Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
1.
Emergencias ; 34(6): 428-436, 2022 12.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2168376

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To describe the sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity, and baseline functional status of patients aged 65 or older who came to hospital emergency departments (EDs) during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to compare them with the findings for an earlier period to analyze factors of the index episode that were related to mortality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We studied data from the EDEN-COVID cohort (Emergency Department and Elder Needs During COVID-19) of patients aged 65 years or older treated in 40 Spanish EDs on 7 consecutive days. Nine sociodemographic variables, 18 comorbidities, and 7 function variables were registered and compared with the findings for the EDEN cohort of patients included with the same criteria and treated a year earlier in the same EDs. In-hospital mortality was calculated in the 2 cohorts and a multivariable logistic regression model was used to explore associated factors. RESULTS: The EDEN-COVID cohort included 6806 patients with a median age of 78 years; 49% were women. The pandemic cohort had a higher proportion of men, patients covered by the national health care system, patients brought from residential facilities, and patients who arrived in an ambulance equipped for advanced life support. Pandemic-cohort patients more often had diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, and dementia; they less often had connective tissue and thromboembolic diseases. The Barthel and Charlson indices were worse in this period, and cognitive decline was more common. Fewer patients had a history of depression or falls. Eight hundred ninety these patients (13.1%) died, 122 of them in the ED (1.8%); these percentages were lower in the earlier EDEN cohort, at 3.1% and 0.5%, respectively. Independent sociodemographic factors associated with higher mortality were transport by ambulance, older age, male sex, and living in a residential facility. Mortalityassociated comorbidities were neoplasms, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. The only function variable associated with mortality was the inability to walk independently. A history of falls in the past 6 months was a protective factor. CONCLUSION: The sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity, and functional status of patients aged 65 years or older who were treated in hospital EDs during the pandemic differed in many ways from those usually seen in this older-age population. Mortality was higher than in the prepandemic period. Certain sociodemographic, comorbidity, and function variables were associated with in-hospital mortality.


OBJETIVO: Investigar sociodemografía, comorbilidad y situación funcional de los pacientes de 65 o más años de edad que consultaron a los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) durante la primera oleada epidémica de COVID, compararlas con un periodo previo y ver su relación. METODO: Se utilizaron los datos obtenidos de la cohorte EDEN-Covid (Emergency Department and Elder Needs during COVID) en la que participaron 40 SUH españoles que incluyeron todos los pacientes de $ 65 años atendidos durante 7 días consecutivos. Se analizaron 9 características sociodemográficas, 18 comorbilidades y 7 variables de funcionalidad, que se compararon con las de la cohorte EDEN (Emergency Department and Elder Needs), que contiene pacientes con el mismo criterio de inclusión etario reclutados por los mismos SUH un año antes. Se recogió la mortalidad intrahospitalaria y se investigaron los factores asociados mediante regresión logística multivariable. RESULTADOS: La cohorte EDEN-Covid incluyó 6.806 pacientes (mediana edad: 78 años; 49% mujeres). Hubo más varones, con cobertura sanitaria pública, procedentes de residencia y que llegaron con ambulancia medicalizada que durante el periodo prepandemia. Presentaron más frecuentemente diabetes mellitus, enfermedad renal crónica, enfermedad cerebrovascular y demencia y menos conectivopatías y enfermedad tromboembólica, peores índices de Barthel y Charlson, más deterioro cognitivo y menos antecedentes de depresión o caídas previas. Fallecieron durante el episodio 890 pacientes (13,1%), 122 de ellos en urgencias (1,8%), porcentajes superiores al periodo prepandemia (3,1% y 0,5%, respectivamente). Se asociaron de forma independiente a mayor mortalidad durante el periodo COVID la llegada en ambulancia, mayor edad, ser varón y vivir en residencia como variables sociodemográficas, y neoplasia, enfermedad renal crónica e insuficiencia cardiaca como comorbilidades. La única variable funcional asociada a mortalidad fue no deambular respecto a ser autónomo, y la existencia de caídas los 6 meses previos resultó un factor protector. CONCLUSIONES: La sociodemografía, comorbilidad y funcionalidad de los pacientes de 65 o más años que consultaron en los SUH españoles durante la primera ola pandémica difirieron en muchos aspectos de lo habitualmente observado en esta población. La mortalidad fue mayor a la del periodo prepandémico. Algunos aspectos sociodemográficos, de comorbilidad y funcionales se relacionaron con la mortalidad intrahospitalaria.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Male , Female , Aged , COVID-19/therapy , Pandemics , Functional Status , Comorbidity , Emergency Service, Hospital
2.
Emergencias ; 34(6):428-436, 2022.
Article in Spanish | CINAHL | ID: covidwho-2124873

ABSTRACT

Objective. To describe the sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity, and baseline functional status of patients aged 65 or older who came to hospital emergency departments (EDs) during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to compare them with the findings for an earlier period to analyze factors of the index episode that were related to mortality. Methods. We studied data from the EDEN-COVID cohort (Emergency Department and Elder Needs During COVID-19) of patients aged 65 years or older treated in 40 Spanish EDs on 7 consecutive days. Nine sociodemographic variables, 18 comorbidities, and 7 function variables were registered and compared with the findings for the EDEN cohort of patients included with the same criteria and treated a year earlier in the same EDs . In-hospital mortality was calculated in the 2 cohorts and a multivariable logistic regression model was used to explore associated factors. Results. The EDEN-COVID cohort included 6806 patients with a median age of 78 years;49% were women. The pandemic cohort had a higher proportion of men, patients covered by the national health care system, patients brought from residential facilities, and patients who arrived in an ambulance equipped for advanced life support. Pandemic-cohort patients more often had diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, and dementia;they less often had connective tissue and thromboembolic diseases. The Barthel and Charlson indices were worse in this period, and cognitive decline was more common. Fewer patients had a history of depression or falls. Eight hundred ninety these patients (13.1%) died, 122 of them in the ED (1.8%);these percentages were lower in the earlier EDEN cohort, at 3.1% and 0.5%, respectively. Independent sociodemographic factors associated with higher mortality were transport by ambulance, older age, male sex, and living in a residential facility. Mortality- associated comorbidities were neoplasms, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. The only function variable associated with mortality was the inability to walk independently. A history of falls in the past 6 months was a protective factor. Conclusions. The sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity, and functional status of patients aged 65 years or older who were treated in hospital EDs during the pandemic differed in many ways from those usually seen in this older-age population. Mortality was higher than in the prepandemic period. Certain sociodemographic, comorbidity, and function variables were associated with in-hospital mortality.

3.
Emergencias ; 34(5): 369-376, 2022 10.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2057979

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To define quality of care indicators and care process standards for treating patients with COVID-19 in hospital emergency departments (EDs), to determine the level of adherence to standards during the first wave in 2020, and to detect factors associated with different levels of adherence. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We selected care indicators and standards by applying the Delphi method. We then analyzed the level of adherence in the SIESTA cohort (registered by the Spanish Investigators in Emergency Situations Team). This cohort was comprised of patients with COVID-19 treated in 62 Spanish hospitals in March and April 2020. Adherence was compared according to pandemic-related ED caseload pressure, time periods during the wave (earlier and later), and age groups. RESULTS: Fourteen quality indicators were identified. Three were adhered to in less than 50% of the patients. Polymerase chain reaction testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection was the indicator most often disregarded, in 29% of patients when the caseload was high vs 40% at other times (P .001) and in 30% of patients in the later period vs 37% in the earlier period (P = .04). Adherence to the following indicators was better in the later part of the wave: monitoring of oxygen saturation (100% vs 99%, P = .035), electrocardiogram monitoring in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine (87% vs 65%, P .001), and avoiding of lopinavir/ritonavir treatment in patients with diarrhea (79% vs 53%, P .001). No differences related to age groups were found. CONCLUSION: Adherence to certain quality indicators deteriorated during ED treatment of patients with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. Pressure from high caseloads may have exacerbated this deterioration. A learning effect led to improvement. No differences related to patient age were detected.


OBJETIVO: Definir indicadores de calidad y sus estándares para el proceso asistencial del paciente con COVID-19 en servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH), así como determinar su grado de cumplimiento durante el primer pico pandémico e investigar si existieron diferencias en relación con diferentes factores. METODO: Siguiendo la metodología del Delphi, los autores seleccionaron los indicadores y sus estándares. Posteriormente, se analizó el grado de cumplimiento en la cohorte SIESTA, formada por pacientes COVID-19 de 62 SUH españoles atendidos en marzo y abril de 2020. Se comparó el cumplimiento de los indicadores según la presión asistencial generada por la pandemia en el SUH, el periodo asistencial y el grupo etario. RESULTADOS: Se definieron 14 indicadores. Tres de ellos se cumplieron en 50% de los pacientes. La realización de la reacción en cadena de la polimerasa (PCR) para el SARS-CoV-2 tuvo peor cumplimiento en SUH con alta presión (29% frente a 40%, p 0,001) y durante el periodo tardío (30% frente a 37%, p = 0,04). Durante el periodo tardío, mejoró la medida de saturación de oxígeno (100% frente a 99%, p = 0,035), la realización de electrocardiograma en pacientes tratados con hidroxicloroquina (87% frente a 65%, p 0,001) y la no administración de lopinavir-ritonavir en pacientes con diarrea (79% frente a 53%, p 0,001). No hubo diferencias en relación con el grupo etario. CONCLUSIONES: Durante el primer pico pandémico, diversos aspectos de la calidad de la atención a pacientes COVID-19 en los SUH españoles se vieron deteriorados. La presión asistencial pudo incrementar este deterioro. Hubo un efecto de aprendizaje que condicionó una mejora, pero no se observaron diferencias según la edad de los pacientes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital , Hospitals , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine , Lopinavir , Ritonavir , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Emergencias ; 34(5):369-376, 2022.
Article in Spanish | CINAHL | ID: covidwho-2045787

