Impact of COVID-19 and Shelter in Place on Volume and Type of Traumatic Injuries.

INTRODUCTION: Very little is known about the effects of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and its associated social distancing practices on trauma presentations to the emergency department (ED). This study aims to assess the impact of a city-wide stay at home order on the volume, type, and outcomes of traumatic injuries at urban EDs. METHODS: The study was a retrospective chart review of all patients who presented to the ED of an urban Level I Trauma Center and its urban community affiliate in the time period during the 30 days before the institution of city-wide shelter-in-place (preSIP) order and 60 days after the shelter-in-place (SIP) order and the date-matched time periods in the preceding year. Volume and mechanism of traumatic injuries were compared using paired T-tests. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in overall ED volume. The volume of certain blunt trauma presentations (motor vehicle collisions) during the first 60 days of SIP compared to the same period from the year prior also significantly decreased. Importantly, the volume of penetrating injuries, including gunshot wounds and stab wounds, did not differ for the preSIP and SIP periods when compared to the prior year. The mortality of traumatic injuries was also unchanged during the SIP comparison period. CONCLUSION: While there were significant decreases in visits to the ED and overall trauma volume, penetrating trauma, including gun violence, and other severe traumatic injuries remain a public health crisis that affects urban communities despite social distancing recommendations enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rate of Decompensation of Normoxic Emergency Department Patients with SARS-CoV-2.

INTRODUCTION: As of October 30, 2020, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected over 44 million people worldwide and killed over 1.1 million people. In the emergency department (ED), patients who need supplemental oxygen or respiratory support are admitted to the hospital, but the course of normoxic patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. In our health system, the policy during the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was to admit all patients with abnormal chest imaging (CXR) regardless of their oxygen level. We also admitted febrile patients with respiratory complaints who resided in congregate living. We describe the rate of decompensation among patients admitted with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection but who were not hypoxemic in the ED. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study of patients admitted to our health system between March 1-May 5, 2020 with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. We queried our registry to find patients who were admitted to the hospital but had no recorded oxygen saturation of <92% in the ED and received no supplemental oxygen prior to admission. Our primary outcome was decompensation at 72 hours, defined by the need for respiratory support (oxygen, high-flow nasal cannula, non-invasive ventilation, or intubation). RESULTS: A total of 840 patients met our inclusion criteria. Of those patients, 376 (45%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Sixty patients (7.1%) with suspected COVID-19 required respiratory support at 72 hours including 27 (3%) of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 positive patients. Among the 376 patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 54 patients (14%) had normal CXR in the ED. One-third of patients with normal CXRs decompensated at 72 hours. Seven SARS-CoV-2 positive patients in our cohort died during their hospitalization, of whom five had normal CXRs on admission. CONCLUSION: Sixty (7.1%) of suspected COVID-19 patients hospitalized at 72 hours required respiratory support despite being normoxic in the ED. Further research should look to identify the normoxic SARS-CoV-2 patients at risk for decompensation.

Upgrades to intensive care: The effects of COVID-19 on decision-making in the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: The initial surge of critically ill patients in the COVID-19 pandemic severely disrupted processes at acute care hospitals. This study examines the frequency and causes for patients upgraded to intensive care unit (ICU) level care following admission from the emergency department (ED) to non-critical care units. METHODS: The number of ICU upgrades per month was determined, including the percentage of upgrades noted to have non-concordant diagnoses. Charts with non-concordant diagnoses were examined in detail as to the ED medical decision-making, clinical circumstances surrounding the upgrade, and presence of a diagnosis of COVID-19. For each case, a cognitive bias was assigned. RESULTS: The percentage of upgraded cases with non-concordant diagnoses increased from a baseline range of 14-20% to 41.3%. The majority of upgrades were due to premature closure (72.2%), anchoring (61.1%), and confirmation bias (55.6%). CONCLUSION: Consistent with the behavioral literature, this suggests that stressful ambient conditions affect cognitive reasoning processes.

Emergency Department Management of the Covid-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (EDs) need to be prepared to manage crises and disasters in both the short term and the long term. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has necessitated a rapid overhaul of several aspects of ED operations in preparation for a sustained response. OBJECTIVE: We present the management of the COVID-19 crisis in 3 EDs (1 large academic site and 2 community sites) within the same health care system. DISCUSSION: Aspects of ED throughput, including patient screening, patient room placement, and disposition are reviewed, along with departmental communication procedures and staffing models. Visitor policies are also discussed. Special considerations are given to airway management and the care of psychiatric patients. Brief guidance around the use of personal protective equipment is also included. CONCLUSIONS: A crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic requires careful planning to facilitate urgent restructuring of many aspects of an ED. By sharing our departments' responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, we hope other departments can better prepare for this crisis and the next.

Impact of a shelter-in-place order during the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence of opioid overdoses.

INTRODUCTION: Since the beginning of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in the United States, there have been concerns about the potential impact of the pandemic on persons with opioid use disorder. Shelter-in-place (SIP) orders, which aimed to reduce the spread and scope of the virus, likely also impacted this patient population. This study aims to assess the role of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence of opioid overdose before and after a SIP order. METHODS: A retrospective review of the incidence of opioid overdoses in an urban three-hospital system was conducted. Comparisons were made between the first 100 days of a city-wide SIP order during the COVID-19 pandemic and the 100 days during the COVID-19 pandemic preceding the SIP order (Pre-SIP). Differences in observed incidence and expected incidence during the SIP period were evaluated using a Fisher's Exact test. RESULTS: Total patient visits decreased 22% from 46,078 during the Pre-SIP period to 35,971 during the SIP period. A total of 1551 opioid overdoses were evaluated during the SIP period, compared to 1665 opioid overdoses during the Pre-SIP period, consistent with a 6.8% decline. A Fisher's Exact Test demonstrated a p < 0.0001, with a corresponding Odds Ratio of 1.20 with a 95% confidence interval (1.12;1.29). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic and the associated SIP order were associated with a statistically and clinically significant increase in the proportion of opioid overdoses in relation to the overall change in total ED visits.