A randomized controlled trial on long-term effectiveness of a psychosocial aftercare program following paediatric chronic pain treatment: Who benefits the most?

BACKGROUND: For paediatric chronic pain patients, intensive interdisciplinary pain treatment (IIPT) is a well-established treatment. The treatment's short-term effectiveness can be improved by an additive psychosocial aftercare (PAC). However, neither the program's long-term effectiveness nor the patients in particular need have been investigated yet. METHODS: This study aimed at determining the long-term effects of PAC and detecting predictors of treatment outcome within a multicentre randomized controlled trial measured at five time points up to 12 months after discharge. At inpatient admission to IIPT, patients (N = 419, 14.3 years of age, 72.3% female) were randomly assigned to intervention or control group. After IIPT discharge, the intervention group received PAC, whereas the control group received treatment as usual (TAU). Patient-reported outcomes included pain and emotional characteristics. Clinicians assessed potential psychosocial risk factors and their prognosis of treatment outcome. Statistical analyses included mixed-models and univariable logistic regressions. RESULTS: Data at the 12-month follow-up (n = 288) showed a significant benefit of PAC compared with TAU; the majority (59.0%) of patients in the PAC-group reported no chronic pain compared to 29.2% of TAU-patients (p < 0.001). Patients with a single parent specifically benefited from PAC compared to TAU. Clinicians were able to make a reliable prognosis of treatment outcome, but did not successfully predict which patients would benefit the most from PAC. CONCLUSIONS: Study results suggest that PAC is highly effective irrespective of patient characteristics, but particularly for patients with single parents. Its broad implementation could help to improve the long-term outcomes of youth with severely disabling chronic pain. SIGNIFICANCE: A psychosocial aftercare following paediatric IIPT leads to significantly better pain and emotional outcomes compared to treatment as usual up to 12 months after discharge, especially for patients with single parents.

Mortality and morbidity in patients with congenital heart disease hospitalised for viral pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: Data on the clinical outcome of patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) affected by severe viral pneumonia are limited. We analysed morbidity and mortality of viral pneumonia and evaluated the association between medical conditions, medication, vaccination and outcome specifically in patients with CHD requiring hospitalisation for viral pneumonia. METHODS: Based on data from one of Germany's largest health insurers, all cases of viral pneumonia requiring hospital admission (2005-2018) were studied. Mortality, and composites of death, transplantation, mechanical circulatory support, ventilation or extracorporeal lung support served as endpoints. RESULTS: Overall, 26 262 viral pneumonia cases occurred in 24 980 patients. Of these, 1180 cases occurred in patients with CHD. Compared with patients without CHD, mortality rate was elevated in patients with CHD. As a group, patients with CHD aged 20-59 years even exceeded mortality rates in patients without CHD aged >60 years. No mortality was observed in patients with CHD with simple defects <60 years of age without associated cardiovascular risk factors. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, age, CHD complexity, chromosomal anomalies, cardiac medication, use of immunosuppressants and absence of vaccination for influenza emerged as risk factors of adverse outcome. CONCLUSIONS: We present timely data on morbidity and mortality of severe viral pneumonia requiring hospital admission in patients with CHD. Need for mechanical ventilation and risk of death in CHD increase early in life, reaching a level equivalent to non-CHD individuals >60 years of age. Our data suggest that except for patients with isolated simple defects, patients with CHD should be considered higher-risk individuals when faced with severe viral pneumonia.

Study protocol for a prospective, double-blinded, observational study investigating the diagnostic accuracy of an app-based diagnostic health care application in an emergency room setting: the eRadaR trial.

INTRODUCTION: Occurrence of inaccurate or delayed diagnoses is a significant concern in patient care, particularly in emergency medicine, where decision making is often constrained by high throughput and inaccurate admission diagnoses. Artificial intelligence-based diagnostic decision support system have been developed to enhance clinical performance by suggesting differential diagnoses to a given case, based on an integrated medical knowledge base and machine learning techniques. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of Ada, an app-based diagnostic tool and the impact on patient outcome. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The eRadaR trial is a prospective, double-blinded study with patients presenting to the emergency room (ER) with abdominal pain. At initial contact in the ER, a structured interview will be performed using the Ada-App and both, patients and attending physicians, will be blinded to the proposed diagnosis lists until trial completion. Throughout the study, clinical data relating to diagnostic findings and types of therapy will be obtained and the follow-up until day 90 will comprise occurrence of complications and overall survival of patients. The primary efficacy of the trial is defined by the percentage of correct diagnoses suggested by Ada compared with the final discharge diagnosis. Further, accuracy and timing of diagnosis will be compared with decision making of classical doctor-patient interaction. Secondary objectives are complications, length of hospital stay and overall survival. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was received by the independent ethics committee (IEC) of the Goethe-University Frankfurt on 9 April 2020 including the patient information material and informed consent form. All protocol amendments must be reported to and adapted by the IEC. The results from this study will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals and reported at suitable national and international meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00019098.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on appendicitis treatment in Germany-a population-based analysis.

PURPOSE: Acute appendicitis is one of the most common reasons for emergency medical consultation. While simple appendicitis can be treated with antibiotics or surgery, complex appendicitis including gangrene, abscess, and perforation requires appendectomy. During the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, an overall drop in emergency room consultations was observed. We therefore aimed to investigate the incidence and treatment strategies of acute appendicitis during that period. METHODS: Data of insurance holders with the ICD code for "acute appendicitis" or OPS procedure of appendectomy of a major health insurance company in Germany were analyzed retrospectively. Groups were built, containing of the means of March-June of 2017, 2018, and 2019, defined as "pre-COVID group" with the "COVID group," defined as data from March to June of 2020. Data was analyzed by age, sex, comorbidities, length of hospital stay, diagnoses, and treatment. Data of the COVID group was analyzed for simultaneous COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 pandemic of early 2020, an overall reduction by 12.9% of patients presenting with acute appendicitis was noticeable. These results were mainly due to decreased rates of uncomplicated appendicitis, while complicated appendicitis was scarcely affected. Especially in the group of females < 40 years, a drastic reduction was visible. Rates of extended surgery did not change. Likewise, the complication rate like appendix stump leakage or need for re-operation did not differ. In March 2020, 4.8% of acute appendicitis patients had concomitant COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSION: In line with the overall drop of emergency room visits during the COVID-19 pandemic of spring 2020 in Germany, a significantly lowered number of patients with uncomplicated appendicitis were noticeable, whereas complicated appendicitis did not differ. Also, treatment and complication rate of acute appendicitis did not change. These findings might be a hint that acute appendicitis is not a progressing disease but caused by different entities for uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis and therefore another clue that uncomplicated appendicitis can be treated with antibiotics or observation. Nevertheless provided data does not cover outpatient treatment; therefore, no statement observation or antibiotics in outpatients can be made.

Temporal trends in the presentation of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany: an analysis of health insurance claims.

AIMS: The first reports of declining hospital admissions for major cardiovascular emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic attracted public attention. However, systematic evidence on this subject is sparse. We aimed to investigate the rate of emergent hospital admissions, subsequent invasive treatments and comorbidities during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a retrospective analysis of health insurance claims data from the second largest insurance fund in Germany, BARMER. Patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction, acute limb ischemia, aortic rupture, stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) between January 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020, were included. Admission rates per 100,000 insured, invasive treatments and comorbidities were compared from January-May 2019 (pre-COVID) to January-May 2020 (COVID). A total of 115,720 hospitalizations were included in the current analysis (51.3% females, mean age 72.9 years). Monthly admission rates declined from 78.6/100,000 insured (pre-COVID) to 70.6/100,000 (COVID). The lowest admission rate was observed in April 2020 (61.6/100,000). Administration rates for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (7.3-6.6), non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (16.8-14.6), acute limb ischemia (5.1-4.6), stroke (35.0-32.5) and TIA (13.7-11.9) decreased from pre-COVID to COVID. Baseline comorbidities and the percentage of these patients treated with interventional or open-surgical procedures remained similar over time across all entities. In-hospital mortality in hospitalizations for stroke increased from pre-COVID to COVID (8.5-9.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Admission rates for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular emergencies declined during the pandemic in Germany, while patients' comorbidities and treatment allocations remained unchanged. Further investigation is warranted to identify underlying reasons and potential implications on patients' outcomes.