ABSTRACT

Objectives. To define quality of care indicators and care process standards for treating patients with COVID-19 in hospital emergency departments (EDs), to determine the level of adherence to standards during the first wave in 2020, and to detect factors associated with different levels of adherence. Methods. We selected care indicators and standards by applying the Delphi method. We then analyzed the level of adherence in the SIESTA cohort (registered by the Spanish Investigators in Emergency Situations Team). This cohort was comprised of patients with COVID-19 treated in 62 Spanish hospitals in March and April 2020. Adherence was compared according to pandemic-related ED caseload pressure, time periods during the wave (earlier and later), and age groups. Results. Fourteen quality indicators were identified. Three were adhered to in less than 50% of the patients. Polymerase chain reaction testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection was the indicator most often disregarded, in 29% of patients when the caseload was high vs 40% at other times (P < .001) and in 30% of patients in the later period vs 37% in the earlier period (P = .04). Adherence to the following indicators was better in the later part of the wave: monitoring of oxygen saturation (100% vs 99%, P = .035), electrocardiogram monitoring in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine (87% vs 65%, P < .001), and avoiding of lopinavir/ritonavir treatment in patients with diarrhea (79% vs 53%, P < .001). No differences related to age groups were found. Conclusions. Adherence to certain quality indicators deteriorated during ED treatment of patients with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. Pressure from high caseloads may have exacerbated this deterioration. A learning effect led to improvement. No differences related to patient age were detected. Objetivo. Definir indicadores de calidad y sus estándares para el proceso asistencial del paciente con COVID-19 en servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH), así como determinar su grado de cumplimiento durante el primer pico pandémico e investigar si existieron diferencias en relación con diferentes factores. Método. Siguiendo la metodología del Delphi, los autores seleccionaron los indicadores y sus estándares. Posteriormente, se analizó el grado de cumplimiento en la cohorte SIESTA, formada por pacientes COVID-19 de 62 SUH españoles atendidos en marzo y abril de 2020. Se comparó el cumplimiento de los indicadores según la presión asistencial generada por la pandemia en el SUH, el periodo asistencial y el grupo etario. Resultados. Se definieron 14 indicadores. Tres de ellos se cumplieron en < 50% de los pacientes. La realización de la reacción en cadena de la polimerasa (PCR) para el SARS-CoV-2 tuvo peor cumplimiento en SUH con alta presión (29% frente a 40%, p < 0,001) y durante el periodo tardío (30% frente a 37%, p = 0,04). Durante el periodo tardío, mejoró la medida de saturación de oxígeno (100% frente a 99%, p = 0,035), la realización de electrocardiograma en pacientes tratados con hidroxicloroquina (87% frente a 65%, p < 0,001) y la no administración de lopinavir-ritonavir en pacientes con diarrea (79% frente a 53%, p < 0,001). No hubo diferencias en relación con el grupo etario. Conclusiones. Durante el primer pico pandémico, diversos aspectos de la calidad de la atención a pacientes COVID-19 en los SUH españoles se vieron deteriorados. La presión asistencial pudo incrementar este deterioro. Hubo un efecto de aprendizaje que condicionó una mejora, pero no se observaron diferencias según la edad de los pacientes.

5.
Eur Heart J ; 42(33): 3127-3142, 2021 08 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1973142

ABSTRACT

AIMS: We investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with COVID-19 attending emergency departments (EDs), before hospitalization. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with PE in 62 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, case group) during the first COVID-19 outbreak. COVID-19 patients without PE and non-COVID-19 patients with PE were included as control groups. Adjusted comparisons for baseline characteristics, acute episode characteristics, and outcomes were made between cases and randomly selected controls (1:1 ratio). We identified 368 PE in 74 814 patients with COVID-19 attending EDs (4.92‰). The standardized incidence of PE in the COVID-19 population resulted in 310 per 100 000 person-years, significantly higher than that observed in the non-COVID-19 population [35 per 100 000 person-years; odds ratio (OR) 8.95 for PE in the COVID-19 population, 95% confidence interval (CI) 8.51-9.41]. Several characteristics in COVID-19 patients were independently associated with PE, the strongest being D-dimer >1000 ng/mL, and chest pain (direct association) and chronic heart failure (inverse association). COVID-19 patients with PE differed from non-COVID-19 patients with PE in 16 characteristics, most directly related to COVID-19 infection; remarkably, D-dimer >1000 ng/mL, leg swelling/pain, and PE risk factors were significantly less present. PE in COVID-19 patients affected smaller pulmonary arteries than in non-COVID-19 patients, although right ventricular dysfunction was similar in both groups. In-hospital mortality in cases (16.0%) was similar to COVID-19 patients without PE (16.6%; OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65-1.42; and 11.4% in a subgroup of COVID-19 patients with PE ruled out by scanner, OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.97-2.27), but higher than in non-COVID-19 patients with PE (6.5%; OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.66-4.51). Adjustment for differences in baseline and acute episode characteristics and sensitivity analysis reported very similar associations. CONCLUSIONS: PE in COVID-19 patients at ED presentation is unusual (about 0.5%), but incidence is approximately ninefold higher than in the general (non-COVID-19) population. Moreover, risk factors and leg symptoms are less frequent, D-dimer increase is lower and emboli involve smaller pulmonary arteries. While PE probably does not increase the mortality of COVID-19 patients, mortality is higher in COVID-19 than in non-COVID-19 patients with PE.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Embolism , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products , Humans , Incidence , Pulmonary Embolism/epidemiology , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Rev Invest Clin ; 74(3): 135-146, 2022 05 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1836372

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Information is needed on the safety and efficacy of direct discharge from the emergency department (ED) of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the study were to study the variables associated with discharge from the ED in patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, and study ED revisits related to COVID-19 at 30 days (EDR30d). METHODS: Multicenter study of the SIESTA cohort including 1198 randomly selected COVID patients in 61 EDs of Spanish medical centers from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020. We collected baseline and related characteristics of the acute episode and calculated the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for ED discharge. In addition, we analyzed the variables related to EDR30d in discharged patients. RESULTS: We analyzed 859 patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, 84 (9.8%) of whom weredischarged from the ED. The variables independently associated with discharge were being a woman (aOR 1.890; 95%CI 1.176 3.037), age < 60 years (aOR 2.324; 95%CI 1.353-3.990), and lymphocyte count > 1200/mm3 (aOR 4.667; 95%CI 1.045-20.839). The EDR30d of the ED discharged group was 40.0%, being lower in women (aOR 0.368; 95%CI 0.142-0.953). A totalof 130 hospitalized patients died (16.8%) as did two in the group discharged from the ED (2.4%) (OR 0.121; 95%CI 0.029-0.498). CONCLUSION: Discharge from the ED in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was infrequent and was associated with few variables of the episode. The EDR30d was high, albeit with a low mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pneumonia , Cohort Studies , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies
7.
Emerg Med J ; 39(5): 402-410, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1752891

