Adult Suicide-Related emergency department encounters during the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Cross-Sectional study.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in widespread psychosocial disruption, which may impact suicidal thoughts and behaviours. This study characterizes adult suicide-related emergency department (ED) encounters and patient characteristics during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 compared to the year prior. Methods: Retrospective cross-sectional study in a large, integrated, community-based health system of adults (≥18-years-old) with suicide-related ED encounters (defined by the Centres for Disease Control-recommended International Statistical Classification of Diseases [ICD-10-CM] codes) during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the same period in 2019. Population-level incidence rate ratios (IRRs) compared suicide-related ED encounters in 2020 to 2019. Patient characteristics for the first suicide-related ED visit for each period were used to calculate percent relative change comparing 2020 to 2019. Findings: Of 10,651 suicide-related ED encounters in 2020 and 11,476 in 2019, 49.6% and 51.6% were for females and the mean age was 38±17 and 38±16 years-old, respectively. Suicide-related ED encounters significantly declined in each month of 2020 (IRR 0.71-0.91, p<.05), but were equivalent to 2019 levels June-August. Adults in 2020 were more likely to have co-occurring substance use disorders (+15•7%; 95% CI 7•0-24•4%) or have no mental health or suicide diagnosis associated with an outpatient visit in the last year (+21•1%, 95% CI: 12•5-29•6) compared to 2019. Interpretation: Adults with suicidal thoughts and behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 had distinct social and psychiatric characteristics compared to patients in the prior year. These findings can help inform health system responses to mental health needs.

Emergency Department Encounters Among Youth With Suicidal Thoughts or Behaviors During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Population-level reports of suicide-related emergency department (ED) encounters among youth during the COVID-19 pandemic are lacking, along with youth characteristics and preexisting psychiatric service use. Objective: To characterize population-level and relative change in suicide-related ED encounters among youth during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with 2019. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study evaluated ED encounters in 2019 and 2020 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California-a large, integrated, community-based health system. Youth aged 5 to 17 years who presented to the ED with suicidal thoughts or behaviors were included. Exposure: The COVID-19 pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: Population-level incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and percent relative effects for suicide-related ED encounters as defined by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-recommended International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes in 4 periods in 2020 compared with the same periods in 2019. Results: There were 2123 youth with suicide-related ED encounters in 2020 compared with 2339 in 2019. In the 2020 group, 1483 individuals (69.9%) were female and 1798 (84.7%) were aged 13 to 17 years. In the 2019 group, 1542 (65.9%) were female, and 1998 (85.4%) were aged 13 to 17 years. Suicide-related ED encounter incidence rates were significantly lower in March through May 2020 compared with this period in 2019 (IRR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.51-0.63; P < .001), then returned to prepandemic levels. However, suicide-related ED visits among female youth from June 1 to August 31, 2020, and September 1 through December 15, 2020, were significantly higher than in the corresponding months in 2019 (IRR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.04-1.35; P = .04 and IRR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.11-1.35; P < .001, respectively), while suicide-related ED visits for male youth decreased from September 1 through December 15, 2020 (IRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.94). Youth with no history of outpatient mental health or suicide encounters (129.4%; 95% CI, 41.0-217.8) and those with comorbid psychiatric conditions documented at the ED encounter (6.7%; 95% CI, 1.0-12.3) had a higher risk of presenting with suicide-related problems from September to December 2020 vs the same period in 2019. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of youth experiencing suicidal thoughts and behaviors, suicide-related presentations to the ED initially decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic, likely owing to shelter-in-place orders, then were similar to 2019 levels. However, a greater number of female youth, youth with no psychiatric history, and youth with psychiatric diagnoses at the time of the ED encounter presented for suicide-related concerns during the pandemic, suggesting these may be vulnerable groups in need of further interventions. Adjustments in care may be warranted to accommodate these groups during periods of crisis.

Clinical characteristics of COVID-19 patients evaluated in the emergency department: A retrospective cohort study of 801 cases.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has extracted devastating tolls. Despite its pervasiveness, robust information on disease characteristics in the emergency department (ED) and how that information predicts clinical course remain limited. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of the first ED visit from SARS-CoV-2-positive patients in our health system, from February 21, 2020 to April 5, 2020. We reviewed each patient's ED visit(s) and included the first visit with symptoms consistent with COVID-19. We collected demographic, clinical, and treatment variables from electronic health records and structured manual chart review. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the association between patient characteristics and 2 primary outcomes: a critical outcome and hospitalization from index visit. Our critical outcome was defined as death or advanced respiratory support (high flow nasal cannula or greater) within 21 days. RESULTS: Of the first 1030 encounters, 801 met our inclusion criteria: 15% were over age 75 years, 47% were female, and 24% were non-Hispanic white. We found 161 (20%) had a critical outcome and 393 (49%) were hospitalized. Independent predictors of a critical outcome included a history of hypertension, abnormal chest x-ray, elevated neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN), measured fever, and abnormal respiratory vital signs (respiratory rate, oxygen saturation). Independent predictors of hospitalization included abnormal pulmonary auscultation, elevated BUN, measured fever, and abnormal respiratory vital signs. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, diverse study of ED patients with COVID-19, we have identified numerous clinical characteristics that have independent associations with critical illness and hospitalization.

