Continuous monitoring is superior to manual measurements in detecting vital sign deviations in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Patients admitted to the emergency care setting with COVID-19-infection can suffer from sudden clinical deterioration, but the extent of deviating vital signs in this group is still unclear. Wireless technology monitors patient vital signs continuously and might detect deviations earlier than intermittent measurements. The aim of this study was to determine frequency and duration of vital sign deviations using continuous monitoring compared to manual measurements. A secondary analysis was to compare deviations in patients admitted to ICU or having fatal outcome vs. those that were not. METHODS: Two wireless sensors continuously monitored (CM) respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), and peripheral arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2 ). Frequency and duration of vital sign deviations were compared with point measurements performed by clinical staff according to regional guidelines, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS). RESULTS: SpO2 < 92% for more than 60 min was detected in 92% of the patients with CM vs. 40% with NEWS (p < .00001). RR > 24 breaths per minute for more than 5 min were detected in 70% with CM vs. 33% using NEWS (p = .0001). HR ≥ 111 for more than 60 min was seen in 51% with CM and 22% with NEWS (p = .0002). Patients admitted to ICU or having fatal outcome had longer durations of RR > 24 brpm (p = .01), RR > 21 brpm (p = .01), SpO2 < 80% (p = .01), and SpO2 < 85% (p = .02) compared to patients that were not. CONCLUSION: Episodes of desaturation and tachypnea in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection are common and often not detected by routine measurements.

Experiences from COVID-19-driven use of telephone consultations in a cardiology clinic-The CoviTel study.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a rapid shift towards telephone consultations (TC) in the out-patient clinic setting with little knowledge of the consequences. The aims of this study were to evaluate patient-centred experiences with TC, to describe patterns in clinical outcomes from TC and to pinpoint benefits and drawbacks associated with this type of consultations. METHODS: This mixed methods study combined an analysis of quantitative and qualitative data. A quantitative, retrospective observational study was conducted employing data from all 248 patients who received TC at an out-patient cardiology clinic during April 2020 with a one-month follow-up. Semi-structured interviews were conducted; Ten eligible patients were recruited from the outpatient clinic by purposive sampling. RESULTS: Within the follow-up period, no patients died or were acutely hospitalised. Approximately one in every four patients was transferred to their general practitioner, while the remaining three-quarter of the patients had a new examination or a new consultation planned. The cardiologist failed to establish contact with more than a fifth of the patients, often due to missing phone numbers. Ten patients were interviewed. Five themes emerged from the interviews: 1) Knowing an estimated time of the consultation is essential for patient satisfaction, 2) TC are well perceived when individually adapted, 3) TC can be a barrier to patient questions, 4) Video consultations should only be offered to patients who request it, and 5) Prescriptions or instructions made via TC do not cause uncertainty in patients. CONCLUSIONS: The TC program was overall safe and the patients felt comfortable. Crucial issues include precise time planning, the patient's availability on the phone and a correct phone number. Patients stressed that TC are unsuitable when addressing sensitive topics. A proposed visitation tool is presented.