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics and outcomes of acute (myo)pericarditis (AMP) in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Case-control, retrospective review, consecutive case inclusion performed in 62 Spanish EDs. All COVID-19 patients with AMP (cases) were compared in clinical characteristics and outcomes with COVID-19 without AMP (control group A) and non-COVID patients with AMP (control group B). We estimated unadjusted standardised incidence (SI, not adjusted by population's age/sex) of AMP in COVID-19 and non-COVID populations (per 100 000/year). RESULTS: We identified 67 AMP in COVID-19 patients (SI=56.5, OR with respect to non-COVID patients=4.43, 95% CI=3.98 to 4.94). Remarkably, COVID-19 cases presented with chest pain less frequently than non-COVID patients and had less typical ECG changes, higher NT-proBNP (N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide), more left and right ventricular dysfunction in echocardiography and more need of inotropic/vasopressor drugs. Admission to intensive care was higher than control group A (OR=3.22, 95% CI=1.43 to 7.23), and in-hospital mortality was higher than control group B (OR=7.75, 95% CI=2.77 to 21.7). CONCLUSION: AMP is unusual as a form of COVID-19 presentation (about 1‰ cases), but SI is more than fourfold higher than non-COVID population, and it is less symptomatic, more severe and has higher in-hospital mortality; therefore, rapid recognition, echocardiographic assessment of myopericardial inflammation/dysfunction and treatment with vasoactive drugs when needed are recommended in AMP in patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pericarditis , Adenosine Monophosphate , Biomarkers , COVID-19/epidemiology , Case-Control Studies , Humans , Incidence , Natriuretic Peptide, Brain , Peptide Fragments , Risk Factors
8.
J Emerg Med ; 62(4): 443-454, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1654729

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of knowledge about the real incidence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in patients with COVID-19, their clinical characteristics, and their prognoses. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the incidence, clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes of ACS in patients with COVID-19 in the emergency department. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with ACS in 62 Spanish emergency departments between March and April 2020 (the first wave of COVID-19). We formed 2 control groups: COVID-19 patients without ACS (control A) and non-COVID-19 patients with ACS (control B). Unadjusted comparisons between cases and control subjects were performed regarding 58 characteristics and outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 110 patients with ACS in 74,814 patients with COVID-19 attending the ED (1.48% [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.21-1.78%]). This incidence was lower than that observed in non-COVID-19 patients (3.64% [95% CI 3.54-3.74%]; odds ratio [OR] 0.40 [95% CI 0.33-0.49]). The clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 associated with a higher risk of presenting ACS were: previous coronary artery disease, age ≥60 years, hypertension, chest pain, raised troponin, and hypoxemia. The need for hospitalization and admission to intensive care and in-hospital mortality were higher in cases than in control group A (adjusted OR [aOR] 6.36 [95% CI 1.84-22.1], aOR 4.63 [95% CI 1.88-11.4], and aOR 2.46 [95% CI 1.15-5.25]). When comparing cases with control group B, the aOR of admission to intensive care was 0.41 (95% CI 0.21-0.80), while the aOR for in-hospital mortality was 5.94 (95% CI 2.84-12.4). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of ACS in patients with COVID-19 attending the emergency department was low, around 1.48%, but could be increased in some circumstances. Patients with COVID-19 with ACS had a worse prognosis than control subjects with higher in-hospital mortality.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome , COVID-19 , Acute Coronary Syndrome/complications , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Incidence , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
9.
J Clin Gastroenterol ; 56(1): e38-e46, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1605073

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), who were attending the emergency department (ED), before hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with UGB in 62 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, case group) during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 outbreak. We formed 2 control groups: COVID-19 patients without UGB (control group A) and non-COVID-19 patients with UGB (control group B). Fifty-three independent variables and 4 outcomes were compared between cases and controls. RESULTS: We identified 83 UGB in 74,814 patients with COVID-19 who were attending EDs (1.11%, 95% CI=0.88-1.38). This incidence was lower compared with non-COVID-19 patients [2474/1,388,879, 1.78%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.71-1.85; odds ratio (OR)=0.62; 95% CI=0.50-0.77]. Clinical characteristics associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 patients presenting with UGB were abdominal pain, vomiting, hematemesis, dyspnea, expectoration, melena, fever, cough, chest pain, and dysgeusia. Compared with non-COVID-19 patients with UGB, COVID-19 patients with UGB more frequently had fever, cough, expectoration, dyspnea, abdominal pain, diarrhea, interstitial lung infiltrates, and ground-glass lung opacities. They underwent fewer endoscopies in the ED (although diagnoses did not differ between cases and control group B) and less endoscopic treatment. After adjustment for age and sex, cases showed a higher in-hospital all-cause mortality than control group B (OR=2.05, 95% CI=1.09-3.86) but not control group A (OR=1.14, 95% CI=0.59-2.19) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of UGB in COVID-19 patients attending EDs was lower compared with non-COVID-19 patients. Digestive symptoms predominated over respiratory symptoms, and COVID-19 patients with UGB underwent fewer gastroscopies and endoscopic treatments than the general population with UGB. In-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients with UGB was increased compared with non-COVID patients with UGB, but not compared with the remaining COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastroscopy , Humans , Incidence , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Acad Emerg Med ; 28(11): 1236-1250, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1398328