Comprehensive management of acute pulmonary embolism in primary care using telemedicine in the COVID-era.

A healthy, active woman in her 70s reported intermittent exertional dyspnoea for 2 months, notable during frequent open-water swimming. Symptoms were similar to an episode of travel-provoked pulmonary embolism 3 years prior. She denied chest pain, cough, fever, extremity complaints and symptoms at rest. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, her healthcare system was using secure telemedicine to evaluate non-critical complaints. During the initial video visit, she appeared well, conversing normally without laboured breathing. An elevated serum D-dimer prompted CT pulmonary angiography, which identified acute lobar pulmonary embolism. After haematology consultation and telephone conversation with the patient, her physician prescribed rivaroxaban. Her symptoms rapidly improved. She had an uneventful course and is continuing anticoagulation indefinitely. The pandemic has increased the application of telemedicine for acute care complaints. This case illustrates its safe and effective use for comprehensive management of acute pulmonary embolism in the primary care setting.

Publication Non Grata: The Challenge of Publishing Non-COVID-19 Research in the COVID Era.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine publication trends in leading clinical research journals (impact factor >20) during the rise of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to check for an increase in publication times of non-COVID-19 original research articles. METHODS: We collected publication data from five print-based medical journals and one online journal--JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, The Lancet (Lancet), The New England Journal of Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, The BMJ (BMJ), and BMC Medicine (BMC Med)--for the December 2019 through May 2020 period. We categorized each article as either "COVID-19-related" or "non-COVID-19-related". When available, we further extracted data on submission-to-acceptance dates and acceptance-to-publication dates for original research articles for the January through July 2019 and January through July 2020 periods. We compared the time from submission to publication for non-COVID-19 original research articles during the two periods and tested for statistical significance with a one-tailed Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: We found that non-COVID-19-related articles began decreasing in volume as COVID-19-related articles increased. In BMJ and Lancet, the COVID-19-related articles began overtaking the non-COVID-19-related articles in number during April and May 2020. However, COVID-19-related primary research articles only began consistently appearing in journal issues during May 2020. Only BMJ and BMC Med publicly recorded complete data regarding their publication timelines. After removing outliers, we found that the mean time from submission to publication for articles published in BMJ from January through July 2019 was 204 days (median: 194 days; IQR: 163-236), and from January through July 2020 was 223 days (median: 218 days; IQR: 177-261) (p=0.04). In BMC Med, the mean time from submission to publication from February through July 2019 was 153 days (median: 150 days; IQR: 123-181), and from February through July 2020 was 163 days (median: 157 days; IQR: 132-191) (p=0.06).  Conclusion: We discovered a steadily increasing trend in the percentage of COVID-19-related articles and a concomitant decreasing trend in the percentage of non-COVID-19-related articles published in high-impact print journals during the period from December 2019 through May 2020. For non-COVID-19-related articles published in BMJ, we found a statistically significant increase upon comparing the submission-to-publication times for the period from January through July 2020 with the submission-to-publication times for the period from January through July 2019.

Acute Stroke Presentation, Care, and Outcomes in Community Hospitals in Northern California During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Shelter-in-place (SIP) orders implemented to mitigate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 spread may inadvertently discourage patient care-seeking behavior for critical conditions like acute ischemic stroke. We aimed to compare temporal trends in volume of acute stroke alerts, patient characteristics, telestroke care, and short-term outcomes pre- and post-SIP orders. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study in 21 stroke centers of an integrated healthcare system serving 4.4+ million members across Northern California. We included adult patients who presented with suspected acute stroke and were evaluated by telestroke between January 1, 2019, and May 9, 2020. SIP orders announced the week of March 15, 2020, created pre (January 1, 2019, to March 14, 2020) and post (March 15, 2020, to May 9, 2020) cohort for comparison. Main outcomes were stroke alert volumes and inpatient mortality for stroke. RESULTS: Stroke alert weekly volume post-SIP (mean, 98 [95% CI, 92-104]) decreased significantly compared with pre-SIP (mean, 132 [95% CI, 130-136]; P<0.001). Stroke discharges also dropped, in concordance with acute stroke alerts decrease. In total, 9120 patients were included: 8337 in pre- and 783 in post-SIP cohorts. There were no differences in patient demographics. Compared with pre-SIP, post-SIP patients had higher National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores (P=0.003), lower comorbidity score (P<0.001), and arrived more often by ambulance (P<0.001). Post-SIP, more patients had large vessel occlusions (P=0.03), and there were fewer stroke mimics (P=0.001). Discharge outcomes were similar for post-SIP and pre-SIP cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort study, regional stroke alert and ischemic stroke discharge volumes decreased significantly in the early COVID-19 pandemic. Compared with pre-SIP, the post-SIP population showed no significant demographic differences but had lower comorbidity scores, more severe strokes, and more large vessel occlusions. The inpatient mortality was similar in both cohorts. Further studies are needed to understand the causes and implications of care avoidance to patients and healthcare systems.