Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
CJEM ; 25(4): 335-343, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2268367

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Intubation practices changed during the COVID-19 pandemic to protect healthcare workers from transmission of disease. Our objectives were to describe intubation characteristics and outcomes for patients tested for SARS CoV-2 infection. We compared outcomes between patients testing SARS COV-2 positive with those testing negative. METHODS: We conducted a health records review using the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) registry. We included consecutive eligible patients who presented to one of 47 EDs across Canada between March 1, 2020 and June 20, 2021, were tested for SARS-CoV-2 and intubated in the ED. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients experiencing a post-intubation adverse event during the ED stay. Secondary outcomes included first-pass success, intubation practices, and hospital mortality. We used descriptive statistics to summarize variables with subgroup differences examined using t tests, z tests, or chi-squared tests where appropriate with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Of 1720 patients with suspected COVID-19 who were intubated in the ED during the study period, 337 (19.6%) tested SARS-CoV-2 positive and 1383 (80.4%) SARS-CoV-2 negative. SARS-CoV-2 positive patients presented to hospital with lower oxygen levels than SARS-CoV-2 negative patients (mean pulse oximeter SaO2 86 vs 94%, p < 0.001). In total, 8.5% of patients experienced an adverse event post-intubation. More patients in the SARS-CoV-2 positive subgroup experienced post-intubation hypoxemia (4.5 vs 2.2%, p = 0.019). In-hospital mortality was greater for patients who experienced intubation-related adverse events (43.2 vs 33.2%, p = 0.018). There was no significant difference in adverse event-associated mortality by SARS-CoV-2 status. First-pass success was achieved in 92.4% of all intubations, with no difference by SARS-CoV-2 status. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed a low risk of adverse events associated with intubation, even though hypoxemia was common in patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2. We observed high rates of first-pass success and low rates of inability to intubate. The limited number of adverse events precluded multivariate adjustments. Study findings should reassure emergency medicine practitioners that system modifications made to intubation processes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic do not appear to be associated with worse outcomes compared to pre-COVID-19 practices.


RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les pratiques d'intubation ont changé au cours de la pandémie de COVID-19 afin de protéger le personnel de santé contre la transmission de la maladie. Nos objectifs étaient de décrire les caractéristiques de l'intubation et les résultats pour les patients testés pour l'infection par le CoV-2 du SRAS. Nous avons comparé les résultats entre les patients testés positifs au SARS COV-2 et ceux testés négatifs. MéTHODES: Nous avons effectué un examen des dossiers de santé à l'aide du registre du Réseau canadien d'intervention rapide dans les services d'urgence pour la COVID-19 (RCIRSUC). Nous avons inclus les patients éligibles consécutifs qui se sont présentés à l'un des 47 services d'urgence du Canada entre le 1er mars 2020 et le 20 juin 2021, qui ont été testés pour le SRAS-CoV-2 et qui ont été intubés dans le service d'urgence. Le résultat principal était la proportion de patients ayant subi un événement indésirable après l'intubation pendant leur séjour aux urgences. Les critères de jugement secondaires comprenaient le succès du premier passage, les pratiques d'intubation et la mortalité hospitalière. Nous avons utilisé des statistiques descriptives pour résumer les variables avec des différences de sous-groupes examinées à l'aide de tests t, de tests z ou de tests du chi carré, le cas échéant, avec des IC à 95%. RéSULTATS: Sur les 1720 patients suspects de COVID-19 qui ont été intubés aux urgences pendant la période de l'étude, 337 (19,6%) ont été testés positifs au SARS-CoV-2 et 1383 (80,4%) négatifs au SARS-CoV-2. Les patients positifs au SRAS-CoV-2 se sont présentés à l'hôpital avec des niveaux d'oxygène inférieurs à ceux des patients négatifs pour le SRAS-CoV-2 (oxymètre de pouls moyen SaO2 86% contre 94%, p < 0,001). Au total, 8,5% des patients ont présenté un événement indésirable après l'intubation. Un plus grand nombre de patients du sous-groupe positif au SRAS-CoV-2 ont présenté une hypoxémie post-intubation (4,5% vs 2,2%, p = 0,019). La mortalité hospitalière était plus élevée chez les patients ayant subi des événements indésirables liés à l'intubation (43,2% vs 33,2%, p = 0,018). Il n'y avait pas de différence significative dans la mortalité associée aux événements indésirables selon le statut du SRAS-CoV-2. Le succès du premier passage a été obtenu dans 92,4% de toutes les intubations, sans différence selon le statut SARS-CoV-2 CONCLUSIONS: Pendant la pandémie de COVID-19, nous avons observé un faible risque d'événements indésirables associés à l'intubation, même si l'hypoxémie était fréquente chez les patients atteints de SRAS-CoV-2 confirmé. Nous avons observé des taux élevés de réussite du premier passage et des taux faibles d'incapacité à intuber. Le nombre limité d'événements indésirables a empêché les ajustements multivariés. Les résultats de l'étude devraient rassurer les praticiens de la médecine d'urgence que les modifications apportées aux processus d'intubation en réponse à la pandémie de COVID-19 ne semblent pas être associées à des résultats plus défavorables que les pratiques antérieures à la pandémie de COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemics , Canada/epidemiology , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Emergency Service, Hospital
3.
Nicotine Tob Res ; 2022 Feb 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2242905

