Derivation and validation of a clinical decision rule to risk-stratify COVID-19 patients discharged from the emergency department: The CCEDRRN COVID discharge score.

Objective: To risk-stratify COVID-19 patients being considered for discharge from the emergency department (ED). Methods: We conducted an observational study to derive and validate a clinical decision rule to identify COVID-19 patients at risk for hospital admission or death within 72 hours of ED discharge. We used data from 49 sites in the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) between March 1, 2020, and September 8, 2021. We randomly assigned hospitals to derivation or validation and prespecified clinical variables as candidate predictors. We used logistic regression to develop the score in a derivation cohort and examined its performance in predicting short-term adverse outcomes in a validation cohort. Results: Of 15,305 eligible patient visits, 535 (3.6%) experienced the outcome. The score included age, sex, pregnancy status, temperature, arrival mode, respiratory rate, and respiratory distress. The area under the curve was 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.73) in derivation and 0.71 (95% CI 0.68-0.73) in combined derivation and validation cohorts. Among those with a score of 3 or less, the risk for the primary outcome was 1.9% or less, and the sensitivity of using 3 as a rule-out score was 89.3% (95% CI 82.7-94.0). Among those with a score of ≥9, the risk for the primary outcome was as high as 12.2% and the specificity of using 9 as a rule-in score was 95.6% (95% CI 94.9-96.2). Conclusion: The CCEDRRN COVID discharge score can identify patients at risk of short-term adverse outcomes after ED discharge with variables that are readily available on patient arrival.

A Qualitative Assessment of Studies Evaluating the Classification Accuracy of Personnel Using START in Disaster Triage: A Scoping Review.

Background: Mass casualty incidents (MCIs) can occur as a consequence of a wide variety of events and often require overwhelming prehospital and emergency support and coordinated emergency response. A variety of disaster triage systems have been developed to assist health care providers in making difficult choices with regards to prioritization of victim treatment. The simple triage and rapid treatment (START) triage system is one of the most widely used triage algorithms; however, the research literature addressing real-world or simulation studies documenting the classification accuracy of personnel using START is lacking. Aims and Objectives: To explore the existing literature related to the current state of knowledge about studies assessing the classification accuracy of the START triage system. Design: Scoping review based on Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework and narrative synthesis based on methods described by Popay and colleagues were performed. Results: The literature search identified 1,820 citations, of which 32 studies met the inclusion criteria. Thirty were peer-reviewed articles and 28 published in the last 10 years (i.e., 2010 and onward). Primary research studies originated in 13 countries and included 3,706 participants conducting triaging assessments involving 2,950 victims. Included studies consisted of five randomized controlled trials, 17 non-randomized controlled studies, eight descriptive studies, and two mixed-method studies. Simulation techniques, mode of delivery, contextual features, and participants' required skills varied among studies. Overall, there was no consistent reporting of outcomes across studies and results were heterogeneous. Data were extracted from the included studies and categorized into two themes: (1) typology of simulations and (2) START system in MCIs simulations. Each theme contains sub-themes regarding the development of simulation employing START as a system for improving individuals' preparedness. These include types of simulation training, settings, and technologies. Other sub-themes include outcome measures and reference standards. Conclusion: This review demonstrates a variety of factors impacting the development and implementation of simulation to assess characteristics of the START system. To further improve simulation-based assessment of triage systems, we recommend the use of reporting guidelines specifically designed for health care simulation research. In particular, reporting of reference standards and test characteristics need to improve in future studies.

CCEDRRN COVID-19 Infection Score (CCIS): development and validation in a Canadian cohort of a clinical risk score to predict SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a clinical risk score that can accurately quantify the probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients presenting to an emergency department without the need for laboratory testing. DESIGN: Cohort study of participants in the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) registry. Regression models were fitted to predict a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result using clinical and demographic predictors, as well as an indicator of local SARS-CoV-2 incidence. SETTING: 32 emergency departments in eight Canadian provinces. PARTICIPANTS: 27 665 consecutively enrolled patients who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 in participating emergency departments between 1 March and 30 October 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test result within 14 days of an index emergency department encounter for suspected COVID-19 disease. RESULTS: We derived a 10-item CCEDRRN COVID-19 Infection Score using data from 21 743 patients. This score included variables from history and physical examination and an indicator of local disease incidence. The score had a c-statistic of 0.838 with excellent calibration. We externally validated the rule in 5295 patients. The score maintained excellent discrimination and calibration and had superior performance compared with another previously published risk score. Score cut-offs were identified that can rule-in or rule-out SARS-CoV-2 infection without the need for nucleic acid testing with 97.4% sensitivity (95% CI 96.4 to 98.3) and 95.9% specificity (95% CI 95.5 to 96.0). CONCLUSIONS: The CCEDRRN COVID-19 Infection Score uses clinical characteristics and publicly available indicators of disease incidence to quantify a patient's probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The score can identify patients at sufficiently high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection to warrant isolation and empirical therapy prior to test confirmation while also identifying patients at sufficiently low risk of infection that they may not need testing. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04702945.

Engaging frontline providers: an important key to eliminating tuberculosis in Canada, and other high-income countries.

The greatest human cost of the rapidly moving pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 may be due to its impact on the response to other diseases. One such other disease is tuberculosis (TB). All indications suggest that COVID-19-related diversions of healthcare resources and disruptions to public health programming will exacerbate the slower moving pandemic of TB. This is expected to set back TB elimination efforts by years. This is a prediction that is especially relevant to Canada, which has repeatedly failed to meet pre-set targets for the elimination of TB even before the COVID-19 pandemic began. A collaborative approach to achieve TB elimination, one that engages all care providers, has recently been emphasized by the STOP-TB Partnership. Among TB elimination strategies, frontline providers (e.g., family physicians, emergency room physicians, and others) are well positioned to identify candidates for the treatment of latent TB infection, and make the diagnosis of infection-spreading cases of TB in a timely manner, thereby interrupting forward-moving chains of transmission. Electronic medical records offer the promise of automating these processes. In this commentary, we promote broader engagement of the workforce across multiple sectors of medicine to reduce TB associated morbidity and mortality, interrupt transmission, and shrink the reservoir of latent TB infection.

RéSUMé: Le plus grand coût humain de la pandémie de SRAS-CoV-2, une maladie à évolution rapide, pourrait être son impact sur la riposte aux autres maladies. L'une d'elles est la tuberculose. Selon tous les indicateurs, les ressources de soins de santé détournées et les programmes de santé publique perturbés pour lutter contre la COVID-19 vont exacerber la pandémie de tuberculose, dont l'évolution est plus lente. Il faut s'attendre à une régression de plusieurs années dans les efforts pour éliminer la tuberculose. C'est une prédiction qui concerne particulièrement le Canada, qui a à maintes reprises été incapable de respecter les objectifs préétablis d'élimination de la tuberculose, même avant la pandémie de COVID-19. Le Partenariat Halte à la tuberculose promulgue depuis peu une démarche concertée, impliquant tous les prestataires de soins, pour parvenir à éliminer la tuberculose. Entre autres stratégies d'élimination, on compte sur les prestataires de première ligne (médecins de famille, médecins d'urgence et autres), bien placés pour repérer les personnes candidates au traitement de la tuberculose-infection (latente) et pour diagnostiquer les cas de tuberculose-maladie (active) dans les meilleurs délais, ce qui interromprait les chaînes de transmission en mouvement. Le dossier médical électronique recèle la promesse d'automatiser ces processus. Dans notre commentaire, nous préconisons une plus grande mobilisation de la main-d'œuvre de plusieurs secteurs de la médecine afin de réduire la morbidité et la mortalité associées à la tuberculose, d'en interrompre la transmission et de réduire la taille du réservoir d'infection tuberculeuse latente.

Development of the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network population-based registry: a methodology study.

BACKGROUND: Emergency physicians lack high-quality evidence for many diagnostic and treatment decisions made for patients with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our objective is to describe the methods used to collect and ensure the data quality of a multicentre registry of patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. METHODS: This methodology study describes a population-based registry that has been enrolling consecutive patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 since Mar. 1, 2020. Most data are collected from retrospective chart review. Phone follow-up with patients at 30 days captures the World Health Organization clinical improvement scale and contextual, social and cultural variables. Phone follow-up also captures patient-reported quality of life using the Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey at 30 days, 60 days, 6 months and 12 months. Fifty participating emergency departments from 8 provinces in Canada currently enrol patients into the registry. INTERPRETATION: Data from the registry of the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network will be used to derive and validate clinical decision rules to inform clinical decision-making, describe the natural history of the disease, evaluate COVID-19 diagnostic tests and establish the real-world effectiveness of treatments and vaccines, including in populations that are excluded or underrepresented in clinical trials. This registry has the potential to generate scientific evidence to inform our pandemic response, and to serve as a model for the rapid implementation of population-based data collection protocols for future public health emergencies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, no. NCT04702945.

Efficacy and safety outcomes of proposed randomized controlled trials investigating hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS: To assess whether randomized clinical trials (RCTs) proposed to evaluate the treatment of patients with COVID-19 with hydroxychloroquine (HQ) or chloroquine early in the pandemic included plans to measure outcomes that would translate into meaningful efficacy/effectiveness and safety outcomes. METHODS: The World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform database was searched for registers of RCTs evaluating HQ or chloroquine, alone or in combination, compared with other treatments for patients diagnosed with COVID-19. The final search was performed on 8 April 2020. RESULTS: Among 51 registered RCTs (median sample size 262; interquartile range: 100, 520), 34 (67%) reported a clinical outcome, 12 (24%) a surrogate outcome, and 5 (10%) a combination of clinical and surrogate outcomes as primary endpoints. Six (15%) trials included the World Health Organization scale for clinical improvement as a primary clinical outcome. Clinical improvement and mortality accounted for 45% of the unique domains among 18 clinical outcome domains of efficacy. Twenty-four (47%) RCTs did not describe plans to assess safety outcomes; when assessed, safety outcomes were determined in generic terms of total, severe or serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: The RCTs investigating HQ or chloroquine during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic included heterogeneous and insufficient approaches to measure efficacy/effectiveness and safety relevant to patients and clinical practice. These findings provide insights to inform clinical and regulatory decisions that can be drawn about the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of these agents in patients with COVID-19. Trialists need to adapt quickly to the research progress on COVID-19, ensuring that core outcome measures are assessed in ongoing RCTs.