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the incidence, predictor variables, clinical characteristics, and stroke outcomes in patients with COVID-19 seen in emergency departments (EDs) before hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with stroke during the COVID-19 outbreak in 62 Spanish EDs. We formed two control groups: COVID-19 patients without stroke (control A) and non-COVID-19 patients with stroke (control B). We compared disease characteristics and four outcomes between cases and controls. RESULTS: We identified 147 strokes in 74,814 patients with COVID-19 seen in EDs (1.96‰, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.66‰ to 2.31‰), being lower than in non-COVID-19 patients (6,541/1,388,879, 4.71‰, 95% CI = 4.60‰ to 4.83‰; odds ratio [OR] = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.49). The estimated that standardized incidences of stroke per 100,000 individuals per year were 124 and 133 for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 individuals, respectively (OR = 0.93 for COVID patients, 95% CI = 0.87 to 0.99). Baseline characteristics associated with a higher risk of stroke in COVID-19 patients were hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and previous cerebrovascular and coronary diseases. Clinically, these patients more frequently presented with confusion, decreased consciousness, and syncope and higher D-dimer concentrations and leukocyte count at ED arrival. After adjustment for age and sex, the case group had higher hospitalization and intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates (but not mortality) than COVID-19 controls without stroke (OR = 3.41, 95% CI = 1.27 to 9.16; and OR = 3.79, 95% CI = 1.69 to 8.50, respectively) and longer hospitalization and greater in-hospital mortality than stroke controls without COVID-19 (OR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.24 to 1.94; and OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.37 to 2.30, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of stroke in COVID-19 patients presenting to EDs was lower than that in the non-COVID-19 reference sample. COVID-19 patients with stroke had greater need for hospitalization and ICU admission than those without stroke and longer hospitalization and greater in-hospital mortality than non-COVID-19 patients with stroke.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Stroke , Case-Control Studies , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Stroke/epidemiology
12.
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis ; 40(8): 1645-1656, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1122784

ABSTRACT

We investigated the incidence, clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcome of meningoencephalitis (ME) in patients with COVID-19 attending emergency departments (ED), before hospitalization. We retrospectively reviewed all COVID patients diagnosed with ME in 61 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, COVID-ME) during the COVID pandemic. We formed two control groups: non-COVID patients with ME (non-COVID-ME) and COVID patients without ME (COVID-non-ME). Unadjusted comparisons between cases and controls were performed regarding 57 baseline and clinical characteristics and 4 outcomes. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biochemical and serologic findings of COVID-ME and non-COVID-ME were also investigated. We identified 29 ME in 71,904 patients with COVID-19 attending EDs (0.40‰, 95%CI=0.27-0.58). This incidence was higher than that observed in non-COVID patients (150/1,358,134, 0.11‰, 95%CI=0.09-0.13; OR=3.65, 95%CI=2.45-5.44). With respect to non-COVID-ME, COVID-ME more frequently had dyspnea and chest X-ray abnormalities, and neck stiffness was less frequent (OR=0.3, 95%CI=0.1-0.9). In 69.0% of COVID-ME, CSF cells were predominantly lymphocytes, and SARS-CoV-2 antigen was detected by RT-PCR in 1 patient. The clinical characteristics associated with a higher risk of presenting ME in COVID patients were vomiting (OR=3.7, 95%CI=1.4-10.2), headache (OR=24.7, 95%CI=10.2-60.1), and altered mental status (OR=12.9, 95%CI=6.6-25.0). COVID-ME patients had a higher in-hospital mortality than non-COVID-ME patients (OR=2.26; 95%CI=1.04-4.48), and a higher need for hospitalization (OR=8.02; 95%CI=1.19-66.7) and intensive care admission (OR=5.89; 95%CI=3.12-11.14) than COVID-non-ME patients. ME is an unusual form of COVID presentation (<0.5‰ cases), but is more than 4-fold more frequent than in non-COVID patients attending the ED. As the majority of these MEs had lymphocytic predominance and in one patient SARS-CoV-2 antigen was detected in CSF, SARS-CoV-2 could be the cause of most of the cases observed. COVID-ME patients had a higher unadjusted in-hospital mortality than non-COVID-ME patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Meningoencephalitis/virology , Adult , Aged , Critical Care , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Spain
13.
Ann Neurol ; 89(3): 598-603, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1086259

ABSTRACT

We diagnosed 11 Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) cases among 71,904 COVID patients attended at 61 Spanish emergency departments (EDs) during the 2-month pandemic peak. The relative frequency of GBS among ED patients was higher in COVID (0.15‰) than non-COVID (0.02‰) patients (odds ratio [OR] = 6.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.18-12.5), as was the standardized incidence (9.44 and 0.69 cases/100,000 inhabitant-years, respectively, OR = 13.5, 95% CI = 9.87-18.4). Regarding clinical characteristics, olfactory-gustatory disorders were more frequent in COVID-GBS than non-COVID-GBS (OR = 27.59, 95% CI = 1.296-587) and COVID-non-GBS (OR = 7.875, 95% CI = 1.587-39.09) patients. Although COVID-GBS patients were more frequently admitted to intensive care, mortality was not increased versus control groups. Our results suggest SARS-CoV-2 could be another viral infection causing GBS. ANN NEUROL 2021;89:598-603.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/physiopathology , Guillain-Barre Syndrome/epidemiology , Hospital Mortality , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Olfaction Disorders/epidemiology , Taste Disorders/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/complications , Case-Control Studies , Female , Guillain-Barre Syndrome/etiology , Guillain-Barre Syndrome/physiopathology , Guillain-Barre Syndrome/therapy , Humans , Immunoglobulins, Intravenous/therapeutic use , Immunologic Factors/therapeutic use , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Olfaction Disorders/etiology , Olfaction Disorders/physiopathology , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology , Taste Disorders/etiology , Taste Disorders/physiopathology
14.
Chest ; 159(3): 1241-1255, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-996768

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Recent reports of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) developing pneumothorax correspond mainly to case reports describing mechanically ventilated patients. The real incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcome of spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) as a form of COVID-19 presentation remain to be defined. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of SP in patients with COVID-19 attending EDs differ compared with COVID-19 patients without SP and non-COVID-19 patients with SP? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This case-control study retrospectively reviewed all patients with COVID-19 diagnosed with SP (case group) in 61 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs) and compared them with two control groups: COVID-19 patients without SP and non-COVID-19 patients with SP. The relative frequencies of SP were estimated in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients in the ED, and annual standardized incidences were estimated for both populations. Comparisons between case subjects and control subjects included 52 clinical, analytical, and radiologic characteristics and four outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 40 occurrences of SP in 71,904 patients with COVID-19 attending EDs (0.56‰; 95% CI, 0.40‰-0.76‰). This relative frequency was higher than that among non-COVID-19 patients (387 of 1,358,134, 0.28‰; 95% CI, 0.26‰-0.32‰; OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.41-2.71). The standardized incidence of SP was also higher in patients with COVID-19 (34.2 vs 8.2/100,000/year; OR, 4.19; 95% CI, 3.64-4.81). Compared with COVID-19 patients without SP, COVID-19 patients developing SP more frequently had dyspnea and chest pain, low pulse oximetry readings, tachypnea, and increased leukocyte count. Compared with non-COVID-19 patients with SP, case subjects differed in 19 clinical variables, the most prominent being a higher frequency of dysgeusia/anosmia, headache, diarrhea, fever, and lymphopenia (all with OR > 10). All the outcomes measured, including in-hospital death, were worse in case subjects than in both control groups. INTERPRETATION: SP as a form of COVID-19 presentation at the ED is unusual (< 1‰ cases) but is more frequent than in the non-COVID-19 population and could be associated with worse outcomes than SP in non-COVID-19 patients and COVID-19 patients without SP.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Medical Services/methods , Pneumothorax , Respiration, Artificial , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Case-Control Studies , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pneumothorax/diagnostic imaging , Pneumothorax/epidemiology , Pneumothorax/etiology , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Risk Adjustment , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology , Symptom Assessment/methods , Symptom Assessment/statistics & numerical data
15.
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci ; 28(11): 953-966, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-995977

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: We investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics and outcomes of acute pancreatitis (AP) in patients with COVID-19 attending the emergency department (ED), before hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID patients diagnosed with AP in 62 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, COVID-AP) during the COVID outbreak. We formed two control groups: COVID patients without AP (COVID-non-AP) and non-COVID patients with AP (non-COVID-AP). Unadjusted comparisons between cases and controls were performed regarding 59 baseline and clinical characteristics and four outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 54 AP in 74 814 patients with COVID-19 attending the ED (frequency = 0.72‰, 95% CI = 0.54-0.94‰). This frequency was lower than in non-COVID patients (2231/1 388 879, 1.61‰, 95% CI = 1.54-1.67; OR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.34-0.58). Etiology of AP was similar in both groups, being biliary origin in about 50%. Twenty-six clinical characteristics of COVID patients were associated with a higher risk of developing AP: abdominal pain (OR = 59.4, 95% CI = 23.7-149), raised blood amylase (OR = 31.8; 95% CI = 1.60-632) and vomiting (OR = 15.8, 95% CI = 6.69-37.2) being the strongest, and some inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, platelets, D-dimer) were more increased. Compared to non-COVID-AP, COVID-AP patients differed in 23 variables; the strongest ones related to COVID symptoms, but less abdominal pain was reported, pancreatic enzymes raise was lower, and severity (estimated by BISAP and SOFA score at ED arrival) was higher. The in-hospital mortality (adjusted for age and sex) of COVID-AP did not differ from COVID-non-AP (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.45-245) but was higher than non-COVID-AP (OR = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.35-4.48). CONCLUSIONS: Acute pancreatitis as presenting form of COVID-19 in the ED is unusual (<1‰ cases). Some clinically distinctive characteristics are present compared to the remaining COVID patients and can help to identify this unusual manifestation. In-hospital mortality of COVID-AP does not differ from COVID-non-AP but is higher than non-COVID-AP, and the higher severity of AP in COVID patients could partially contribute to this increment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pancreatitis , Acute Disease , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Case-Control Studies , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Pancreatitis/epidemiology , Pancreatitis/virology , Retrospective Studies , Spain/epidemiology
16.
Emergencias ; 32(4):320-331, 2020.
Article | Cin20 | ID: covidwho-820337