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic had reduced access to traditional, in-person smoking cessation treatment. We examined the feasibility, acceptability, and potential effectiveness of mobile chat messaging in preventing smoking relapse in smokers who have recently quit smoking. METHODS: In this assessor-blinded, pilot randomized controlled trial in 5 cessation clinics, we recruited adult daily smokers who had been receiving cessation treatments and abstained for 3 to 30 days. The intervention group received real-time, personalized chat messaging on relapse prevention via WhatsApp for 3 months. The control group received generic text messaging on the harms of smoking and benefits of quitting for 3 months. The primary outcome was carbon monoxide-validated abstinence at 6 months post-treatment initiation. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04409496). RESULTS: From June to July 2020, 108 of 130 (83%) eligible subjects were randomized to the intervention (N=54) or control (N=54) groups. The retention rate was 93% at 3 months (end of treatment) and 85% at 6 months. In the intervention group, 80% of participants responded to the chat messages at least once; 43% continuously engaged with the intervention over the 3-month intervention period. By intention-to-treat, validated abstinence at 6 months was higher in the intervention than control group (31% vs 22%), with an RR of 1.72 (95% CI 0.91-3.23; P=0.09) after adjusting for pre-quit nicotine dependence, duration of abstinence and cessation treatment at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial showed the feasibility and acceptability of mobile chat messaging for relapse prevention with preliminary evidence on its effectiveness in increasing validated abstinence. IMPLICATIONS: Smoking relapse is the most likely outcome of smoking cessation attempts and an undertreated problem. This pilot trial showed the feasibility and acceptability of personalized chat messaging via WhatsApp for relapse prevention in recent abstainers amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The higher carbon monoxide-validated abstinence rate in participants who received chat messaging than controls showed preliminary evidence on the effectiveness of the intervention. Fully-powered trials are warranted to test the intervention.

5.
J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open ; 3(6): e12868, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2172888

ABSTRACT

Objective: To risk-stratify COVID-19 patients being considered for discharge from the emergency department (ED). Methods: We conducted an observational study to derive and validate a clinical decision rule to identify COVID-19 patients at risk for hospital admission or death within 72 hours of ED discharge. We used data from 49 sites in the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) between March 1, 2020, and September 8, 2021. We randomly assigned hospitals to derivation or validation and prespecified clinical variables as candidate predictors. We used logistic regression to develop the score in a derivation cohort and examined its performance in predicting short-term adverse outcomes in a validation cohort. Results: Of 15,305 eligible patient visits, 535 (3.6%) experienced the outcome. The score included age, sex, pregnancy status, temperature, arrival mode, respiratory rate, and respiratory distress. The area under the curve was 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.73) in derivation and 0.71 (95% CI 0.68-0.73) in combined derivation and validation cohorts. Among those with a score of 3 or less, the risk for the primary outcome was 1.9% or less, and the sensitivity of using 3 as a rule-out score was 89.3% (95% CI 82.7-94.0). Among those with a score of ≥9, the risk for the primary outcome was as high as 12.2% and the specificity of using 9 as a rule-in score was 95.6% (95% CI 94.9-96.2). Conclusion: The CCEDRRN COVID discharge score can identify patients at risk of short-term adverse outcomes after ED discharge with variables that are readily available on patient arrival.

7.
BMJ Open ; 12(8): e057852, 2022 08 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1986363

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic yield of screening patients for SARS-CoV-2 who were admitted with a diagnosis unrelated to COVID-19 and to identify risk factors for positive tests. DESIGN: Cohort from the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network registry. SETTING: 30 acute care hospitals across Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Patients hospitalised for non-COVID-19-related diagnoses who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between 1 March and 29 December 2020. MAIN OUTCOME: Positive nucleic acid amplification test for SARS-CoV-2. OUTCOME MEASURE: Diagnostic yield. RESULTS: We enrolled 15 690 consecutive eligible adults who were admitted to hospital without clinically suspected COVID-19. Among these patients, 122 tested positive for COVID-19, resulting in a diagnostic yield of 0.8% (95% CI 0.64% to 0.92%). Factors associated with a positive test included presence of fever, being a healthcare worker, having a positive household contact or institutional exposure, and living in an area with higher 7-day average incident COVID-19 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Universal screening of hospitalised patients for COVID-19 across two pandemic waves had a low diagnostic yield and should be informed by individual-level risk assessment in addition to regional COVID-19 prevalence. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04702945.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Canada/epidemiology , Hospitals , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control
8.
CMAJ Open ; 9(1): E261-E270, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1140799

