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.

A survey and panel discussion of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on paediatric urological productivity, guideline adherence and provider stress.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented need to re-organise and re-align priorities for all surgical specialties. Despite the current declining numbers globally, the direct effects of the pandemic on institutional practices and on personal stress and coping mechanisms remains unknown. The aims of this study were to assess the effect of the pandemic on daily scheduling and work balances, its effects on stress, and to determine compliance with guidelines and to assess whether quarantining has led to other areas of increased productivity. METHODS: A trans-Atlantic convenience sample of paediatric urologists was created in which panellists (Zoom) discussed the direct effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on individual units, as well as creating a questionnaire using a mini-Delphi method to provide current semi-quantitative data regarding practice, and adherence levels to recently published risk stratification guidelines. They also filled out a Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) questionnaire to assess contemporary pandemic stress levels. RESULTS: There was an 86% response rate from paediatric urologists. The majority of respondents reported near complete disruption to planned operations (70%), and trainee education (70%). They were also worried about the effects of altered home-lives on productivity (≤90%), as well as a lack of personal protective equipment (57%). The baseline stress rate was measured at a very high level (PSS) during the pandemic. Adherence to recent operative guidelines for urgent cases was 100%. CONCLUSION: This study represents a panel discussion of a number of practical implications for paediatric urologists, and is one of the few papers to assess more pragmatic effects and combines opinions from both sides of the Atlantic. The impact of the pandemic has been very significant for paediatric urologists and includes a decrease in the number of patients seen and operated on, decreased salary, increased self-reported stress levels, substantially increased telemedicine usage, increased free time for various activities, and good compliance with guidelines and hospital management decisions.