Estimated reimbursement impact of COVID-19 on emergency physicians.

BACKGROUND: The delivery and financing of health care services were altered in unprecedented ways by COVID-19 and subsequent policy responses. We estimated reimbursement losses to emergency physicians in 2020 compared to 2019 related to shifting acute care utilization during COVID-19. METHODS: This was an observational analysis of the Clinical Emergency Department Registry (CEDR) and the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS). Study sample included all ED visits from a sample of 214 emergency department (ED) sites in the CEDR in 2019 and 2020 as well as all ED visits in the NEDS in 2019. We identified level of service billing code for evaluation and management (E&M) services, insurance payer, and geographic location of ED visits across sites in the CEDR and linked these to fee schedules to estimate total professional reimbursement across sites. Our primary analysis was to estimate reimbursement in 2020 compared to 2019 across the CEDR sites. In our secondary analysis, we linked sites in the CEDR to those in NEDS to estimate nationwide reimbursement. RESULTS: Total E&M reimbursement for emergency physicians in the CEDR was $1.6 billion in 2019 and $1.3 billion in 2020, reflecting a 19.7% decline year over year ($308 million loss). In our secondary analysis, we estimate nationwide losses of $6.6 billion, a -19.4% decline year over year. If emergency physicians had received maximum allowable federal relief funds via CARES Act Phases 1 to 3 (2% of 2019 revenue) this would sum to $680 million (2% of the $34 billion) or 10.3% of the estimated $6.6 billion pandemic-related losses. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses provide an estimate of the scale of economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings warrant consideration for policymaker relief and future redesign of emergency care financing. Ultimately, the COVID-19 pandemic likely expanded known cracks in the financing of health care into steep fault lines.

Prehospital emergency department care activations during the initial COVID-19 pandemic surge.

OBJECTIVE: To describe trends in prehospital presentations of critical medical and trauma conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic using prehospital and emergency department (ED) care activations. METHODS: Observational analysis of ED care activations in a tertiary, urban ED between March 10, 2020 and September 1, 2020 was compared to the same time periods in 2018 and 2019. ED care activations for critical medical conditions were classified based on clinical indication: undifferentiated medical, trauma, or stroke. MAIN OUTCOME: The primary outcomes were the number of patients presenting from the prehospital setting with specified ED activation criteria, total ED volume, ambulance arrival volume, and volume of COVID-19 hospital admissions. Locally weighted scatterplot smoothing curves were used to visually display our results. RESULTS: There were 1,461 undifferentiated medical activations, 905 stroke activations, and 1,478 trauma activations recorded, representing absolute decreases of 11.3, 28.1, and 20.3 percent, respectively, relative to the same period in 2019, coinciding with the declaration of a public health emergency in Connecticut. For all three types of presentation, post-peak spikes in activations were observed in early May, approximately two weeks after our health system in Connecticut reached its peak number of COVID-19 hospitalizations-eg, undifferentiated medical activations: increase in 280 percent, n = 140 from 2019, p < 0.0001-and declined thereafter, reaching a nadir in early June 2020. CONCLUSIONS: After the announcement of public health measures to mitigate COVID-19, ED care activations declined in a large Northeast academic ED, followed by post-peak surges in activations as COVID- 19 cases decreased.