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Emergency physicians lack high-quality evidence for many diagnostic and treatment decisions made for patients with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our objective is to describe the methods used to collect and ensure the data quality of a multicentre registry of patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. METHODS: This methodology study describes a population-based registry that has been enrolling consecutive patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 since Mar. 1, 2020. Most data are collected from retrospective chart review. Phone follow-up with patients at 30 days captures the World Health Organization clinical improvement scale and contextual, social and cultural variables. Phone follow-up also captures patient-reported quality of life using the Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey at 30 days, 60 days, 6 months and 12 months. Fifty participating emergency departments from 8 provinces in Canada currently enrol patients into the registry. INTERPRETATION: Data from the registry of the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network will be used to derive and validate clinical decision rules to inform clinical decision-making, describe the natural history of the disease, evaluate COVID-19 diagnostic tests and establish the real-world effectiveness of treatments and vaccines, including in populations that are excluded or underrepresented in clinical trials. This registry has the potential to generate scientific evidence to inform our pandemic response, and to serve as a model for the rapid implementation of population-based data collection protocols for future public health emergencies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, no. NCT04702945.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Medicine , Registries , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , Canada , Data Accuracy , Data Collection , Data Management , Emergency Service, Hospital , Evidence-Based Emergency Medicine , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Information Storage and Retrieval , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Telephone
9.
CJEM ; 23(2): 232-236, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1103612

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on public health, specifically on patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with non-COVID-related diseases, remains largely undocumented. OBJECTIVE: This study explored how overall rates of presentations to the emergency department were impacted immediately after the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic, and specifically how key presenting symptoms representing emergency, standard and low-acuity conditions were impacted. METHODS: A sequential modified Delphi survey and cross-sectional analysis of administrative census data from a tertiary care center in New Brunswick, Canada, were performed. Details of ED presentations for emergency, standard and low-acuity conditions from February 1 to April 30, 2020, were compared to data from previous years. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in the number of patients visiting the ED with emergency, standard and low-acuity complaints immediately after March 13, 2020, compared to 2019. The proportion of females and males remained similar, with a median age of 48 years in 2020 and 44 years in 2019. Total presentation patterns to the ED (registrations, admissions to hospital and left without being seen numbers) decreased, compared to previous years. CONCLUSIONS: We report a predictable decrease in patient visits to the ED with minor, non-life-threatening conditions during a pandemic. However, we also report a decrease in presentations for emergency and standard conditions. Improved messaging highlighting the need to seek help for "true" emergencies, while providing non-ED options for minor, non-life-threatening conditions, may be helpful under normal circumstances and during future pandemics.


RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: L'impact de la pandémie COVID-19 sur la santé publique, en particulier sur les patients se présentant aux services d'urgence (SU) avec des maladies non liées à la COVID, demeure en grande partie non documenté. OBJECTIF: Cette étude a exploré la façon dont les taux globaux de présentations au service des urgences ont été touchés immédiatement après la déclaration de la pandémie de COVID-19, et plus particulièrement la façon dont les principaux symptômes représentant des conditions d'urgence, standard et de faible acuité ont été touchés. MéTHODES: Une enquête Delphi séquentielle modifiée et une analyse transversale des données du recensement administratif provenant d'un centre de soins tertiaires du Nouveau-Brunswick, au Canada, ont été réalisées. Les détails des présentations du SU pour les conditions d'urgence, standard et de faible acuité du 1er février au 30 avril 2020 ont été comparés aux données des années précédentes. RéSULTATS: Il y a eu une diminution significative du nombre de patients se rendant au service d'urgence avec des plaintes d'urgence, standard et de faible gravité immédiatement après le 13 mars 2020, par rapport à 2019. La proportion de femmes et d'hommes est demeurée semblable, avec un âge médian de 48 ans en 2020 et de 44 ans en 2019. Le nombre total de modèles de présentation à l'urgence (inscriptions, admissions à l'hôpital et nombre laissé sans être vu) a diminué par rapport aux années précédentes. CONCLUSIONS: Nous faisons état d'une diminution prévisible des visites de patients aux urgences pour des affections mineures qui ne mettent pas leur vie en danger pendant une pandémie. Toutefois, nous signalons également une diminution des présentations pour les situations d'urgence et les conditions normales. Des messages améliorés soulignant la nécessité de demander de l'aide pour les urgences « réelles ¼, tout en offrant des options non urgentes pour des conditions mineures et qui ne mettent pas la vie en danger peuvent être utiles dans des circonstances normales et lors de futures pandémies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergencies , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , COVID-19/therapy , Cross-Sectional Studies , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Incidence , New Brunswick/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL