Observational study of organisational responses of 17 US hospitals over the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has required significant modifications of hospital care. The objective of this study was to examine the operational approaches taken by US hospitals over time in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a prospective observational study of 17 geographically diverse US hospitals from February 2020 to February 2021. OUTCOMES AND ANALYSIS: We identified 42 potential pandemic-related strategies and obtained week-to-week data about their use. We calculated descriptive statistics for use of each strategy and plotted percent uptake and weeks used. We assessed the relationship between strategy use and hospital type, geographic region and phase of the pandemic using generalised estimating equations (GEEs), adjusting for weekly county case counts. RESULTS: We found heterogeneity in strategy uptake over time, some of which was associated with geographic region and phase of pandemic. We identified a body of strategies that were both commonly used and sustained over time, for example, limiting staff in COVID-19 rooms and increasing telehealth capacity, as well as those that were rarely used and/or not sustained, for example, increasing hospital bed capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic varied in resource intensity, uptake and duration of use. Such information may be valuable to health systems during the ongoing pandemic and future ones.

Age-related differences in symptoms in older emergency department patients with COVID-19: Prevalence and outcomes in a multicenter cohort.

BACKGROUND: Older adults represent a disproportionate share of severe COVID-19 presentations and fatalities, but we have limited understanding of the differences in presentation by age and the association between less typical emergency department (ED) presentations and clinical outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used the RECOVER Network registry, a research collaboration of 86 EDs in 27 U.S. states. We focused on encounters with a positive nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2, and described their demographics, clinical presentation, and outcomes. Sequential multivariable logistic regressions examined the strength of association between age cohort and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 4536 encounters, median patient age was 55 years, 49% were women, and 34% were non-Hispanic Black persons. Cough was the most common presenting complaint across age groups (18-64, 65-74, and 75+): 71%, 67%, and 59%, respectively (p < 0.001). Neurological symptoms, particularly altered mental status, were more common in older adults (2%, 11%, 26%; p < 0.001). Patients 75+ had the greatest odds of ED index visit admission of all age groups (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 6.66; 95% CI 5.23-8.56), 30-day hospitalization (aOR 7.44; 95% CI 5.63-9.99), and severe COVID-19 (aOR 4.26; 95% CI 3.45-5.27). Compared to individuals with alternate presentations and adjusting for age, patients with typical symptoms (fever, cough and/or shortness of breath) had similar odds of ED index visit admission (aOR 1.01; 95% CI 0.81-1.24), potentially higher odds of 30-day hospitalization (aOR 1.23; 95% CI 1.00-1.53), and greater odds of severe COVID-19 (aOR 1.46; 95% CI 1.12-1.90). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with COVID-19 are more likely to have presentations without the most common symptoms. However, alternate presentations of COVID-19 in older ED patients are not associated with greater odds of mechanical ventilation and/or death. Our data highlights the importance of a liberal COVID-19 testing strategy among older ED patients to facilitate accurate diagnoses and timely treatment and prophylaxis.

Disasters on campus: A cross-sectional survey of college EMS systems' preparedness to respond to mass casualty incidents.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the training and readiness levels of Collegiate Emergency Medical Service (EMS) providers to respond to mass casualty incidents (MCIs). METHODS: An anonymous cross-sectional survey of Collegiate EMS providers was performed. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were US-based EMS providers affiliated with the National Collegiate Emergency Medical Services Foundation. OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were levels of EMS experience and MCI training, subjective readiness levels for responding to various MCI scenarios, and analyzing the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on MCI response capabilities. RESULTS: Respondents had a median age of 21 years (interquartile range IQR 20, 22), with 86 percent (n = 96/112) being trained to the Emergency Medical Technician-Basic level. Providers reported participating in an average of 1.6 MCI trainings over the last four years (IQR, 1.0, 2.2). Subjective MCI response readiness levels were highest with active assailant attacks followed by large event evacuations, natural disasters, hazardous material (HAZMAT) incidents, targeted automobile ramming attacks, explosions, and finally bioweapons release. Disparate to this, only 18 percent of participants reported training in the fundamentals of tactical and disaster medicine. With respect to the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on MCI readiness, 27 percent of respondents reported being less prepared, and there was a statistically significant decrease in subjective readiness to respond to HAZMAT incidents. CONCLUSION: Given low rates of MCI training but high rates of self-assessed MCI preparedness, respondents may overestimate their readiness to adequately respond to the complexity of a real-world MCI. More objective assessment measures are needed to evaluate provider preparedness.

A randomized control trial of a multiplex gastrointestinal PCR panel versus usual testing to assess antibiotics use for patients with infectious diarrhea in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: This study analyzed physician treating behavior through the use of a multiplex gastrointestinal polymerase chain reaction (GI PCR) test compared with usual testing in emergency department (ED) patients with suspected acute infectious diarrhea to assess differences in antibiotic management. METHODS: A prospective, single-center, randomized control trial was designed to investigate antibiotic use in ED patients with moderate to severe suspected infectious diarrhea, comparing those who received GI PCR to those who received usual testing. ED patients with signs of dehydration, inflammation, or persistent symptoms were randomized to either the experimental arm (GI PCR) or the control arm (usual testing or no testing). RESULTS: A total of 74 patients met study criteria and were randomized to either the experimental GI PCR arm (n = 38) or to the control arm (n = 36). Participants in the GI PCR arm received antibiotics in 87% of bacterial or protozoal diarrheal infections (13/15) whereas those in the control arm received antibiotics in 46% of bacterial or protozoal infections (6/13) (P value 0.042) with 2-proportion difference 0.41 (95% confidence interval 0.07 and 0.68). CONCLUSIONS: ED use of multiplex GI PCR led to an increase in antibiotic use for bacterial and protozoal causes of infectious diarrhea compared to usual testing. This increase in antibiotics appears to be appropriate given patients' moderate to severe symptoms and a definitive identification of a likely bacterial or protozoal cause of symptoms. Results should be interpreted with caution because of the small sample size.

Predicting 30-day return hospital admissions in patients with COVID-19 discharged from the emergency department: A national retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Identification of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at risk for deterioration after discharge from the emergency department (ED) remains a clinical challenge. Our objective was to develop a prediction model that identifies patients with COVID-19 at risk for return and hospital admission within 30 days of ED discharge. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of discharged adult ED patients (n = 7529) with SARS-CoV-2 infection from 116 unique hospitals contributing to the National Registry of Suspected COVID-19 in Emergency Care. The primary outcome was return hospital admission within 30 days. Models were developed using classification and regression tree (CART), gradient boosted machine (GBM), random forest (RF), and least absolute shrinkage and selection (LASSO) approaches. RESULTS: Among patients with COVID-19 discharged from the ED on their index encounter, 571 (7.6%) returned for hospital admission within 30 days. The machine-learning (ML) models (GBM, RF, and LASSO) performed similarly. The RF model yielded a test area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.78), with a sensitivity of 0.46 (95% CI, 0.39-0.54) and a specificity of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.82-0.85). Predictive variables, including lowest oxygen saturation, temperature, or history of hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, or obesity, were common to all ML models. CONCLUSIONS: A predictive model identifying adult ED patients with COVID-19 at risk for return for return hospital admission within 30 days is feasible. Ensemble/boot-strapped classification methods (eg, GBM, RF, and LASSO) outperform the single-tree CART method. Future efforts may focus on the application of ML models in the hospital setting to optimize the allocation of follow-up resources.

Association Between Baseline Use of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and Death Among Patients Tested for COVID-19.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) drugs may modify risk associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Therefore, we assessed whether baseline therapy with ACEIs or ARBs was associated with lower mortality, respiratory failure (noninvasive ventilation or intubation), and renal failure (new renal replacement therapy) in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. This retrospective registry-based observational cohort study used data from a national database of emergency department patients tested for SARS-CoV-2. Symptomatic emergency department patients were accrued from January to October 2020, across 197 hospitals in the United States. Multivariable analysis using logistic regression evaluated end points among SARS-CoV-2-positive cases, focusing on ACEIs/ARBs and adjusting for covariates. Model performance was evaluated using the c statistic for discrimination and Cox plotting for calibration. A total of 13 859 (99.9%) patients had known mortality status, of whom 2045 (14.8%) died. Respiratory failure occurred in 2485/13 880 (17.9%) and renal failure in 548/13 813 (4.0%) patients with available data. ACEI/ARB status was associated with a 25% decrease in mortality odds (odds ratio [OR], 0.75; 95%CI, 0.59-0.94; P = .011; c = .82). ACEIs/ARBs were not significantly associated with respiratory failure (OR, 0.89; 95%CI, 0.78-1.06; P = .206) or renal failure (OR, 0.75; 95%CI, 0.55-1.04; P = .083). Adjusting for covariates, baseline ACEI/ARB was associated with 25% lower mortality in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. The potential mechanism for ACEI/ARB mortality modification requires further exploration.

Clinical prediction rule for SARS-CoV-2 infection from 116 U.S. emergency departments 2-22-2021.

OBJECTIVES: Accurate and reliable criteria to rapidly estimate the probability of infection with the novel coronavirus-2 that causes the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2) and associated disease (COVID-19) remain an urgent unmet need, especially in emergency care. The objective was to derive and validate a clinical prediction score for SARS-CoV-2 infection that uses simple criteria widely available at the point of care. METHODS: Data came from the registry data from the national REgistry of suspected COVID-19 in EmeRgency care (RECOVER network) comprising 116 hospitals from 25 states in the US. Clinical variables and 30-day outcomes were abstracted from medical records of 19,850 emergency department (ED) patients tested for SARS-CoV-2. The criterion standard for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 required a positive molecular test from a swabbed sample or positive antibody testing within 30 days. The prediction score was derived from a 50% random sample (n = 9,925) using unadjusted analysis of 107 candidate variables as a screening step, followed by stepwise forward logistic regression on 72 variables. RESULTS: Multivariable regression yielded a 13-variable score, which was simplified to a 13-point score: +1 point each for age>50 years, measured temperature>37.5°C, oxygen saturation<95%, Black race, Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, household contact with known or suspected COVID-19, patient reported history of dry cough, anosmia/dysgeusia, myalgias or fever; and -1 point each for White race, no direct contact with infected person, or smoking. In the validation sample (n = 9,975), the probability from logistic regression score produced an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.79-0.81), and this level of accuracy was retained across patients enrolled from the early spring to summer of 2020. In the simplified score, a score of zero produced a sensitivity of 95.6% (94.8-96.3%), specificity of 20.0% (19.0-21.0%), negative likelihood ratio of 0.22 (0.19-0.26). Increasing points on the simplified score predicted higher probability of infection (e.g., >75% probability with +5 or more points). CONCLUSION: Criteria that are available at the point of care can accurately predict the probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection. These criteria could assist with decisions about isolation and testing at high throughput checkpoints.

Risk stratification with video capsule endoscopy leads to fewer hospital admissions in emergency department patients with low-risk to moderate-risk upper gastrointestinal bleed: A multicenter clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: In US emergency departments (EDs), the physician has limited ability to evaluate for common and serious conditions of the gastrointestinal (GI) mucosa such as a bleeding peptic ulcer. Although many bleeding lesions are self-limited, the majority of these patients require emergency hospitalization for upper endoscopy (EGD). We conducted a clinical trial to determine if ED risk stratification with video capsule endoscopy (VCE) reduces hospitalization rates for low-risk to moderate-risk patients with suspected upper GI bleeding. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial at 3 urban academic EDs. Inclusion criteria included signs of upper GI bleeding and a Glasgow Blatchford score <6. Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of the following 2 treatment arms: (1) an experimental arm that included VCE risk stratification and brief ED observation versus (2) a standard care arm that included admission for inpatient EGD. The primary outcome was hospital admission. Patients were followed for 7 and 30 days to assess for rebleeding events and revisits to the hospital. RESULTS: The trial was terminated early as a result of low accrual. The trial was also terminated early because of a need to repurpose all staff to respond to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. A total of 24 patients were enrolled in the study. In the experimental group, 2/11 (18.2%) patients were admitted to the hospital, and in the standard of care group, 10/13 (76.9%) patients were admitted to the hospital (P = 0.012). There was no difference in safety on day 7 and day 30 after the index ED visit. CONCLUSIONS: VCE is a potential strategy to decrease admissions for upper GI bleeding, though further study with a larger cohort is required before this approach can be recommended.

Factors associated with clinical severity in emergency department patients presenting with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the association of race, ethnicity, comorbidities, and insurance status with need for hospitalization of symptomatic emergency department patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. METHODS: This study is a cohort study of symptomatic patients presenting to a single emergency department (ED) with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from March 7-August 9, 2020. We collected patient-level information regarding demographics, insurance status, comorbidities, level of care, and mortality using a structured chart review. We compared characteristics of patients categorized by (1) home discharge, (2) general hospital ward admission, and (3) intensive care unit (ICU) admission or death within 30 days of the index visit. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to report odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) between hospital admission versus ED discharge home and between ICU care versus general hospital ward admission. RESULTS: In total, 994 patients who presented to the ED with symptoms were included in the analysis with 551 (55.4%) patients discharged home, 314 (31.6%) patients admitted to the general hospital ward, and 129 (13.0%) admitted to the ICU or dying. Patients requiring admission were more likely to be Black or to have public insurance (Medicaid and/or Medicare). Patients who were admitted to the ICU or dying were more likely aged ≥ 65 years or male. In multivariable logistic regression, old age, public insurance, diabetes, hypertension, obesity, heart failure, and hyperlipidemia were independent predictors of hospital admission. When comparing those who needed ICU care versus general hospital ward admission in univariate logistic regression, patients with Medicaid (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.2-4.6), Medicare (OR 4.2, 95% CI 2.1-8.4), Medicaid and Medicare (OR 4.3, 95% CI 2.4-7.7), history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.2), hypertension (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.7), and heart failure (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.4-4.7) were more likely to be admitted into the ICU or die; Black (OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.4-2.9) and Hispanic/Latino (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6-1.8) patients were less likely to be admitted into the ICU; however, the associations were not statistically significant. In multivariable logistic regression, old age, male sex, public insurance, and heart failure were independent predictors of ICU care/death. CONCLUSION: Comorbidities and public insurance are predictors of more severe illness for patients with SARS-CoV-2. This study suggests that the disparities in severity seen in COVID-19 among Black patients may be attributable, in part, to low socioeconomic status and chronic health conditions.

Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism among hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019-positive patients predicted for higher mortality and prolonged intensive care unit and hospital stays in a multisite healthcare system.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared with that in a matched cohort with similar cardiovascular risk factors and the effects of DVT and PE on the hospital course. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from COVID-19 patients who had been hospitalized from March 11, 2020 to September 4, 2020. The patients were randomly matched in a 1:1 ratio by age, sex, hospital of admission, smoking history, diabetes mellitus, and coronary artery disease with a cohort of patients without COVID-19. The primary end point was the incidence of DVT/PE and the odds of developing DVT/PE using a conditional logistic regression model. The secondary end point was the hospitalization outcomes for COVID-19 patients with and without DVT/PE, including mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, ICU stay, and length of hospitalization (LOH). Multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify the variables associated with mortality, ICU admission, discharge disposition, ICU duration, and LOH. RESULTS: A total of 13,310 patients had tested positive for COVID-19, 915 of whom (6.9%) had been hospitalized across our multisite health care system. The mean age of the hospitalized patients was 60.8 ± 17.0 years, and 396 (43.3%) were women. Of the 915 patients, 82 (9.0%) had had a diagnosis of DVT/PE confirmed by ultrasound examination of the extremities and/or computed tomography angiography of the chest. The odds of presenting with DVT/PE in the setting of COVID-19 infection was greater than that without COVID-19 infection (0.6% [5 of 915] vs 9.0% [82 of 915]; odds ratio [OR], 18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.0-51.2; P < .001). The vascular risk factors were not different between the COVID-19 patients with and without DVT/PE. Mortality (P = .02), the need for ICU stay (P < .001), duration of ICU stay (P < .001), and LOH (P < .001) were greater in the DVT/PE cohort than in the cohort without DVT/PE. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, the hemoglobin (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.46-0.95; P = .04) and D-dimer (OR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.33-1.56; P = .03) levels were associated with higher mortality. Higher activated partial thromboplastin times (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.00-1.12; P = .03) and higher interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels (OR, 1.0; 95% CI, 1.01-1.07; P = .05) were associated with a greater risk of ICU admission. IL-6 (OR, 1.0; 95% CI, 1.00-1.02; P = .05) was associated with a greater risk of rehabilitation placement after discharge. On multivariable gamma regression analysis, hemoglobin (coefficient, -3.0; 95% CI, 0.03-0.08; P = .005) was associated with a prolonged ICU stay, and the activated partial thromboplastin time (coefficient, 2.0; 95% CI, 0.003-0.006; P = .05), international normalized ratio (coefficient, -3.2; 95% CI, 0.06-0.19; P = .002) and IL-6 (coefficient, 2.4; 95% CI, 0.0011-0.0027; P = .02) were associated with a prolonged LOH. CONCLUSIONS: A significantly greater incidence of DVT/PE occurred in hospitalized COVID-19-positive patients compared with a non-COVID-19 cohort matched for cardiovascular risk factors. Patients affected by DVT/PE were more likely to experience greater mortality, to require ICU admission, and experience prolonged ICU stays and LOH compared with COVID-19-positive patients without DVT/PE. Advancements in DVT/PE prevention are needed for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection.

Telemedicine in vascular surgery during the coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic: A multisite healthcare system experience.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the introduction of telemedicine as an alternative to the traditional face-to-face encounters with vascular surgery patients in the era of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data on face-to-face and telemedicine interactions was conducted at a multisite health care system from January to August 2020 in vascular surgery patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. The end point is direct patient satisfaction comparison between face-to-face and telemedicine encounters/interactions prior and during the pandemic. RESULTS: There were 6262 patient encounters from January 1, 2020, to August 6, 2020. Of the total encounters, 790 (12.6%) were via telemedicine, which were initiated on March 11, 2020, after the World Health Organization's declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic. These telemedicine encounters were readily adopted and embraced by both the providers and patients and remain popular as an option to patients for all types of visits. Of these patients, 78.7% rated their overall health care experience during face-to-face encounters as very good and 80.6% of patients rated their health care experience during telemedicine encounters as very good (P = .78). CONCLUSIONS: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has produced unprecedented consequences to the practice of medicine and specifically of vascular surgery, our multisite health care system has been able to swiftly adapt and adopt telemedicine technologies for the care of our complex patients. Most important, the high quality of patient-reported satisfaction and health care experience has remained unchanged.