Opportunistic COVID-19 vaccination in the emergency department.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Simons SN
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8652434 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThis is an observational study to analyze an emergency department (ED) utilization pattern of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinated in-hospital healthcare workers (HCWs).MethodsWe included 4,703 HCWs who were administered the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine between March 4 and April 2, 2021, in a tertiary hospital in Korea where fast-track and post-vaccination cohort zone (PVCZ) were introduced in ED. We analyzed data of participants' age, sex, occupation, date and type of vaccination, and their clinical information using SPSS v25.0.ResultsThe sample comprised HCWs, who received either the ChAdOx1 (n = 4,458) or the BNT162B2 (n = 245) vaccines; most participants were female (73.5%), and 81.1% were under 50 years old. Further, 153 (3.3%) visited the ED and reported experiencing fever (66.9%) and myalgia (56.1%). Additionally, 91 (59.5%) of them were in their 20s, and 106 (67.5%) were assigned to the PVCZ. Lastly, 107 (68.2%) of the patients received parenteral management. No patient required hospitalization.ConclusionIn conclusion, vaccinated HCWs who visited the ED with adverse events had a high incidence of fever and a low likelihood of developing serious illnesses. As the COVID-19 vaccination program for Korean citizens continues to expand, strategies to minimize unnecessary ED overcrowding should be put into effect.
| S-EPMC8275460 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 may lead to severe disease, requiring intensive care treatment and challenging the capacity of health care systems. The aim of this study was to compare the ability of commonly used scoring systems for sepsis and pneumonia to predict severe COVID-19 in the emergency department.MethodsProspective, observational, single centre study in a secondary/tertiary care hospital in Oslo, Norway. Patients were assessed upon hospital admission using the following scoring systems; quick Sequential Failure Assessment (qSOFA), Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome criteria (SIRS), National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), CURB-65 and Pneumonia Severity index (PSI). The ratio of arterial oxygen tension to inspiratory oxygen fraction (P/F-ratio) was also calculated. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) for each scoring system was calculated, along with sensitivity and specificity for the most commonly used cut-offs. Severe disease was defined as death or treatment in ICU within 14 days.Results38 of 175 study participants developed severe disease, 13 (7%) died and 29 (17%) had a stay at an intensive care unit (ICU). NEWS2 displayed an AUROC of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.72-0.88), CURB-65 0.75 (0.65-0.84), PSI 0.75 (0.65-0.84), SIRS 0.70 (0.61-0.80) and qSOFA 0.70 (0.61-0.79). NEWS2 was significantly better than SIRS and qSOFA in predicating severe disease, and with a cut-off of5 points, had a sensitivity and specificity of 82% and 60%, respectively.ConclusionNEWS2 predicted severe COVID-19 disease more accurately than SIRS and qSOFA, but not significantly better than CURB65 and PSI. NEWS2 may be a useful screening tool in evaluating COVID-19 patients during hospital admission.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04345536. (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04345536).
| S-EPMC7577659 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:The purpose of this study is to elucidate the chest imaging findings of suspected COVID-19 patients presenting to the emergency department and the relationship with their demographics and RT-PCR testing results. METHODS:Patients presenting to the ED between March 12 and March 28, 2020, with symptoms suspicious for COVID-19 and subsequent CXR and/or CT exam were selected. Patients imaged for other reasons with findings suspicious for COVID-19 were also included. Demographics, laboratory test results, and history were extracted from the medical record. Descriptive statistics were used to explore the relationship between imaging and these factors. RESULTS:A total of 227 patients from the emergency department were analyzed (224 CXRs and 25 CTs). Of the 192 patients with COVID-19 results, 173 (90.1%) had COVID-19 RT-PCR (+). Abnormal imaging (CXR, 85.7% and/or CT, 100%) was noted in 155 (89.6%) of COVID-19 RT-PCR (+) cases. The most common imaging findings were mixed airspace/interstitial opacities (39.8%) on CXR and peripheral GGOs on CT (92%). The most common demographic were African Americans (76.8%). Furthermore, 97.1% of African Americans were RT-PCR (+) compared to 65.8% of Caucasians. CONCLUSION:We found a similar spectrum of thoracic imaging findings in COVID-19 patients as previous studies. The most common demographic were African Americans (76.8%). Furthermore, 97.1% of African Americans were RT-PCR (+) compared to 65.8% of Caucasians. Both CT and CXR can accurately identify COVID-19 pneumonitis in 89.6% of RT-PCR (+) cases, 89.5% of false negatives, and 72.7% of cases with no RT-PCR result.