ABSTRACT

Objective. To estimate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the organization of Spanish hospital emergency departments (EDs). To explore differences between Spanish autonomous communities or according to hospital size and disease incidence in the area. Methods. Survey of the heads of 283 EDs in hospitals belonging to or affiliated with Spain's public health service. Respondents evaluated the pandemic's impact on organization, resources, and staff absence from work in March and April 2020. Assessments were for 15-day periods. Results were analyzed overall and by autonomous community, hospital size, and local population incidence rates. Results. A total of 246 (87%) responses were received. The majority of the EDs organized a triage system, first aid, and observation wards;areas specifically for patients suspected of having COVID-19 were newly set apart. The nursing staff was increased in 83% of the EDs (with no subgroup differences), and 59% increased the number of physicians (especially in large hospitals and locations where the COVID-19 incidence was high). Diagnostic tests for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 were the resource the EDs missed most: 55% reported that tests were scarce often or very often. Other resources reported to be scarce were FPP2 and FPP3 masks (38% of the EDs), waterproof protective gowns (34%), and space (32%). More than 5% of the physicians, nurses, or other emergency staff were on sick leave 20%, 19%, and 16% of the time. These deficiencies were greatest during the last half of March, except for tests, which were most scarce in the first 15 days. Large hospital EDs less often reported that diagnostic tests were unavailable. In areas where the COVID-19 incidence was higher, the EDs reported higher rates of staff on sick leave. Resource scarcity differed markedly by autonomous community and was not always associated with the incidence of COVID-19 in the population. Conclusions. The COVID-19 pandemic led to organizational changes in EDs. Certain resources became scarce, and marked differences between autonomous communities were detected. Objetivo. Estimar el impacto del brote pandémico de COVID-19 en diversos aspectos organizativos de los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) españoles e investigar si difirió en función de la comunidad autónoma, tamaño del hospital e incidencia local de la pandemia. Método. Encuesta a los responsables de los 283 SUH españoles de uso público, quienes valoraron el impacto de la pandemia en aspectos organizativos, disponibilidad de recursos, y bajas del personal durante marzo-abril de 2020, diferenciando dicho impacto por quincenas. Los resultados se analizaron en conjunto, por comunidad autónoma, según tamaño del hospital y según incidencia local de la pandemia. Resultados. Se recibieron 246 encuestas (87% de los SUH españoles). La mayoría de SUH reorganizaron el triaje, primera asistencia y observación y habilitó nuevos espacios específicos para pacientes con sospecha de COVID-19. Un 83% aumentó dotación enfermera (sin diferencias entre grupos) y un 59% la dotación de médicos (más frecuente en hospitales grandes y zonas de alta incidencia). El recurso que más escaseó fue el test diagnóstico de SARS-CoV-2 (55% del tiempo insuficiente con cierta o mucha frecuencia), seguido de mascarillas FPP2-FPP3 (38%), batas impermeables (34%) y espacio asistencial (32%). Hubo más del 5% de médicos/enfermería/otro personal de baja el 20%/19%/16% del tiempo. Estos déficits fueron máximos la segunda quincena de marzo, excepto para los test diagnósticos (primera quincena de marzo). Los SUH de grandes centros tuvieron menos escasez de tests diagnósticos, y los de zonas de alta incidencia pandémica más profesionales de baja. Existieron marcadas diferencias en todas estos déficits entre comunidades autónomas, no siempre concordantes con el grado de afectación pandémica en cada comunidad. Conclusiones. La pandemia COVID-19 generó cambios estructurales en los SUH, que sufrieron una escasez considerable en ciertos recursos, con diferencias marcadas entre comunidades autónomas.

17.
Emergencias : revista de la Sociedad Espanola de Medicina de Emergencias ; 32(4):233-241, 2020.
Article | WHO COVID | ID: covidwho-679940

