Intimate partner violence screening during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency Department (ED) screening for intimate partner violence (IPV) is typically nursing-initiated, often with visitors present. Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen both an increase in societal stress, a known exacerbator of IPV, and the implementation of visitor restriction policies. This combination presents the need for enhanced IPV screening and the opportunity to perform screening in a controlled, patient-only environment. Our goal was to evaluate the frequency of nurse-initiated screening for IPV prior to and during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the frequency of positive screens for IPV. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study evaluating all adults (age >18 years) presenting to a tertiary care center ED. Patients were identified as presenting prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (June 1, 2019 to August 31, 2019) and after the COVID-19 visitor restriction policies (June 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020). Descriptive statistics were performed using chi-square and t-tests compared the demographic variables. Chi-square was used for a bivariate analysis of our primary outcomes (IPV screening performed and screening positive for IPV). Further analysis was done using a binary logistic regression model adjusting for the demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Both the odds of nursing-initiated IPV screening and the odds of verbally screening positive for IPV significantly increased (OR 1.509, 95% CI 1.432-1.600) and (OR 1.375, 95% CI 1.126-1.681) respectively following the implementation of COVID-19 visitor restriction policies. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that nurse-initiated IPV screening should continue to be performed with the patient privately, even after COVID-19 related ED visitor restrictions are removed. These findings also support the hypothesis that the stress related to COVID-19 is contributing to a rise in IPV.

RNA and viable SARS-CoV-2 contamination of emergency department surfaces and association with patient COVID-19 status and aerosol procedures

Background: Aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) performed on COVID-19–positive patients raise concerns about the dissemination of SARS-CoV-2 via aerosols and droplets. Infectious aerosols and droplets generated by SARS-CoV-2–positive patient AGPs or through direct COVID-19 patient coughing or exhalation could potentially contaminate surfaces, leading to the indirect spread of SARS-CoV-2 via fomites within the emergency department (ED). We sampled surfaces of ED patient rooms occupied by known SARS-CoV-2–positive patients or patients under investigation for COVID-19 and undergoing an AGP to determine the frequency of room contamination with SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Methods: Swabs were collected from 5 room surfaces in the ED following AGPs performed on patients under investigation for COVID-19 or positive for SARS-CoV-2. High- and low-touch surfaces 6 feet (2 m) from the patient (door handle and return vent, respectively) and reusable medical equipment were swabbed. Swabs were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-qPCR;positive samples were cultured in Vero E6 cells. Patient COVID-19 results were confirmed through the electronic medical record. Results: In total, 203 rooms were sampled: 43 SARS-CoV-2–positive patients with an AGP, 44 SARS-CoV-2–positive patients who did not have an AGP, and 116 SARS-CoV-2–negative patients with an AGP, for a total of 1,015 swabs. Overall, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected on 36 (3.5%) surfaces from 29 rooms (14.3%) (Table 1). RNA contamination was detected more frequently in rooms occupied by SARS-CoV-2–positive patients who did not have an AGP than rooms occupied by COVID-19 patients (30% vs 14%). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was also detected in rooms occupied by SARS-CoV-2–negative patients undergoing an AGP (9%). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was most frequently detected on air vents (n = 15), bedrails (n = 10), equipment and vital signs monitors (n = 4 each), and door handles (n = 3). One bedrail was positive by culture and confirmed by an RT-qPCR cycle threshold reduction from >40 to 13. Conclusions: We detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA contamination on room surfaces in the ED, regardless of patient AGP or COVID-19 status;however, RNA contamination of room surfaces was most common in rooms occupied by SARS-CoV-2–positive patients who did not have an AGP, which may be attributable to stage of disease and viral shedding. SARS-CoV-2 RNA contamination was also present in rooms where APGs were performed on SARS-CoV-2–negative patients, suggesting carryover from previous patients. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was found most often on room air-return vents, further emphasizing the importance of aerosols in the spread of SARS-CoV-2.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

Racial disparities in the SOFA score among patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score predicts probability of in-hospital mortality. Many crisis standards of care suggest the use of SOFA scores to allocate medical resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESEARCH QUESTION: Are SOFA scores elevated among Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients hospitalized with COVID-19, compared to Non-Hispanic White patients? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study conducted in Yale New Haven Health System, including 5 hospitals with total of 2681 beds. Study population drawn from consecutive patients aged ≥18 admitted with COVID-19 from March 29th to August 1st, 2020. Patients excluded from the analysis if not their first admission with COVID-19, if they did not have SOFA score recorded within 24 hours of admission, if race and ethnicity data were not Non-Hispanic Black, Non-Hispanic White, or Hispanic, or if they had other missing data. The primary outcome was SOFA score, with peak score within 24 hours of admission dichotomized as <6 or ≥6. RESULTS: Of 2982 patients admitted with COVID-19, 2320 met inclusion criteria and were analyzed, of whom 1058 (45.6%) were Non-Hispanic White, 645 (27.8%) were Hispanic, and 617 (26.6%) were Non-Hispanic Black. Median age was 65.0 and 1226 (52.8%) were female. In univariate logistic screen and in full multivariate model, Non-Hispanic Black patients but not Hispanic patients had greater odds of an elevated SOFA score ≥6 when compared to Non-Hispanic White patients (OR 1.49, 95%CI 1.11-1.99). INTERPRETATION: Given current unequal patterns in social determinants of health, US crisis standards of care utilizing the SOFA score to allocate medical resources would be more likely to deny these resources to Non-Hispanic Black patients.

The potential impact of triage protocols on racial disparities in clinical outcomes among COVID-positive patients in a large academic healthcare system.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact in the United States, particularly for Black populations, and has heavily burdened the healthcare system. Hospitals have created protocols to allocate limited resources, but there is concern that these protocols will exacerbate disparities. The sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score is a tool often used in triage protocols. In these protocols, patients with higher SOFA scores are denied resources based on the assumption that they have worse clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to assess whether using SOFA score as a triage tool among COVID-positive patients would exacerbate racial disparities in clinical outcomes. METHODS: We analyzed data from a retrospective cohort of hospitalized COVID-positive patients in the Yale-New Haven Health System. We examined associations between race/ethnicity and peak overall/24-hour SOFA score, in-hospital mortality, and ICU admission. Other predictors of interest were age, sex, primary language, and insurance status. We used one-way ANOVA and chi-square tests to assess differences in SOFA score across racial/ethnic groups and linear and logistic regression to assess differences in clinical outcomes by sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Our final sample included 2,554 patients. Black patients had higher SOFA scores compared to patients of other races. However, Black patients did not have significantly greater in-hospital mortality or ICU admission compared to patients of other races. CONCLUSION: While Black patients in this sample of hospitalized COVID-positive patients had higher SOFA scores compared to patients of other races, this did not translate to higher in-hospital mortality or ICU admission. Results demonstrate that if SOFA score had been used to allocate care, Black COVID patients would have been denied care despite having similar clinical outcomes to white patients. Therefore, using SOFA score to allocate resources has the potential to exacerbate racial inequities by disproportionately denying care to Black patients and should not be used to determine access to care. Healthcare systems must develop and use COVID-19 triage protocols that prioritize equity.

Developing a Triage Protocol for the COVID-19 Pandemic: Allocating Scarce Medical Resources in a Public Health Emergency.

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has caused shortages of life-sustaining medical resources, and future waves of the virus may cause further scarcity. The Yale New Haven Health System developed a triage protocol to allocate scarce medical resources during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the primary goal of saving the most lives possible, and a secondary goal of making triage assessments and decisions consistent, transparent, and fair. We outline the process of developing the triage protocol, summarize the protocol itself, and discuss the major ethical challenges encountered, along with our answers to these challenges. These challenges include (1) the role of age and chronic comorbidities; (2) evaluating children and pregnant patients; (3) racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in health; (4) prioritization of healthcare workers; and (5) balancing clinical judgment versus protocolized assessments. We conclude with a review of the limitations of our protocol and the lessons learned. We hope that a robust public discussion of such protocols and the ethical challenges that they raise will result in the fairest possible processes, less need for triage, and more lives saved during future waves of the COVID-19 pandemic and similar public health emergencies.