| S-EPMC7246086 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionInfluenza is a major concern in hospitals, including the emergency department (ED), mainly because of a high risk for ED personnel to acquire and transmit the disease. Although influenza vaccination is recommended for health care workers, vaccination coverage is low.MethodsThis survey was conducted in the 2016/2017 and 2020/2021 influenza seasons. Questionnaires were sent to ED personnel in 12 hospitals in Bavaria, South-Eastern Germany. The response rates were 62% and 38% in 2016/2017 and 2020/2021, respectively. Data were compared between the two seasons as well as between vaccinated and not vaccinated respondents in 2020/2021.ResultsSignificantly more ED personnel reported having been vaccinated in the 2020/2021 season. Factors associated with vaccination coverage (or the intention to get vaccinated) were profession (physician / medical student), having been vaccinated at least twice, the availability of an influenza vaccination on site (in the ED) as well as the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, significant differences in the assessment and evaluation of influenza, its vaccination side effects and ethical aspects were found between vaccinated and not vaccinated ED personnel in 2020/2021. Unvaccinated respondents estimated higher frequencies of almost all potential vaccination side effects, were less likely to accept lay-offs if employees would not come to work during an influenza pandemic and more likely to agree that work attendance should be an employee´s decision. Vaccinated participants instead, rather agreed that vaccination should be mandatory and were less likely to consider job changes in case of a mandatory vaccination policy.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic might have contributed to a higher influenza vaccination rate among ED workers. Vaccination on site and interventions targeting the perception of influenza vaccination and its side effects may be most promising to increase the vaccination coverage among ED personnel.
| S-EPMC8604289 | 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: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:IntroductionThe novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the United States (US) prompted widespread containment measures such as shelter-in-place (SIP) orders. The goal of our study was to determine whether there was a significant change in overall volume and proportion of emergency department (ED) encounters since SIP measures began.MethodsThis was a retrospective, observational, cross-sectional study using billing data from January 1, 2017-April 20, 2020. We received data from 141 EDs across 16 states, encompassing a convenience sample of 26,223,438 ED encounters. We used a generalized least squares regression approach to ascertain changes for overall ED encounters, hospital admissions, and New York University ED visit algorithm categories.ResultsED encounters decreased significantly in the post-SIP period. Overall, there was a 39.6% decrease in ED encounters compared to expected volume in the pre-SIP period. Emergent encounters decreased by 35.8%, while non-emergent encounters decreased by 52.1%. Psychiatric encounters decreased by 30.2%. Encounters related to drugs and alcohol decreased the least, by 9.3% and 27.5%, respectively.ConclusionThere was a significant overall reduction in ED utilization in the post-SIP period. There was a greater reduction in lower acuity encounters than higher acuity encounters. Of all subtypes of ED encounters, substance abuse- and alcohol-related encounters reduced the least, and injury-related encounters reduced the most.
| S-EPMC7673895 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The novel coronavirus, SARs-CoV-2, causes a clinical disease known as COVID-19. Since being declared a global pandemic, a significant amount of literature has been produced and guidelines are rapidly changing as more light is shed on this subject. Decisions regarding disposition must be made with attention to comorbidities. Multiple comorbidities portend a worse prognosis. Many clinical decision tools have been postulated; however, as of now, none have been validated. Laboratory testing available to the emergency physician is nonspecific but does show promise in helping prognosticate and risk stratify. Radiographic testing can also aid in the process. Escalating oxygen therapy seems to be a safe and effective therapy; delaying intubation for only the most severe cases in which respiratory muscle fatigue or mental status demands this. Despite thrombotic concerns in COVID-19, the benefit of anticoagulation in the emergency department (ED) seems to be minimal. Data regarding adjunctive therapies such as steroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories are variable with no concrete recommendations, although steroids may decrease mortality in those patients developing acute respiratory distress syndrome. With current guidelines in mind, we propose a succinct flow sheet for both the escalation of oxygen therapy as well as ED management and disposition of these patients.
| S-EPMC7673887 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine the public's likelihood of being willing to use an emergency department (ED) for urgent/emergent illness during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsAn institutional review board-approved, cross-sectional survey of a non-probability sample from Amazon Mechanical Turk was administered May 24-25, 2020. Change in self-reported willingness to use an ED before and during the pandemic (primary outcome) was assessed via McNemar's test; COVID-19 knowledge and perceptions were secondary outcomes.ResultsThere were 855 survey participants (466 [54.5%] male; 699 [81.8%] White; median age 39). Proportion reporting likelihood to use the ED pre-pandemic (71% [604/855]) decreased significantly during the pandemic (49% [417/855]; P < 0.001); those unlikely to visit the ED increased significantly during the pandemic (41% [347/855] vs 22% [417/855], P < 0.001). Participants were unlikely to use the ED during the pandemic if they were unlikely to use it pre-pandemic (adjusted odds ratio, 4.55; 95% confidence interval, 3.09-6.7) or correctly answered more COVID-19 knowledge questions (adjusted odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.60). Furthermore, 23.4% (n = 200) of respondents believed the pandemic was not a serious threat to society. Respondents with higher COVID-19 knowledge scores were more likely to view the pandemic as serious (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-1.82).ConclusionsThis survey study investigated the public's willingness to use the ED during the COVID-19 pandemic. Only 49% of survey respondents were willing to visit the ED during a pandemic if they felt ill compared with 71% before the pandemic.
| S-EPMC7771795 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 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.ObjectivesThis 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.MethodsUsing 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.ResultsOf 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.ConclusionCOVID-19 patients diagnosed with mild symptoms on initial presentation have a 14.6% rate of bounceback due to progression of illness.
| S-EPMC8054547 | biostudies-literature