Emergency department utilization for substance use disorders and mental health conditions during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: As the emergency department (ED) has evolved into the de-facto site of care for a variety of substance use disorder (SUD) presentations, trends in ED utilization are an essential public health surveillance tool. Changes in ED visit patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic may reflect changes in access to outpatient treatment, changes in SUD incidence, or the unintended effects of public policy to mitigate COVID-19. We use a national emergency medicine registry to describe and characterize trends in ED visitation for SUDs since 2019. METHODS: We included all ED visits identified in a national emergency medicine clinical quality registry, which included 174 sites across 33 states with data from January 2019 through June 2021. We defined SUD using ED visit diagnosis codes including: opioid overdose and opioid use disorder (OUD), alcohol use disorders (AUD), and other SUD. To characterize changes in ED utilization, we plotted the 3-week moving average ratio of visit counts in 2020 and 2021 as compared to visit counts in 2019. FINDINGS: While overall ED visits declined in the early pandemic period and had not returned to 2019 baseline by June 2021, ED visit counts for SUD demonstrated smaller declines in March and April of 2020, so that the proportion of overall ED visits that were for SUD increased. Furthermore, in the second half of 2020, ED visits for SUD returned to baseline, and increased above baseline for OUD ever since May 2020. CONCLUSIONS: We observe distinct patterns in ED visitation for SUDs over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly for OUD for which ED visitation barely declined and now exceeds previous baselines. These trends likely demonstrate the essential role of hospital-based EDs in providing 24/7/365 care for people with SUDs and mental health conditions. Allocation of resources must be directed towards the ED as a de-facto safety net for populations in crisis.

Implementation of an Electronic Health Record Integrated Clinical Pathway Improves Adherence to COVID-19 Hospital Care Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, frequently changing guidelines presented challenges to emergency department (ED) clinicians. The authors implemented an electronic health record (EHR)-integrated clinical pathway that could be accessed by clinicians within existing workflows when caring for patients under investigation (PUI) for COVID-19. The objective was to examine the association between clinical pathway utilization and adherence to institutional best practice treatment recommendations for COVID-19. METHODS: The authors conducted an observational analysis of all ED patients seen in a health system inclusive of seven EDs between March 18, 2020, and April 20, 2021. They implemented the pathway as an interactive flow chart that allowed clinicians to place orders while viewing the most up-to-date institutional guidance. Primary outcomes were proportion of admitted PUIs receiving dexamethasone and aspirin in the ED, and secondary outcome was time to delivering treatment. RESULTS: A total of 13 269 patients were admitted PUIs. The pathway was used by 40.6% of ED clinicians. When clinicians used the pathway, patients were more likely to be prescribed aspirin (OR, 7.15; 95% CI, 6.2-8.26) and dexamethasone (10.4; 8.85-12.2). For secondary outcomes, clinicians using the pathway had statistically significant ( P < 0.0001) improvement in timeliness of ordering medications and admission to the hospital. Aspirin, dexamethasone, and admission order time were improved by 103.89, 94.34, and 121.94 minutes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of an EHR-integrated clinical pathway improved clinician adherence to changing COVID-19 treatment guidelines and timeliness to associated medication administration. As pathways continue to be implemented, their effects on improving patient outcomes and decreasing disparities in patient care should be further examined.

Real-world assessment of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nasopharyngeal swab testing in a region with a high burden of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Concerns persist regarding possible false-negative results that may compromise COVID-19 containment. Although obtaining a true false-negative rate is infeasible, using real-life observations, the data suggest a possible false-negative rate of ˜2.3%. Use of a sensitive, amplified RNA platform should reassure healthcare systems.

Universal SARS-CoV-2 Testing of Emergency Department Admissions Increases Emergency Department Length of Stay.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Our institution experienced a change in SARS-CoV-2 testing policy as well as substantial changes in local COVID-19 prevalence, allowing for a unique examination of the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 testing and emergency department (ED) length of stay. METHODS: This was an observational interrupted time series of all patients admitted to an academic health system between March 15, 2020, and September 30, 2020. Given testing limitations from March 15 to April 24, all patients receiving SARS-CoV-2 tests were symptomatic. On April 24, testing was expanded to all ED admissions. The primary and secondary outcomes were ED length of stay and number needed to test to obtain a positive, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 70,856 patients were cared for in the EDs during the 7-month period. The testing change increased admission length of stay by 1.89 hours (95% confidence interval 1.39 to 2.38). The number needed to test was 2.5 patients and was highest yield on April 1, 2020, when the state positivity rate was 39.7%; however, the number needed to test exceeded 170 patients by Sept 1, 2020, at which point the state positivity rate was 0.5%. CONCLUSION: Although universal SARS-CoV-2 testing of ED admissions may meaningfully support mitigation and containment efforts, the clinical cost of testing all admissions amid low community positivity is notable. In our system, universal ED SARS-CoV-2 testing was associated with a 24% increase in admission length of stay alongside the detection of only 1 positive case every other day. Given the known harms and risks of ED boarding and crowding, solutions must be developed to support regular operational flow while balancing infection prevention needs.

