Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth ; 10(9): e38364, 2022 09 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2054780

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Symptom checkers are clinical decision support apps for patients, used by tens of millions of people annually. They are designed to provide diagnostic and triage advice and assist users in seeking the appropriate level of care. Little evidence is available regarding their diagnostic and triage accuracy with direct use by patients for urgent conditions. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine the diagnostic and triage accuracy and usability of a symptom checker in use by patients presenting to an emergency department (ED). METHODS: We recruited a convenience sample of English-speaking patients presenting for care in an urban ED. Each consenting patient used a leading symptom checker from Ada Health before the ED evaluation. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated by comparing the symptom checker's diagnoses and those of 3 independent emergency physicians viewing the patient-entered symptom data, with the final diagnoses from the ED evaluation. The Ada diagnoses and triage were also critiqued by the independent physicians. The patients completed a usability survey based on the Technology Acceptance Model. RESULTS: A total of 40 (80%) of the 50 participants approached completed the symptom checker assessment and usability survey. Their mean age was 39.3 (SD 15.9; range 18-76) years, and they were 65% (26/40) female, 68% (27/40) White, 48% (19/40) Hispanic or Latino, and 13% (5/40) Black or African American. Some cases had missing data or a lack of a clear ED diagnosis; 75% (30/40) were included in the analysis of diagnosis, and 93% (37/40) for triage. The sensitivity for at least one of the final ED diagnoses by Ada (based on its top 5 diagnoses) was 70% (95% CI 54%-86%), close to the mean sensitivity for the 3 physicians (on their top 3 diagnoses) of 68.9%. The physicians rated the Ada triage decisions as 62% (23/37) fully agree and 24% (9/37) safe but too cautious. It was rated as unsafe and too risky in 22% (8/37) of cases by at least one physician, in 14% (5/37) of cases by at least two physicians, and in 5% (2/37) of cases by all 3 physicians. Usability was rated highly; participants agreed or strongly agreed with the 7 Technology Acceptance Model usability questions with a mean score of 84.6%, although "satisfaction" and "enjoyment" were rated low. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides preliminary evidence that a symptom checker can provide acceptable usability and diagnostic accuracy for patients with various urgent conditions. A total of 14% (5/37) of symptom checker triage recommendations were deemed unsafe and too risky by at least two physicians based on the symptoms recorded, similar to the results of studies on telephone and nurse triage. Larger studies are needed of diagnosis and triage performance with direct patient use in different clinical environments.


Subject(s)
Decision Support Systems, Clinical , Emergency Service, Hospital , Physicians , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , Triage/methods , Young Adult
2.
West J Emerg Med ; 22(6): 1262-1269, 2021 Oct 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1761083

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Coinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and another virus may influence the clinical trajectory of emergency department (ED) patients. However, little empirical data exists on the clinical outcomes of coinfection with SARS-CoV-2 METHODS: In this retrospective cohort analysis, we included adults presenting to the ED with confirmed, symptomatic coronavirus 2019 who also underwent testing for additional viral pathogens within 24 hours. To investigate the association between coinfection status with each of the outcomes, we performed logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 6,913 ED patients, 5.7% had coinfection. Coinfected individuals were less likely to experience index visit or 30-day hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.90 and OR 0.39; 95% CI, 0.25-0.62, respectively). CONCLUSION: Coinfection is relatively uncommon in symptomatic ED patients with SARS-CoV-2 and the clinical short- and long-term outcomes are more favorable in coinfected individuals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Coinfection/virology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Coinfection/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL