COVID-19 as a risk factor for long-term mortality in patients managed by the emergency medical system: A prospective, multicenter, ambulance-based cohort study.

Introduction: COVID-19 has initially been studied in terms of an acute-phase disease, although recently more attention has been given to the long-term consequences. In this study, we examined COVID-19 as an independent risk factor for long-term mortality in patients with acute illness treated by EMS (emergency medical services) who have previously had the disease against those who have not had the disease. Methods: A prospective, multicenter, ambulance-based, ongoing study was performed with adult patients with acute disease managed by EMS and transferred with high priority to the emergency department (ED) as study subjects. The study involved six advanced life support units, 38 basic life support units, and five emergency departments from Spain. Sociodemographic inputs, baseline vital signs, pre-hospital blood tests, and comorbidities, including COVID-19, were collected. The main outcome was long-term mortality, which was classified into 1-year all-cause mortality and 1-year in- and out-of-hospital mortality. To compare both the patients with COVID-19 vs. patients without COVID-19 and to compare survival vs non-survival, two main statistical analyses were performed, namely, a longitudinal analysis (Cox regression) and a logistic regression analysis. Results: Between 12 March 2020 and 30 September 2021, a total of 3,107 patients were included in the study, with 2,594 patients without COVID-19 and 513 patients previously suffering from COVID-19. The mortality rate was higher in patients with COVID-19 than in patients without COVID-19 (31.8 vs. 17.9%). A logistic regression showed that patients previously diagnosed with COVID-19 presented higher rates of nursing home residency, a higher number of breaths per minute, and suffering from connective disease, dementia, and congestive heart failure. The longitudinal analysis showed that COVID-19 was a risk factor for mortality [hazard ratio 1.33 (1.10-1.61); p < 0.001]. Conclusion: The COVID-19 group presented an almost double mortality rate compared with the non-COVID-19 group. The final model adjusted for confusion factors suggested that COVID-19 was a risk factor for long-term mortality.

COVID-19 as a risk factor for long-term mortality in patients managed by the emergency medical system: A prospective, multicenter, ambulance-based cohort study

Introduction COVID-19 has initially been studied in terms of an acute-phase disease, although recently more attention has been given to the long-term consequences. In this study, we examined COVID-19 as an independent risk factor for long-term mortality in patients with acute illness treated by EMS (emergency medical services) who have previously had the disease against those who have not had the disease. Methods A prospective, multicenter, ambulance-based, ongoing study was performed with adult patients with acute disease managed by EMS and transferred with high priority to the emergency department (ED) as study subjects. The study involved six advanced life support units, 38 basic life support units, and five emergency departments from Spain. Sociodemographic inputs, baseline vital signs, pre-hospital blood tests, and comorbidities, including COVID-19, were collected. The main outcome was long-term mortality, which was classified into 1-year all-cause mortality and 1-year in- and out-of-hospital mortality. To compare both the patients with COVID-19 vs. patients without COVID-19 and to compare survival vs non-survival, two main statistical analyses were performed, namely, a longitudinal analysis (Cox regression) and a logistic regression analysis. Results Between 12 March 2020 and 30 September 2021, a total of 3,107 patients were included in the study, with 2,594 patients without COVID-19 and 513 patients previously suffering from COVID-19. The mortality rate was higher in patients with COVID-19 than in patients without COVID-19 (31.8 vs. 17.9%). A logistic regression showed that patients previously diagnosed with COVID-19 presented higher rates of nursing home residency, a higher number of breaths per minute, and suffering from connective disease, dementia, and congestive heart failure. The longitudinal analysis showed that COVID-19 was a risk factor for mortality [hazard ratio 1.33 (1.10–1.61);p < 0.001]. Conclusion The COVID-19 group presented an almost double mortality rate compared with the non-COVID-19 group. The final model adjusted for confusion factors suggested that COVID-19 was a risk factor for long-term mortality.

Prehospital Respiratory Early Warning Score for airway management in-ambulance: A score comparison.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital Respiratory Early Warning Scores to estimate the requirement for advanced respiratory support is needed. To develop a prehospital Respiratory Early Warning Score to estimate the requirement for advanced respiratory support. METHODS: Multicentre, prospective, emergency medical services (EMS)-delivered, longitudinal cohort derivationvalidation study carried out in 59 ambulances and five hospitals across five Spanish provinces. Adults with acute diseases evaluated, supported and discharged to the Emergency Department with high priority were eligible. The primary outcome was the need for invasive or non-invasive respiratory support (NIRS or IRS) in the prehospital scope at the first contact with the patient. The measures included the following: epidemiological endpoints, prehospital vital signs (respiratory rate, pulse oximetry saturation, fraction of inspired oxygen, systolic and diastolic mean blood pressure, heart rate, tympanic temperature and consciousness level by the GCS). RESULTS: Between 26 Oct 2018 and 26 Oct 2021, we enrolled 5793 cases. For NIRS prediction, the final model of the logistic regression included respiratory rate and pulse oximetry saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio. For the IRS case, the motor response from the Glasgow Coma Scale was also included. The REWS showed an AUC of 0.938 (95% CI: 0.918-0.958), a calibration-in-large of 0.026 and a higher net benefit as compared with the other scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that REWS is a remarkably aid for the decision-making process in the management of advanced respiratory support in prehospital care. Including this score in the prehospital scenario could improve patients' care and optimise the resources' management.

Derivación y validación de nuevos fenotipos prehospitalarios en pacientes adultos con enfermedad por COVID-19

Objective. To characterize phenotypes of prehospital patients with COVID-19 to facilitate early identification of at-risk groups. Methods. Multicenter observational noninterventional study of a retrospective cohort of 3789 patients, analyzing 52 prehospital variables. The main outcomes were 4 clusters of prehospital variables describing the phenotypes. Secondary outcomes were hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, admission to an intensive care unit, and cumulative mortality inside or outside the hospital on days 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 after hospitalization and after start of prehospital care. Results. We used a principal components multiple correspondence analysis (factor analysis) followed by decomposition into 4 clusters as follows: cluster 1, 1090 patients (28.7%);cluster 2, 1420 (37.4%);cluster 3, 250 (6.6%), and cluster 4, 1029 (27.1%). Cluster 4 was comprised of the oldest patients and had the highest frequencies of residence in group facilities and low arterial oxygen saturation. This group also had the highest mortality (44.8% at 28 days). Cluster 1 was comprised of the youngest patients and had the highest frequencies of smoking, fever, and requirement for mechanical ventilation. This group had the most favorable prognosis and the lowest mortality. Conclusions. Patients with COVID-19 evaluated by emergency medical responders and transferred to hospital emergency departments can be classified into 4 phenotypes with different clinical, therapeutic, and prognostic characteristics. The phenotypes can help health care professionals to quickly assess a patient's future risk, thus informing clinical decisions. Objetivos. Desarrollar un fenotipado prehospitalario de pacientes con COVID-19 que permita una identificación temprana de los grupos de riesgo. Método. Estudio observacional de cohorte retrospectivo multicéntrico, sin intervención con 3.789 pacientes y 52 variables prehospitalarias. Las variables de resultado principal fueron las cuatro agrupaciones prehospitalarios obtenidos, #1, #2, #3 y #4. Los resultados secundarios fueron: ingreso hospitalario, ventilación mecánica, ingreso en unidad de cuidados intensivos y mortalidad acumulada a los 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21 y 28 días desde el ingreso hospitalario (hospitalaria y extrahospitalaria). Resultados. Por medio de una descomposición en componentes principales/correspondencia múltiple de datos mixtos (continuos y categóricos), seguido de una descomposición en agrupaciones, se obtuvo cuatro agrupaciones/fenotipos #1, #2, #3 y #4 de 1.090 (28,7%), 1.420 (37,4%), 250 (6,6%) y 1.029 (27,1%) pacientes, respectivamente. El grupo #4, compuesto por los pacientes de mayor edad, baja saturación de oxígeno e institucionalización es el que presenta la mayor mortalidad (44,8% de mortalidad a 28 días). El grupo #1, compuesto de pacientes de menor edad, con mayor porcentaje de tabaquismo, fiebre y necesidades de ventilación mecánica, es el de pronóstico más favorable con la menor tasa de mortalidad. Conclusiones. Los pacientes con COVID-19 valorados por los servicios médicos de emergencias y transferidos al servicio de urgencias hospitalario se pueden clasificar en 4 fenotipos con diferentes consideraciones clínicas, terapéuticas y de pronóstico, y permite a los profesionales sanitarios discriminar rápidamente el nivel de riesgo futuro del paciente y ayuda por lo tanto en el proceso de toma de decisiones.

N-antigenemia detection by a rapid lateral flow test predicts 90-day mortality in COVID-19: A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate if the detection of N antigen of SARS-CoV-2 in plasma by a rapid lateral flow test predicts 90-day mortality in COVID-19 patients hospitalized at the wards. METHODS: The presence of N-antigenemia was evaluated in the first 36 hours after hospitalization in 600 unvaccinated COVID-19 patients, by using the Panbio COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device from Abbott (Abbott Laboratories Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The impact of N-antigenemia on 90-day mortality was assessed by multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Prevalence of N-antigenemia at hospitalization was higher in nonsurvivors (69% (82/118) vs. 52% (250/482); p < 0.001). The patients with N-antigenemia showed more frequently RNAemia (45.7% (148/324) vs. 19.8% (51/257); p < 0.001), absence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 N antibodies (80.7% (264/327) vs. 26.6% (69/259); p < 0.001) and absence of S1 antibodies (73.4% (240/327) vs. 23.6% (61/259); p < 0.001). The patients with antigenemia showed more frequently acute respiratory distress syndrome (30.1% (100/332) vs. 18.7% (50/268); p = 0.001) and nosocomial infections (13.6% (45/331) vs. 7.9% (21/267); p = 0.026). N-antigenemia was a risk factor for increased 90-day mortality in the multivariable analysis (HR, 1.99 (95% CI,1.09-3.61), whereas the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 N-antibodies represented a protective factor (HR, 0.47 (95% CI, 0.26-0.85). DISCUSSION: The presence of N-antigenemia or the absence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 N-antibodies after hospitalization is associated to increased 90-day mortality in unvaccinated COVID-19 patients. Detection of N-antigenemia by using lateral flow tests is a quick, widely available tool that could contribute to early identify those COVID-19 patients at risk of deterioration.

Comparison of Nine Early Warning Scores for Identification of Short-Term Mortality in Acute Neurological Disease in Emergency Department.

(1) Background: The aim was screening the performance of nine Early Warning Scores (EWS), to identify patients at high-risk of premature impairment and to detect intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, as well as to track the 2-, 7-, 14-, and 28-day mortality in a cohort of patients diagnosed with an acute neurological condition. (2) Methods: We conducted a prospective, longitudinal, observational study, calculating the EWS [Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), VitalPAC Early Warning Score (ViEWS), Modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (MREMS), Early Warning Score (EWS), Hamilton Early Warning Score (HEWS), Standardised Early Warning Score (SEWS), WHO Prognostic Scored System (WPSS), and Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS)] upon the arrival of patients to the emergency department. (3) Results: In all, 1160 patients were included: 808 patients were hospitalized, 199 cases (17%) required ICU care, and 6% of patients died (64 cases) within 2 days, which rose to 16% (183 cases) within 28 days. The highest area under the curve for predicting the need for ICU admissions was obtained by RAPS and MEWS. For predicting mortality, MREMS obtained the best scores for 2- and 28-day mortality. (4) Conclusions: This is the first study to explore whether several EWS accurately identify the risk of ICU admissions and mortality, at different time points, in patients with acute neurological disorders. Every score analyzed obtained good results, but it is suggested that the use of RAPS, MEWS, and MREMS should be preferred in the acute setting, for patients with neurological impairment.

One-on-one comparison between qCSI and NEWS scores for mortality risk assessment in patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive value of the quick COVID-19 Severity Index (qCSI) and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) for 90-day mortality amongst COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted in adult patients transferred by ambulance to an emergency department (ED) with suspected COVID-19 infection subsequently confirmed by a SARS-CoV-2 test (polymerase chain reaction). We collected epidemiological data, clinical covariates (respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, level of consciousness and use of supplemental oxygen) and hospital variables. The primary outcome was cumulative all-cause mortality during a 90-day follow-up, with mortality assessment monitoring time points at 1, 2, 7, 14, 30 and 90 days from ED attendance. Comparison of performances for 90-day mortality between both scores was carried out by univariate analysis. RESULTS: From March to November 2020, we included 2,961 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients (median age 79 years, IQR 66-88), with 49.2% females. The qCSI score provided an AUC ranging from 0.769 (1-day mortality) to 0.749 (90-day mortality), whereas AUCs for NEWS ranging from 0.825 for 1-day mortality to 0.777 for 90-day mortality. At all-time points studied, differences between both scores were statistically significant (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients with SARS-CoV-2 can rapidly develop bilateral pneumonias with multiorgan disease; in these cases, in which an evacuation by the EMS is required, reliable scores for an early identification of patients with risk of clinical deterioration are critical. The NEWS score provides not only better prognostic results than those offered by qCSI at all the analyzed time points, but it is also better suited for COVID-19 patients.KEY MESSAGESThis work aims to determine whether NEWS is the best score for mortality risk assessment in patients with COVID-19.AUCs for NEWS ranged from 0.825 for 1-day mortality to 0.777 for 90-day mortality and were significantly higher than those for qCSI in these same outcomes.NEWS provides a better prognostic capacity than the qCSI score and allows for long-term (90 days) mortality risk assessment of COVID-19 patients.

Comorbidity-adjusted NEWS predicts mortality in suspected patients with COVID-19 from nursing homes: Multicentre retrospective cohort study.

AIMS: To assess the prognostic accuracy of comorbidity-adjusted National Early Warning Score in suspected Coronavirus disease 2019 patients transferred from nursing homes by the Emergency Department. DESIGN: Multicentre retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Patients transferred by high-priority ambulances from nursing homes to Emergency Departments with suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, from March 12 to July 31 2020, were considered. Included variables were: clinical covariates (respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, level of consciousness and supplemental oxygen use), the presence of comorbidities and confirmatory analytical diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. The primary outcome was a 2-day mortality rate. The discriminatory capability of the National Early Warning Score was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in two different cohorts, the validation and the revalidation, which were randomly selected from the main cohort. RESULTS: A total of 337 nursing homes, 10 advanced life support units, 51 basic life support units and 8 hospitals in Spain entailing 1,324 patients (median age 87 years) was involved in this study. Two-day mortality was 11.5% (152 cases), with a positivity rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 of 51.2%, 77.7% of hospitalization from whom 1% was of intensive care unit admission. The National Early Warning Score results for the revalidation cohort presented an AUC of 0.771, and of 0.885, 0.778 and 0.730 for the low-, medium- and high-level groups of comorbidities. CONCLUSION: The comorbidity-adjusted National Early Warning Score provides a good short-term prognostic criterion, information that can help in the decision-making process to guide the best strategy for each older adult, under the current pandemic. IMPACT: What problem did the study address? Under the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, targeting older adults at high risk of deterioration in nursing homes remains challenging. What were the main findings? Comorbidity-adjusted National Early Warning Score helps to forecast the risk of clinical deterioration more accurately. Where and on whom will the research have impact? A high NEWS, with a low level of comorbidity is associated with optimal predictive performance, making these older adults likely to benefit from continued follow up and potentially hospital referral under the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Role of SpO2/FiO2 Ratio and ROX Index in Predicting Early Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in COVID-19. A Pragmatic, Retrospective, Multi-Center Study.

The ability of COVID-19 to compromise the respiratory system has generated a substantial proportion of critically ill patients in need of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The objective of this paper was to analyze the prognostic ability of the pulse oximetry saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (SpO2/FiO2) and the ratio of SpO2/FiO2 to the respiratory rate-ROX index-as predictors of IMV in an emergency department in confirmed COVID-19 patients. A multicenter, retrospective cohort study was carried out in four provinces of Spain between March and November 2020. The discriminative power of the predictive variable was assessed through a prediction model trained using a derivation sub-cohort and evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) on the validation sub-cohort. A total of 2040 patients were included in the study. The IMV rate was 10.1%, with an in-hospital mortality rate of 35.3%. The performance of the SpO2/FiO2 ratio was better than the ROX index-AUC = 0.801 (95% CI 0.746-0.855) and AUC = 0.725 (95% CI 0.652-0.798), respectively. In fact, a direct comparison between AUCs resulted in significant differences (p = 0.001). SpO2 to FiO2 ratio is a simple and promising non-invasive tool for predicting risk of IMV in patients infected with COVID-19, and it is realizable in emergency departments.

Modelo de riesgo de mortalidad en pacientes con sospecha de enfermedad por COVID-19 basado en información del centro coordinador de urgencias

Objective. To develop and validate a scale to stratify risk of 2-day mortality based on data collected during calls to an emergency dispatch center from patients with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods. Retrospective multicenter study of consecutive patients over the age of 18 years with suspected COVID-19 who were transported from home over the course of 3 months after telephone interviews with dispatchers. We analyzed clinical and epidemiologic variables and comorbidities in relation to death within 2 days of the call. Using data from the development cohort, we built a risk model by means of logistic regression analysis of categorical variables that were independently associated with 2-day mortality. The scale was validated first in a validation cohort in the same province and then in a cohort in a different province. Results. A total of 2320 patients were included. The mean age was 79 years, and 49.8% were women. The overall 2-day mortality rate was 22.6% (376 deaths of patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection). The model included the following factors: age, location (rural location as a protective factor), institutionalization, desaturation, lung sounds (rhonchi), and altered mental status. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for death within 2 days was 0.763 (95% CI, 0.725-0.802;P < .001). Mortality in patients at high risk (more than 2.4 points on the scale) was 60%. Conclusions. This risk scale derived from information available to an emergency dispatch center is applicable to patients with suspected COVID-19. It can stratify patients by risk of early death (within 2 days), possibly helping with decision making regarding whether to transport from home or what means of transport to use, and destination. Objetivo. Derivar y validar una escala basada en variables recogidas durante la llamada a un centro coordinador de urgencias (CCU) que permita estratificar el riesgo de mortalidad a 2 días en pacientes con sospecha de enfermedad por COVID-19. Método. Estudio multicéntrico retrospectivo que incluyó a los pacientes consecutivos ≥ 18 años durante 3 meses, catalogados como caso sospechoso de COVID-19 después de la entrevista telefónica del CCU y que precisaron evacuación. Se analizaron variables clínico-epidemiológicas, comorbilidades y resultado de muerte a los 2 días. Se derivó una escala con las variables categóricas asociadas de forma independiente con la mortalidad a 2 días mediante regresión logística, en la cohorte de derivación. La escala se validó mediante una cohorte de validación y otra de revalidación obtenida en una provincia distinta. Resultados. Se incluyeron 2.320 pacientes (edad mediana 79 años, 49,8% mujeres). La mortalidad global fue del 22,6% (376 casos en pacientes con SARS-CoV-2). El modelo incluyó edad, localización (zona rural como variable protectora), institucionalización, desaturación, roncus, taquipnea y alteración del nivel de conciencia. El área bajo la curva (ABC) para la mortalidad a 2 días fue de 0,763 (IC 95%: 0,725-0,802;p < 0,001). La mortalidad en los pacientes de alto riesgo (> 2,4 puntos) fue del 60%. Conclusiones. La escala, derivada a través de información obtenida con datos del CCU, es aplicable a pacientes con sospecha de infección por COVID-19, estratifica el riesgo de mortalidad precoz (menos de 2 días) y puede ser una herramienta que ayude en la toma de decisiones, referidas a su evacuación, destino o vector de transporte.

Modelos de riesgo para la predicción de mortalidad hospitalaria en ancianos con neumonía por COVID-19

Objective. To compare the prognostic value of 3 severity scales: the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), the CURB-65 pneumonia severity score, and the Severity Community-Acquired Pneumonia (SCAP) score. To build a new predictive model for in-hospital mortality in patients over the age of 75 years admitted with pneumonia due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods. Retrospective study of patients older than 75 years admitted from the emergency department for COVID-19 pneumonia between March 12 and April 27, 2020. We recorded demographic (age, sex, living in a care facility or not), clinical (symptoms, comorbidities, Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI]), and analytical (serum biochemistry, blood gases, blood count, and coagulation factors) variables. A risk model was constructed, and the ability of the 3 scales to predict all-cause in-hospital mortality was compared. Results. We included 186 patients with a median age of 85 years (interquartile range, 80-89 years);44.1% were men. Mortality was 47.3%. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) were as follows for each tool: PSI, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.64-0.82);CURB-65 score, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.62-0.79);and SCAP score, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.63-0.81). Risk factors included in the model were the presence or absence of symptoms (cough, dyspnea), the CCI, and analytical findings (aspartate aminotransferase, potassium, urea, and lactate dehydrogenase. The AUC for the model was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.73-0.88). Conclusions. This study shows that the predictive power of the PSI for mortality is moderate and perceptibly higher than the CURB-65 and SCAP scores. We propose a new predictive model for mortality that offers significantly better performance than any of the 3 scales compared. However, our model must undergo external validation. Objetivo. Los objetivos son comparar la utilidad pronóstica de tres escalas de gravedad (Pneumonia Severity Index: PSI;CURB-65 scale;Severity Community Acquired Pneumonia Score: SCAP) y diseñar un nuevo modelo predictivo de mortalidad hospitalaria en pacientes mayores de 75 años ingresados por neumonía por COVID-19. Método. Estudio retrospectivo de pacientes mayores de 75 años ingresados por neumonía por COVID-19 desde el servicio de urgencias entre el 12 de marzo y el 27 de abril de 2020. Se recogieron variables demográficas (edad, sexo, institucionalización), clínicas (síntomas, comorbilidades, índice de Charlson) y analíticas (bioquímica en suero, gasometría, hematimetría, hemostasia). Se derivó un modelo de riesgo y se compararon las escalas de gravedad PSI, CURB-65 y SCAP para predecir la mortalidad intrahospitalaria por cualquier causa. Resultados. Se incluyeron 186 pacientes, con una mediana de edad de 85 años (RIC 80-89), un 44,1% varones. La mortalidad fue del 47,3%. Las escalas PSI, CURB-65 y SCAP tuvieron un área bajo la curva (ABC) de 0,74 (IC 95% 0,64-0,82), 0,71 (IC 95% 0,62-0,79) y 0,72 (IC 95% 0,63-0,81), respectivamente. El modelo predictivo compuesto por la ausencia o presencia de síntomas (tos y disnea), comorbilidad (índice de Charlson) y datos analíticos (aspartato- aminotransferasa, potasio, urea y lactato-deshidrogenasa) tuvo un ABC de 0,81 (IC 95% 0,73-0,88). Conclusión. Este estudio muestra que la escala PSI tiene una capacidad predictiva de mortalidad moderada, notablemente mejor que las escalas CURB-65 y SCAP. Se propone un nuevo modelo predictivo de mortalidad que mejora significativamente el rendimiento de estas escalas, siendo necesario verificar su validez externa.

Early Warning Scores in Patients with Suspected COVID-19 Infection in Emergency Departments.

Early warning scores (EWSs) help prevent and recognize and thereby act as the first signs of clinical and physiological deterioration. The objective of this study is to evaluate different EWSs (National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), quick sequential organ failure assessment score (qSOFA), Modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (MREMS) and Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS)) to predict mortality within the first 48 h in patients suspected to have Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a retrospective observational study in patients over 18 years of age who were treated by the advanced life support units and transferred to the emergency departments between March and July of 2020. Each patient was followed for two days registering their final diagnosis and mortality data. A total of 663 patients were included in our study. Early mortality within the first 48 h affected 53 patients (8.3%). The scale with the best capacity to predict early mortality was the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), with an area under the curve of 0.825 (95% CI: 0.75-0.89). The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive patients presented an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.804 (95% CI: 0.71-0.89), and the negative ones with an AUC of 0.863 (95% CI: 0.76-0.95). Among the EWSs, NEWS2 presented the best predictive power, even when it was separately applied to patients who tested positive and negative for SARS-CoV-2.