National trends in emergency department closures, mergers, and utilization, 2005-2015.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To describe nationwide hospital-based emergency department (ED) closures and mergers, as well as the utilization of emergency departments and inpatient beds, over time and across varying geographic areas in the United States. METHODS: Observational analysis of the American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey from 2005 to 2015. Primary outcomes were hospital-based ED closure and merger. Secondary outcomes were yearly ED visits per hospital-based ED and yearly hospital admissions per hospital bed. RESULTS: The total number of hospital-based EDs decreased from 4,500 in 2005 to 4,460 in 2015, with 200 closures, 138 mergers, and 160 new hospital-based EDs. While yearly ED visits per hospital-based ED exhibited a 28.6% relative increase (from 25,083 to 32,248), yearly hospital admissions per hospital bed had a 3.3% relative increase (from 45.4 to 43.9) from 2005 to 2015. The number of hospital admissions and hospital beds did not change significantly in urban areas and declined in rural areas. ED visits grew more uniformly across urban and rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: The number of hospital-based ED closures is small when accounting for mergers, but occurs as many more patients are presenting to a stable number of EDs in larger health systems, though rural areas may differentially affected. EDs were managing accelerating patient volumes alongside stagnant inpatient bed capacity.

Analysis of Hospital Resource Availability and COVID-19 Mortality Across the United States.

Although the impact of COVID-19 has varied greatly across the United States, there has been little assessment of hospital resources and mortality. We examine hospital resources and death counts among hospital referral regions from March 1 to July 26, 2020. This was an analysis of American Hospital Association data with COVID-19 data from the New York Times. Hospital-based resource availabilities were characterized per COVID-19 case. Death count was defined by monthly confirmed COVID-19 deaths. Geographic areas with fewer intensive care unit beds (incident rate ratio [IRR], 0.194; 95% CI, 0.076-0.491), nurses (IRR, 0.927; 95% CI, 0.888-0.967), and general medicine/surgical beds (IRR, 0.800; 95% CI, 0.696-0.920) per COVID-19 case were statistically significantly associated with an increased incidence rate of death in April 2020. This underscores the potential impact of innovative hospital capacity protocols and care models to create resource flexibility to limit system overload early in a pandemic.

Emergency Department Utilization for Emergency Conditions During COVID-19.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We use a national emergency medicine clinical quality registry to describe recent trends in emergency department (ED) visitation overall and for select emergency conditions. METHODS: Data were drawn from the Clinical Emergency Department Registry, including 164 ED sites across 35 states participating in the registry with complete data from January 2019 through November 15, 2020. Overall ED visit counts, as well as specific emergency medical conditions identified by International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification code (myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, cardiac arrest/ventricular fibrillation, and venous thromboembolisms), were tabulated. We plotted biweekly visit counts overall and across specific geographic regions. RESULTS: The largest declines in visit counts occurred early in the pandemic, with a nadir in April 46% lower than the 2019 monthly average. By November, overall ED visit counts had increased, but were 23% lower than prepandemic levels. The proportion of all ED visits that were for the select emergency conditions increased early in the pandemic; however, total visit counts for acute myocardial infarction and cerebrovascular disease have remained lower in 2020 compared with 2019. Despite considerable geographic and temporal variation in the trajectory of the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak, the overall pattern of ED visits observed was similar across regions and time. CONCLUSION: The persistent decline in ED visits for these time-sensitive emergency conditions raises the concern that coronavirus disease 2019 may continue to impede patients from seeking essential care. Efforts thus far to encourage individuals with concerning signs and symptoms to seek emergency care may not have been sufficient.