Dataset Information

Understanding the environmental factors related to the decrease in Pediatric Emergency Department referrals for acute asthma during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Lockdown measures during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic determined radical changes to behavioral and social habits, that were reflected by a reduction in the transmission of respiratory pathogens and in anthropogenic atmospheric emissions.

Objective

This ecological study aims to provide a descriptive evaluation on how restrictive measures during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic impacted Pediatric Emergency Department (PED) referrals for asthma exacerbations, and their potentially associated environmental triggers in Bologna, a densely populated urban area in Northern Italy.

Methods

Files of children evaluated for acute asthma during 2015 to 2020 at the PED of Sant'Orsola University Hospital of Bologna were retrospectively reviewed. Historical daily concentration records of particulate (PM_2.5 , PM₁₀ ) and gaseous (NO₂ , C₆ H₆ ) air pollutants, and pollen were concurrently evaluated, including specific PM chemical tracers for traffic-related air pollution (TRAP).

Results

In 2020, asthma-related PED referrals decreased compared to referral rates of the previous 5 years (p < 0.01). This effect was particularly marked during the first lockdown period (March to May), when the drastic drop in PED referrals was associated with a reduction of high-priority cases up to 85% and by 54%, on average. A concomitant reduction in the concentrations of traffic-related air pollutants was observed in the range of 40%-60% (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

The lower rate of asthma exacerbations in childhood was in this study paralleled with reduced TRAP levels during the pandemic. Synergic interactions of the multiple consequences of lockdowns likely contributed to the reduced exacerbations, including decreased exposure to ambient pollutants and fewer respiratory infections, identified as the most important factor in the literature.

SUBMITTER: Dondi A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8661783 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCanadian pediatric emergency department visits are increasing, with a disproportionate increase in low-acuity visits locally (33% of volume in 2008-09, 41% in 2011-12). We sought to understand: 1) presentation patterns and resource implications; 2) parents' perceptions and motivations; and 3) alternate health care options considered prior to presenting with low-acuity problems.MethodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study at our tertiary pediatric emergency department serving two provinces to explore differences between patients with and without a primary care provider. During four, 2-week study periods over 1 year, parents of low-acuity visits received an anonymous survey. Presentation times, interventions, diagnoses and dispositions were captured on a data collection form linked to the survey by study number.ResultsParents completed 2,443 surveys (74.1% response rate), with survey-data collection form pairs available for 2,146 visits. Overall, 89.7% of respondents had a primary care provider; 68% were family physicians. Surprisingly, 40% of visits occurred during weekday office hours and 27.3% occurred within 4 hours of symptom onset; 67.5% of those early presenters were for injuries. Few parents sought care from their primary care provider (25%), health information line (20.7%), or urgent care clinic (18.5%); 36% reported that they believed their child's problem required the emergency department. Forty-five percent required only a history, physical exam and reassurance; only 11% required an intervention not available in an office setting. Patients without a primary care provider were significantly more likely to present during weekday office hours (p = 0.003), have longer symptom duration (p<0.001), and not know of other options (p = 0.001).ConclusionsMany parents seek pediatric emergency department care for low-acuity problems despite their child having a primary care provider. Ensuring timely access to these providers may help reduce pediatric emergency department overuse. Educational initiatives should inform parents about low-acuity problems and where appropriate care can/should be accessed.

Project description:BackgroundDuring the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic period, the use of emergency services with pediatric non-COVID patients has decreased considerably. We aimed to examine whether there was a change in the demographic data, triage profile, causes, management, and cost of pediatric emergency department (PED) visits of non-COVID patients during the pandemic period.MethodsThis study was a retrospective, single-center, observational comparative study that was conducted at the PED. Patient records were examined during "the pandemic spring" and the same period of the previous year. Patient demographics, waiting time, and outcome of the PED visit were analyzed in the entire population of children admitted to the PED during the study period, whereas more precise data such as the reason for PED use, duration of symptoms, urgency levels according to the Emergency Severity Index (ESI), final diagnosis, management, and cost of patient care were analyzed in a sample of admitted patients. We used the chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test for statistical analyses.ResultsA total of 62,593 PED visits occurred. During the pandemic period, PED visits showed a decrease of 55.8% compared to the previous year. Patients included in the sampling study group were selected using a systematic random sampling method. The median waiting time during the pandemic period was significantly shorter than the previous year (median 14 min [IQR: 5-32] vs. median 5 min [IQR: 2-16]; p<0.001). The median duration of symptoms was 1 day (1-2) in both groups. Emergency Severity Index (ESI) levels I, II, and III showed a significant increase (27.7% vs. 37.3%) in triage scoring compared to levels IV and V (72.3% vs. 62.7%) during the pandemic period (p<0.001). The median cost per patient during the pandemic period was statistically higher compared to the previous year ($19.57 [19.57-40.50] vs. $25.34 [31.50-52.01]; p<0.001). Overall costs during the pandemic period had a 1.6-fold decline.ConclusionWe highlighted the changes in an ordinary PED profile during an extraordinary period. A shift in ESI levels in a more emergent direction was observed. While the number of nonurgent patients, especially those with infections, decreased, the rates of surgical cases, acute neurological and heart diseases, home accidents, and poisoning increased relative to the pre-pandemic period.