ABSTRACT
Objectives: Here we report the clinical performance of COVID-19 curbside screening with triage to a drive-through care pathway versus main emergency department (ED) care for ambulatory COVID-19 testing during a pandemic. Patients were evaluated from cars to prevent the demand for testing from spreading COVID-19 within the hospital. Methods: We examined the effectiveness of curbside screening to identify patients who would be tested during evaluation, patient flow from screening to care team evaluation and testing, and safety of drive-through care as 7-day ED revisits and 14-day hospital admissions. We also compared main ED efficiency versus drive-through care using ED length of stay (EDLOS). Standardized mean differences (SMD) >0.20 identify statistical significance. Results: Of 5931 ED patients seen, 2788 (47.0%) were walk-in patients. Of these patients, 1111 (39.8%) screened positive for potential COVID symptoms, of whom 708 (63.7%) were triaged to drive-through care (with 96.3% tested), and 403 (36.3%) triaged to the main ED (with 90.5% tested). The 1677 (60.2%) patients who screened negative were seen in the main ED, with 440 (26.2%) tested. Curbside screening sensitivity and specificity for predicting who ultimately received testing were 70.3% and 94.5%. Compared to the main ED, drive-through patients had fewer 7-day ED revisits (3.8% vs 12.5%, SMD = 0.321), fewer 14-day hospital readmissions (4.5% vs 15.6%, SMD = 0.37), and shorter EDLOS (0.56 vs 5.12 hours, SMD = 1.48). Conclusion: Curbside screening had high sensitivity, permitting early respiratory isolation precautions for most patients tested. Low ED revisit, hospital readmissions, and EDLOS suggest drive-through care, with appropriate screening, is safe and efficient for future respiratory illness pandemics.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Emergency departments face unforeseen surges in patients classified as low acuity during pandemics such as the coronavirus disease pandemic. Streamlining patient flow using telemedicine in an alternative care area can reduce crowding and promote physical distancing between patients and clinicians, thus limiting personal protective equipment use. This quality improvement project describes critical elements and processes in the operationalization of a telemedicine-enabled drive-through and walk-in garage care system to improve ED throughput and conserve personal protective equipment during 3 coronavirus disease surges in 2020. METHODS: Standardized workflows were established for the operationalization of the telemedicine-enabled drive-through and walk-in garage care system for patients presenting with respiratory illness as quality improvement during disaster. Statistical control charts present interrupted time series data on the ED length of stay and personal protective equipment use in the week before and after deployment in March, July, and November 2020. RESULTS: Physical space, technology infrastructure, equipment, and staff workflows were critical to the operationalization of the telemedicine-enabled drive-through and walk-in garage care system. On average, the ED length of stay decreased 17%, from 4.24 hours during the week before opening to 3.54 hours during the telemedicine-enabled drive-through and walk-in garage care system operation. There was an estimated 25% to 41% reduction in personal protective equipment use during this time. CONCLUSION: Lessons learned from this telemedicine-enabled alternative care area implementation can be used for disaster preparedness and management in the ED setting to reduce crowding, improve throughput, and conserve personal protective equipment during a pandemic.