Blood Biomarkers for Assessing Headaches in Healthcare Workers after Wearing Biological Personal Protective Equipment in a COVID-19 Field Hospital.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to a pandemic, which among other things, has highlighted biosafety as a key cornerstone in the management of disease transmission. The aim of this work was to analyze the role played by different blood biomarkers in predicting the appearance of headaches in healthcare workers wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) in a COVID-19 treatment unit. A prospective cohort study of 38 healthcare workers was performed during April 2020. Blood analysis, performed just before the start of a 4 hour shift, was carried out on all volunteers equipped with PPE. At the end of their shifts and after decontamination, they were asked if they had suffered from headache in order to obtain a binary outcome. The baseline creatinine value reflected a specific odds ratio of 241.36 (95% CI: 2.50-23,295.43; p = 0.019) and an area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.737 (95%CI: 0.57-0.90; p < 0.01). Blood creatinine is a good candidate for predicting the appearance of a de novo headache in healthcare workers after wearing PPE for four hours in a COVID-19 unit.

Viral RNA load in plasma is associated with critical illness and a dysregulated host response in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 can course with respiratory and extrapulmonary disease. SARS-CoV-2 RNA is detected in respiratory samples but also in blood, stool and urine. Severe COVID-19 is characterized by a dysregulated host response to this virus. We studied whether viral RNAemia or viral RNA load in plasma is associated with severe COVID-19 and also to this dysregulated response. METHODS: A total of 250 patients with COVID-19 were recruited (50 outpatients, 100 hospitalized ward patients and 100 critically ill). Viral RNA detection and quantification in plasma was performed using droplet digital PCR, targeting the N1 and N2 regions of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein gene. The association between SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia and viral RNA load in plasma with severity was evaluated by multivariate logistic regression. Correlations between viral RNA load and biomarkers evidencing dysregulation of host response were evaluated by calculating the Spearman correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The frequency of viral RNAemia was higher in the critically ill patients (78%) compared to ward patients (27%) and outpatients (2%) (p < 0.001). Critical patients had higher viral RNA loads in plasma than non-critically ill patients, with non-survivors showing the highest values. When outpatients and ward patients were compared, viral RNAemia did not show significant associations in the multivariate analysis. In contrast, when ward patients were compared with ICU patients, both viral RNAemia and viral RNA load in plasma were associated with critical illness (OR [CI 95%], p): RNAemia (3.92 [1.183-12.968], 0.025), viral RNA load (N1) (1.962 [1.244-3.096], 0.004); viral RNA load (N2) (2.229 [1.382-3.595], 0.001). Viral RNA load in plasma correlated with higher levels of chemokines (CXCL10, CCL2), biomarkers indicative of a systemic inflammatory response (IL-6, CRP, ferritin), activation of NK cells (IL-15), endothelial dysfunction (VCAM-1, angiopoietin-2, ICAM-1), coagulation activation (D-Dimer and INR), tissue damage (LDH, GPT), neutrophil response (neutrophils counts, myeloperoxidase, GM-CSF) and immunodepression (PD-L1, IL-10, lymphopenia and monocytopenia). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia and viral RNA load in plasma are associated with critical illness in COVID-19. Viral RNA load in plasma correlates with key signatures of dysregulated host responses, suggesting a major role of uncontrolled viral replication in the pathogenesis of this disease.

Predicting Health Care Workers' Tolerance of Personal Protective Equipment: An Observational Simulation Study.

BACKGROUND: More recently, due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, health care workers have to deal with clinical situations wearing personal protective equipment (PPE); however, there is a question of whether everybody will tolerate PPE equally. The main objective of this study was to develop a risk model to predict whether health care workers will tolerate wearing PPE, C category, 4B/5B/6B type, during a 30-minute simulation. METHODS: A nonexperimental simulation study was conducted at the Advanced Simulation Center, Faculty of Medicine, Valladolid University (Spain) from April 3rd to 28th, 2017. Health care students and professionals were equipped with PPE and performed a 30-minute simulation. Anthropometric, physiological, and analytical variables and anxiety levels were measured before and after simulation. A scoring model was constructed. RESULTS: Ninety-six volunteers participated in the study. Half the sample presented metabolic fatigue in the 20 minutes after finishing the simulation. The predictive model included female sex, height, muscle and bone mass, and moderate level of physical activity. The validity of the main model using all the variables presented an area under the curve of 0.86 (95% confidence interval: 0.786-0.935), and the validity of the model had an area under the curve of 0.725 (95% confidence interval: 0.559-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Decision-making in biohazard incidents is a challenge for emergency team leaders. Knowledge of health care workers' physiological tolerance of PPE could improve their performance.