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treated in hospital emergency departments (EDs) in Spain, and to assess associations between characteristics and outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, nested-cohort study. Sixty-one EDs included a random sample of all patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 1 and April 30, 2020. Demographic and baseline health information, including concomitant conditions;clinical characteristics related to the ED visit and complementary test results;and treatments were recorded throughout the episode in the ED. We calculated crude and adjusted odds ratios for risk of in-hospital death and a composite outcome consisting of the following events: intensive care unit admission, orotracheal intubation or mechanical ventilation, or in-hospital death. The logistic regression models were constructed with 3 groups of independent variables: the demographic and baseline health characteristics, clinical characteristics and complementary test results related to the ED episode, and treatments. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age of patients was 62 (18) years. Most had high- or low-grade fever, dry cough, dyspnea, and diarrhea. The most common concomitant conditions were cardiovascular diseases, followed by respiratory diseases and cancer. Baseline patient characteristics that showed a direct and independent association with worse outcome (death and the composite outcome) were age and obesity. Clinical variables directly associated with worse outcomes were impaired consciousness and pulmonary crackles;headache was inversely associated with worse outcomes. Complementary test findings that were directly associated with outcomes were bilateral lung infiltrates, lymphopenia, a high platelet count, a D-dimer concentration over 500 mg/dL, and a lactate-dehydrogenase concentration over 250 IU/L in blood. CONCLUSION: This profile of the clinical characteristics and comorbidity of patients with COVID-19 treated in EDs helps us predict outcomes and identify cases at risk of exacerbation. The information can facilitate preventive measures and improve outcomes. OBJETIVO: Describir las caracteristicas clinicas de los pacientes con COVID-19 atendidos en los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) espanoles y evaluar su asociacion con los resultados de su evolucion. METODO: Estudio multicentrico, anidado en una cohorte prospectiva. Participaron 61 SUH que incluyeron pacientes seleccionados aleatoriamente de todos los diagnosticados de COVID-19 entre el 1 de marzo y el 30 de abril de 2020. Se recogieron caracteristicas basales, clinicas, de exploraciones complementarias y terapeuticas del episodio en los SUH. Se calcularon las odds ratio (OR) asociadas a la mortalidad intrahospitalaria y al evento combinado formado por el ingreso en unidad de cuidados intensivos (UCI), la intubacion orotraqueal o ventilacion mecanica invasiva (IOT/ VMI), crudas y ajustadas con modelos de regresion logistica para tres grupos de variables independientes: basales, clinicas y de exploraciones complementarias. RESULTADOS: La edad media fue de 62 anos (DE 18). La mayoria manifestaron fiebre, tos seca, disnea, febricula y diarrea. Las comorbilidades mas frecuentes fueron las enfermedades cardiovasculares, seguidas de las respiratorias y el cancer. Las variables basales que se asociaron independientemente y de forma directa a peores resultados evolutivos (tanto a mortalidad como a evento combinado) fueron edad y obesidad;las variables clinicas fueron disminucion de consciencia y crepitantes a la auscultacion pulmonar, y de forma inversa cefalea;y las variables de resultados de exploraciones complementarias fueron infiltrados pulmonares bilaterales y cardiomegalia radiologicos, y linfopenia, hiperplaquetosis, dimero-D > 500 mg/dL y lactato-deshidrogenasa > 250 UI/L en la analitica. CONCLUSIONES: Conocer las caracteristicas clinicas y la comorbilidad de los pacientes con COVID-19 atendidos en urgencias permite identificar precozmente a la poblacion as susce tible de empeorar, para prever y mejorar los resultados.

18.
Emergencias (Sant Vicenç dels Horts) ; 32(4):233-241, 2020.
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: covidwho-656239

ABSTRACT

OBJETIVO: Describir las características clínicas de los pacientes con COVID-19 atendidos en los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) españoles y evaluar su asociación con los resultados de su evolución. MÉTODOS: Estudio multicéntrico, anidado en una cohorte prospectiva. Participaron 61 SUH que incluyeron pacientes seleccionados aleatoriamente de todos los diagnosticados de COVID-19 entre el 1 de marzo y el 30 de abril de 2020. Se recogieron características basales, clínicas, de exploraciones complementarias y terapéuticas del episodio en los SUH. Se calcularon las odds ratio (OR) asociadas a la mortalidad intrahospitalaria y al evento combinado formado por el ingreso en unidad de cuidados intensivos (UCI), la intubación orotraqueal o ventilación mecánica invasiva (IOT/ VMI), crudas y ajustadas con modelos de regresión logística para tres grupos de variables independientes: basales, clínicas y de exploraciones complementarias. RESULTADOS: La edad media fue de 62 años (DE 18). La mayoría manifestaron fiebre, tos seca, disnea, febrícula y diarrea. Las comorbilidades más frecuentes fueron las enfermedades cardiovasculares, seguidas de las respiratorias y el cáncer. Las variables basales que se asociaron independientemente y de forma directa a peores resultados evolutivos (tanto a mortalidad como a evento combinado) fueron edad y obesidad;las variables clínicas fueron disminución de consciencia y crepitantes a la auscultación pulmonar, y de forma inversa cefalea;y las variables de resultados de exploraciones complementarias fueron infiltrados pulmonares bilaterales y cardiomegalia radiológicos, y linfopenia, hiperplaquetosis, dímero-D >500 mg/dL y lactato-deshidrogenasa >250 UI/L en la analítica. CONCLUSIONES: Conocer las características clínicas y la comorbilidad de los pacientes con COVID-19 atendidos en urgencias permite identificar precozmente a la población más susceptible de empeorar, para prever y mejorar los resultados OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treated in hospital emergency departments (EDs) in Spain, and to assess associations between characteristics and outcomes. METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, nested-cohort study. Sixty-one EDs included a random sample of all patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 1 and April 30, 2020. Demographic and baseline health information, including concomitant conditions;clinical characteristics related to the ED visit and complementary test results;and treatments were recorded throughout the episode in the ED. We calculated crude and adjusted odds ratios for risk of in-hospital death and a composite outcome consisting of the following events: intensive care unit admission, orotracheal intubation or mechanical ventilation, or in-hospital death. The logistic regression models were constructed with 3 groups of independent variables: the demographic and baseline health characteristics, clinical characteristics and complementary test results related to the ED episode, and treatments. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age of patients was 62 (18) years. Most had high- or low-grade fever, dry cough, dyspnea, and diarrhea. The most common concomitant conditions were cardiovascular diseases, followed by respiratory diseases and cancer. Baseline patient characteristics that showed a direct and independent association with worse outcome (death and the composite outcome) were age and obesity. Clinical variables directly associated with worse outcomes were impaired consciousness and pulmonary crackles;headache was inversely associated with worse outcomes. Complementary test findings that were directly associated with outcomes were bilateral lung infiltrates, lymphopenia, a high platelet count, a D-dimer concentration over 500 mg/dL, and a lactate-dehydrogenase concentration over 250 IU/L in blood. CONCLUSION: This profile of the clinical characteristics and comorbidity of patients with COVID-19 treated in EDs helps us predict outcomes and identify cases at risk of exac rbation. The information can facilitate preventive measures and improve outcomes

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL