage. SETTING:The secondary telephone triage service, called the Referral Service, and the hospitals were located in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia and operated 24 hours a day, servicing 4.25 million people. The Referral Service provides an in-depth secondary triage of cases classified as low acuity when calling the Australian emergency telephone number. POPULATION:Cases triaged by the Referral Service between September 2009 and June 2012 were linked to ED and hospital admission records (N=44,523). Planned ED presentations were cases referred to the ED following the secondary triage, unplanned ED presentations were cases that presented despite being referred to alternative care pathways. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Appropriateness was measured using an ED suitability definition and hospital admission rates. These were compared with mean population data which consisted of all of the ED presentations for the state (termed the 'average Victorian ED presentation'). RESULTS:Planned ED presentations were more likely to be ED suitable than unplanned ED presentations (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.5 to 1.7; p<0.001) and the average Victorian ED presentation (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.01 to 3.4; p=0.046). They were also more likely to be admitted to the hospital than the unplanned ED presentation (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.4 to 1.6; p<0.001) and the average Victorian ED presentation (OR 2.3, 95% CI 2.24 to 2.33; p<0.001). Just under 15% of cases diverted away from the emergency care pathways presented in the ED (unplanned ED attendances), and 9.5% of all the alternative care pathway cases were classified as ED suitable and 6.5% were admitted to hospital. CONCLUSIONS:Secondary telephone triage was able to appropriately identify many ED suitable cases, and while most cases referred to alternative care pathways did not present in the ED. Further research is required to establish that these were not inappropriately triaged away from the emergency care pathways.