Collaborative virtual reality environment in disaster medicine: moving from single player to multiple learners.

BACKGROUND: The use of virtual reality (VR) in healthcare education is on the increase. In disaster medicine, it could be a solution to the cost and logistic constraints for a "full-scale" scenarios. However, VR is mainly designed for single players, which is not appropriate for the objectives pursued in disaster medicine. We decided to evaluate the educational value of using individual VR simulation in disaster medicine on a group of learners. METHODS: The VR scenario used was a reproduction of a major train crash, with 21 victims and whose objectives were START triage and first aid techniques. The sessions were carried out in multi-participant groups with different roles (active and immersed with headset, paper triage without headset, and active for communications not immersed in the headset). Their perceived self-efficacy was assessed before (T0), after (T1) and 2 months (T2) after the training. Satisfaction and confidence in learning were also measured. RESULTS: The median levels of satisfaction and confidence in learning were of 21/25 and 32/40 respectively. Their perceived self-efficacy increased significantly between T0 and T1 (p < 0.001), and remained stable until T2. The different roles of participant showed no difference in terms of satisfaction, confidence in learning or changes in perceived self-efficacy. One third of the participants agreed that the number of participants had interfered with their learning. A significant negative correlation (rS = -0.51, p = 0.002) was found between satisfaction and the fact of having been hindered by the number of participants. Around 90% of participants found the activity entertaining and found the new technologies appropriate for learning technical skills. CONCLUSIONS: This first experience of VR in a group setting is satisfactory and shows its positive effects. The limitations highlighted here will enable areas of improvement to be identified for the use of VR in disaster medicine, pending the development of multi-player tools. It would now be appropriate to analyse the impact of this type of simulation on learning and its retention over time.

Performance of the Fresno-Quebec Rule in identifying patients with concomitant fractures not requiring a radiograph before shoulder dislocation reduction: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Although shoulder dislocation diagnosis is often solely based on clinical examination, physicians may order a radiograph to rule out a concomitant shoulder fracture before performing reduction. The Fresno-Québec decision rule aims to identify patients requiring a radiograph before reduction to avoid unnecessary systematic imaging. However, this novel approach needs further validation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the Fresno-Québec rule in identifying patients who do not require a prereduction radiograph and assess the variables associated with a clinically significant fracture. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study from 2015 to 2021. Data were extracted from three ED university-affiliated tertiary-care centers. Patients aged ≥18 years with a final diagnosis of anterior glenohumeral dislocation were included. OUTCOMES MEASURE AND ANALYSIS: Accuracy metrics [sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR)] of the Fresno-Québec rule were measured. Multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify variables associated with the presence of a concomitant clinically significant fracture. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 2129 patients were included, among whom 9.7% had a concomitant fracture. The performance metrics of the Fresno-Québec rule were as follows: Se 0.96 95% confidence interval (0.92-0.98), Sp 0.36 (0.34-0.38), PPV 0.14 (0.12-0.16), NPV 0.99 (0.98-0.99), PLR 1.49 (1.42-1.55) and NLR 0.12 (0.06-0.23). A total of 678 radiographs could have been avoided, corresponding to a reduction of 35.2%. Age ≥40 years, first dislocation episode [odds ratio (OR) = 3.18 (1.95-5.38); P  < 0.001], the following mechanisms: road collision [OR = 6.26 (2.65-16.1)], low-level fall [OR = 3.49 (1.66-8.28)], high-level fall [OR = 3.95 (1.62-10.4)], and seizure/electric shock [OR = 10.6 (4.09-29.2)] were associated with the presence of a concomitant fracture. CONCLUSION: In this study, the Fresno-Québec rule has excellent Se in identifying concomitant clinically significant fractures in patients with an anterior glenohumeral dislocation. The use of this clinical decision rule may be associated with a reduction of approximately a third of unnecessary prereduction radiographs.

Lymphocyte-to-C-Reactive Protein (LCR) Ratio Is Not Accurate to Predict Severity and Mortality in Patients with COVID-19 Admitted to the ED.

Health care systems worldwide have been battling the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, Lymphocytes and CRP have been reported as markers of interest. We chose to investigate the prognostic value of the LCR ratio as a marker of severity and mortality in COVID-19 infection. Between 1 March and 30 April 2020, we conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of patients with moderate and severe coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), all of whom were hospitalized after being admitted to the Emergency Department (ED). We conducted our study in six major hospitals of northeast France, one of the outbreak's epicenters in Europe. A total of 1035 patients with COVID-19 were included in our study. Around three-quarters of them (76.2%) presented a moderate form of the disease, while the remaining quarter (23.8%) presented a severe form requiring admission to the ICU. At ED admission, the median LCR was significantly lower in the group presenting severe disease compared to that with moderate disease (versus 6.24 (3.24-12) versus 12.63 ((6.05-31.67)), p < 0.001). However, LCR was neither associated with disease severity (OR: 0.99, CI 95% (0.99-1)), p = 0.476) nor mortality (OR: 0.99, CI 95% (0.99-1)). In the ED, LCR, although modest, with a threshold of 12.63, was a predictive marker for severe forms of COVID-19.

Exploratory study: Evaluation of a symptom checker effectiveness for providing a diagnosis and evaluating the situation emergency compared to emergency physicians using simulated and standardized patients.

BACKGROUND: The overloading of health care systems is an international problem. In this context, new tools such as symptom checker (SC) are emerging to improve patient orientation and triage. This SC should be rigorously evaluated and we can take a cue from the way we evaluate medical students, using objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE) with simulated patients. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of a symptom checker versus emergency physicians using OSCEs as an assessment method. METHODS: We explored a method to evaluate the ability to set a diagnosis and evaluate the emergency of a situation with simulation. A panel of medical experts wrote 220 simulated patients cases. Each situation was played twice by an actor trained to the role: once for the SC, then for an emergency physician. Like a teleconsultation, only the patient's voice was accessible. We performed a prospective non-inferiority study. If primary analysis had failed to detect non-inferiority, we have planned a superiority analysis. RESULTS: The SC established only 30% of the main diagnosis as the emergency physician found 81% of these. The emergency physician was also superior compared to the SC in the suggestion of secondary diagnosis (92% versus 52%). In the matter of patient triage (vital emergency or not), there is still a medical superiority (96% versus 71%). We prove a non-inferiority of the SC compared to the physician in terms of interviewing time. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We should use simulated patients instead of clinical cases in order to evaluate the effectiveness of SCs.

Biosensors for the Rapid Detection of Cardiovascular Biomarkers of Vital Interest: Needs, Analysis and Perspectives.

We have previously surveyed a panel of 508 physicians from around the world about which biomarkers would be relevant if obtained in a very short time frame, corresponding to emergency situations (life-threatening or not). The biomarkers that emerged from this study were markers of cardiovascular disease: troponin, D-dimers, and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP). Cardiovascular disease is a group of disorders affecting the heart and blood vessels. At the intersection of medicine, basic research and engineering, biosensors that address the need for rapid biological analysis could find a place of choice in the hospital or primary care ecosystem. Rapid, reliable, and inexpensive analysis with a multi-marker approach, including machine learning analysis for patient risk analysis, could meet the demand of medical teams. The objective of this opinion review, proposed by a multidisciplinary team of experts (physicians, biologists, market access experts, and engineers), is to present cases where a rapid biological response is indeed valuable, to provide a short overview of current biosensor technologies for cardiac biomarkers designed for a short result time, and to discuss existing market access issues.

Effectiveness of Hypnosis for the Prevention of Anxiety During Coronary Angiography (HYPCOR study): a prospective randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Coronary angiography is the gold standard for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. This intervention is nevertheless a source of anxiety for the patient both by its discomfort and by the consequences linked to the discovery of potential diseases. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of hypnosis in reducing anxiety in patients undergoing coronary angiography. METHODS: One hundred sixty-nine patients with planned coronary angiography and no history of coronary angiography were randomized to a hypnosis or control group. Patients in the hypnosis group underwent a hypnosis session with self-hypnosis posthypnotic suggestions, while those in the control group had a conversational interview with the hypnotherapist. The primary endpoint was pre-exam anxiety level assessed by the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Y A). RESULTS: Performing a hypnosis session did not result in a significant decrease in anxiety before the intervention. Age, high trait anxiety, high state anxiety the day before, and belief that hypnosis works in general were associated with increased anxiety before the procedure. No adverse events were reported after hypnosis. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups for the occurrence of complications of the intervention. CONCLUSION: In this study, performing a hypnosis session before coronary angiography did not reduce the state of anxiety measured just before the intervention. In all cases, the hypnotic experience appears to be positive for the patient, encouraging further research efforts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The research protocol has been registered on the ClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT02818101; 29/06/2016) and with the ANSM (IDRCB 2016-A00205-46; 02/02/2016).

Silent Hypoxemia in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Cohort of Two Clinical Phenotypes in Critical COVID-19.

Introduction: Understanding hypoxemia, with and without the clinical signs of acute respiratory failure (ARF) in COVID-19, is key for management. Hence, from a population of critical patients admitted to the emergency department (ED), we aimed to study silent hypoxemia (Phenotype I) in comparison to symptomatic hypoxemia with clinical signs of ARF (Phenotype II). Methods: This multicenter study was conducted between 1 March and 30 April 2020. Adult patients who were presented to the EDs of nine Great-Eastern French hospitals for confirmed severe or critical COVID-19, who were then directly admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), were retrospectively included. Results: A total of 423 critical COVID-19 patients were included, out of whom 56.1% presented symptomatic hypoxemia with clinical signs of ARF, whereas 43.9% presented silent hypoxemia. Patients with clinical phenotype II were primarily intubated, initially, in the ED (46%, p < 0.001), whereas those with silent hypoxemia (56.5%, p < 0.001) were primarily intubated in the ICU. Initial univariate analysis revealed higher ICU mortality (29.2% versus 18.8%, p < 0.014) and in-hospital mortality (32.5% versus 18.8%, p < 0.002) in phenotype II. However, multivariate analysis showed no significant differences between the two phenotypes regarding mortality and hospital or ICU length of stay. Conclusions: Silent hypoxemia is explained by various mechanisms, most physiological and unspecific to COVID-19. Survival was found to be comparable in both phenotypes, with decreased survival in favor of Phenotype II. However, the spectrum of silent to symptomatic hypoxemia appears to include a continuum of disease progression, which can brutally evolve into fatal ARF.

Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (PLR) Is Not a Predicting Marker of Severity but of Mortality in COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

(1) Introduction: In the present study, we investigate the prognostic value of platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) as a marker of severity and mortality in COVID-19 infection. (2) Methods: Between 1 March and 30 April 2020, we conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of patients with moderate to severe coronavirus 19 (COVID-19), all of whom were hospitalized after being admitted to the emergency department (ED). (3) Results: A total of 1035 patients were included in our study. Neither lymphocytes, platelets or PLR were associated with disease severity. Lymphocyte count was significantly lower and PLR values were significantly higher in the group of patients who died, and both were associated with mortality in the univariate analysis (OR: 0.524, 95% CI: (0.336−0.815), p = 0.004) and (OR: 1.001, 95% CI: (1.000−1.001), p = 0.042), respectively. However, the only biological parameter significantly associated with mortality in the multivariate analysis was platelet count (OR: 0.996, 95% CI: (0.996−1.000), p = 0.027). The best PLR value for predicting mortality in COVID-19 was 356.6 (OR: 3.793, 95% CI: (1.946−7.394), p < 0.001). (4) Conclusion: A high PLR value is however associated with excess mortality.

Lymphopenia and Early Variation of Lymphocytes to Predict In-Hospital Mortality and Severity in ED Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

(1) Introduction: Multiple studies have demonstrated that lymphocyte count monitoring is a valuable prognostic tool for clinicians during inflammation. The aim of our study was to determine the prognostic value of delta lymphocyte H24 from admission from the emergency department for mortality and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection. (2) Methods: We have made a retrospective and multicentric study in six major hospitals of northeastern France. The patients were hospitalized and had a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. (3): Results: A total of 1035 patients were included in this study. Factors associated with infection severity were CRP > 100 mg/L (OR: 2.51, CI 95%: (1.40−3.71), p < 0.001) and lymphopenia < 800/mm3 (OR: 2.15, CI 95%: (1.42−3.27), p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, delta lymphocytes H24 (i.e., the difference between lymphocytes values at H24 and upon admission to the ED) < 135 was one of the most significant biochemical factors associated with mortality (OR: 2.23, CI 95%: (1.23−4.05), p = 0.009). The most accurate threshold for delta lymphocytes H24 was 75 to predict severity and 135 for mortality. (4) Conclusion: Delta lymphocytes H24 could be a helpful early screening prognostic biomarker to predict severity and mortality associated with COVID-19.

Symptoms of Infarction in Women: Is There a Real Difference Compared to Men? A Systematic Review of the Literature with Meta-Analysis.

(1) Context: The management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is based on a rapid diagnosis. The aim of this study was to focus on the ACS symptoms differences according to gender, in order to contribute to the improvement of knowledge regarding the clinical presentation in women. (2) Methods: We searched for relevant literature in two electronic databases, and analyzed the symptom presentation for patients with suspected ACS. Fifteen prospective studies were included, with a total sample size of 10,730. (3) Results: During a suspected ACS, women present more dyspnea, arm pain, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, palpitations and pain at the shoulder than men, with RR (95%CI) of 1.13 [1.10; 1.17], 1.30 [1.05; 1.59], 1,40 [1.26; 1.56], 1.08 [1.01; 1.16], 1.67 [1.49; 1.86], 1.78 [1.02; 3.13], respectively. They are older by (95%CI) 4.15 [2.28; 6.03] years compared to men. The results are consistent in the analysis of the ACS confirmed subgroup. (4) Conclusions: We have shown that there is a gender-based symptomatic difference and a female presentation for ACS. The "typical" or "atypical" semiology of ACS symptoms should no longer be used.

The Impact of Age on In-Hospital Mortality in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective and Multicenter Study.

Introduction: For the past two years, healthcare systems worldwide have been battling the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Several studies tried to find predictive factors of mortality in COVID-19 patients. We aimed to research age as a predictive factor associated with in-hospital mortality in severe and critical SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: Between 1 March and 20 April 2020, we conducted a multicenter and retrospective study on a cohort of severe COVID-19 patients who were all hospitalized in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). We led our study in nine hospitals of northeast France, one of the pandemic's epicenters in Europe. Results: The median age of our study population was 66 years (58−72 years). Mortality was 24.6% (CI 95%: 20.6−29%) in the ICU and 26.5% (CI 95%: 22.3−31%) in the hospital. Non-survivors were significantly older (69 versus 64 years, p < 0.001) than the survivors. Although a history of cardio-vascular diseases was more frequent in the non-survivor group (p = 0.015), other underlying conditions and prior level of autonomy did not differ between the two groups. On multivariable analysis, age appeared to be an interesting predictive factor of in-hospital mortality. Thus, age ranges of 65 to 74 years (OR = 2.962, CI 95%: 1.231−7.132, p = 0.015) were predictive of mortality, whereas the group of patients aged over 75 years was not (OR = 3.084, CI 95%: 0.952−9.992, p = 0.06). Similarly, all comorbidities except for immunodeficiency (OR = 4.207, CI 95%: 1.006−17.586, p = 0.049) were not predictive of mortality. Finally, survival follow-up was obtained for the study population. Conclusion: Age appears to be a relevant predictive factor of in-hospital mortality in cases of severe or critical SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Relevant Biomarkers in Medical Practices: An Analysis of the Needs Addressed by an International Survey.

(1) Backround: Technological advances should foster gains in physicians' efficiency. For example, a reduction of the medical decision time can be enabled by faster biological tests. The main objective of this study was to collect responses from an international panel of physicians on their needs for biomarkers and also to convey the improvement in the outcome to be made possible by the potential development of fast diagnostic tests for these biomarkers. (2) Methods: we distributed a questionnaire on the Internet to physicians. (3) Results: 508 physicians participated in this survey. The mean age was 38 years. General practice and emergency medicine were heavily represented, with 95% CIs of 44% (39.78, 48.41) and 32% (27.84, 35.94)), respectively. The two most represented countries were France (95% CI: 74% (70.20, 77.83)) and the USA (95% CI: 11% (8.65, 14.18)). Ninety-eight percentages of the physicians thought that obtaining cited biomarkers more quickly would be beneficial to their practice and to patient's care. The main biomarkers of interest identified by our panel were troponin (95% CI: 51% (46.24, 54.94)), C-reactive protein (95% CI: 42% (38.03, 46.62)), D-dimer (95% CI: 29% (24.80, 32.68)), and brain natriuretic peptide (95% CI: 13% (10.25, 16.13)). (4) Conclusions: Our study highlights the real technological need for fast biomarker results, which could be provided by biosensors. The relevance of some answers such as troponin is questionable.

Study protocol: hypnosis versus standard care for shoulder dislocation reduction in the emergency department - a multicentre, randomised, controlled study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Anterior shoulder dislocation is a common reason for consultation at the emergency department (ED). Hypnosis could be a safe and effective alternative therapy for pain relief during shoulder dislocation reduction but nowadays, evidence is not sufficient. The main objective of this study is to show that reduction under hypnosis is associated with a decrease in the use of analgesic compared with usual care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct an interventional, controlled, multicentre, randomised study. A total of 44 patients with shoulder dislocation will be randomised in two groups: the hypnosis group (N=22) and the usual care group (N=22). The primary endpoint will be the comparison of morphine equivalent analgesic consumption during a shoulder dislocation reduction manoeuvre. Secondary endpoints will include haemodynamic parameters monitoring, patient and practitioner satisfaction using a Likert scale, use of coanalgesic or sedative drugs, number of reduction attempts and time spent at ED. Adverse events will be recorded. Statistical analysis will include parametric tests, multivariate linear regression and descriptive statistics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received ethics approval from the Comité de Protection des Personnes of Sud-Est IV on 03/11/2021 (ANSM informed on 19 November 2021). The results will be published in scientific articles and communicated in national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT04992598; National Clinical trial no ID RCB : 2021-A01382-39.

Prognostic Value of C-Reactive Protein to Lymphocyte Ratio (CLR) in Emergency Department Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

(1) Introduction: According to recent studies, the ratio of C-reactive-protein to lymphocyte is more sensitive and specific than other biomarkers associated to systemic inflammatory processes. This study aimed to determine the prognostic value of CLR on COVID-19 severity and mortality at emergency department (ED) admission. (2) Methods: Between 1 March and 30 April 2020, we carried out a multicenter and retrospective study in six major hospitals of northeast France. The cohort was composed of patients hospitalized for a confirmed diagnosis of moderate to severe COVID-19. (3) Results: A total of 1,035 patients were included in this study. Factors associated with infection severity were the CLR (OR: 1.001, CI 95%: (1.000-1.002), p = 0.012), and the lymphocyte level (OR: 1.951, CI 95%: (1.024-3.717), p = 0.042). In multivariate analysis, the only biochemical factor significantly associated with mortality was lymphocyte rate (OR: 2.308, CI 95%: (1.286-4.141), p = 0.005). The best threshold of CLR to predict the severity of infection was 78.3 (sensitivity 79%; specificity 47%), and to predict mortality, was 159.5 (sensitivity 48%; specificity 70%). (4) Conclusion: The CLR at admission to the ED could be a helpful prognostic biomarker in the early screening and prediction of the severity and mortality associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

A Didactic Escape Game for Emergency Medicine Aimed at Learning to Work as a Team and Making Diagnoses: Methodology for Game Development.

BACKGROUND: In the health care environment, teamwork is paramount, especially when referring to patient safety. We are interested in recent and innovative solutions such as escape games, which is a type of adventure game that may be highly useful as an educational tool, potentially combining good communication skills with successful gamification. They involve teams of 5 to 10 individuals who are "locked" in the same room and must collaborate to solve puzzles while under pressure from a timer. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper was to describe the steps involved in creating and implementing an educational escape game. This tool can then be put into service or further developed by trainers who wish to use it for learning interprofessional collaboration. Therefore, we started with an experience of creating an educational escape game for emergency medicine teams. METHODS: We chose to develop an educational escape game by using 6 successive steps. First, we built a team. Second, we chose the pedagogical objectives. Third, we gamified (switched from objectives to scenario). Next, we found the human and material resources needed. Thereafter, we designed briefing and debriefing. Lastly, we tested the game. RESULTS: By following these 6 steps, we created the first ambulant educational escape game that teaches people, or nurses, doctors, and paramedics, working in emergency medicine to work as a team. CONCLUSIONS: From a pedagogic point of view, this game may be a good tool for helping people in multidisciplinary fields (medical and paramedical teams) to learn how to work collaboratively and to communicate as a group. Above all, it seems to be an innovative tool that complements medical simulation-based learning and thus consolidates traditional education.

Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Early Variation of NLR to Predict In-Hospital Mortality and Severity in ED Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

(1) Introduction: The neutrophil-to lymphocyte ratio is valued as a predictive marker in several inflammatory diseases. For example, an increasing NLR is a risk factor of mortality in sepsis. It also appears to be helpful in other settings such as cancer. The aim of our work was to study the prognostic value of NLR for disease severity and mortality in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 upon their admission to the Emergency Department (ED) and its early variation (ΔNLR) in the first 24 h of management (H-24). (2) Methods: Between 1 March and 30 April 2020, we conducted a multicenter and retrospective cohort study of patients with moderate or severe coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), who were all hospitalized after presenting to the ED. (3) Results: A total of 1035 patients were included in our study. Factors associated with infection severity were C-reactive protein level (OR: 1.007, CI 95%: [1.005-1.010], p < 0.001), NLR at H-24 (OR: 1.117, CI 95%: [1.060-1.176], p < 0.001), and ΔNLR (OR: 1.877, CI 95%: [1.160-3.036], p: 0.01). The best threshold of ΔNLR to predict the severity of infection was 0.222 (sensitivity 56.1%, specificity 68.3%). In multivariate analysis, the only biochemical factor significantly associated with mortality was again ΔNLR (OR: 2.142, CI 95%: ([1.132-4.056], p: 0.019). The best threshold of ΔNLR to predict mortality was 0.411 (sensitivity 53.3%; specificity 67.3%). (4) Conclusion: The NLR and its early variation (ΔNLR) could help physicians predict both severity and mortality associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, hence contributing to optimized patient management (accurate triage and treatment).

Correction: Diagnostic performance of congestion score index evaluated from chest radiography for acute heart failure in the emergency department: A retrospective analysis from the PARADISE cohort.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003419.].

Do Blood Eosinophils Predict in-Hospital Mortality or Severity of Disease in SARS-CoV-2 Infection? A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare systems worldwide have been battling the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Eosinophils are multifunctional leukocytes implicated in the pathogenesis of several inflammatory processes including viral infections. We focus our study on the prognostic value of eosinopenia as a marker of disease severity and mortality in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Between 1 March and 30 April 2020, we conducted a multicenter and retrospective study on a cohort of COVID-19 patients (moderate or severe disease) who were hospitalized after presenting to the emergency department (ED). We led our study in six major hospitals of northeast France, one of the outbreak's epicenters in Europe. RESULTS: We have collected data from 1035 patients, with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. More than three quarters of them (76.2%) presented a moderate form of the disease, while the remaining quarter (23.8%) presented a severe form requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). Mean circulating eosinophils rate, at admission, varied according to disease severity (p < 0.001), yet it did not differ between survivors and non-survivors (p = 0.306). Extreme eosinopenia (=0/mm3) was predictive of severity (aOR = 1.77, p = 0.009); however, it was not predictive of mortality (aOR = 0.892, p = 0.696). The areas under the Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve were, respectively, 58.5% (CI95%: 55.3-61.7%) and 51.4% (CI95%: 46.8-56.1%) for the ability of circulating eosinophil rates to predict disease severity and mortality. CONCLUSION: Eosinopenia is very common and often profound in cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Eosinopenia was not a useful predictor of mortality; however, undetectable eosinophils (=0/mm3) were predictive of disease severity during the initial ED management.

Dyskalemia: a management problem for students.

BACKGROUND: Although dyskalemia is common, its management can be problematic for students and general practitioners, especially when it occurs in patients with heart and renal failure. The basic academic knowledge of general medicine students, who have often not yet encountered clinical situations of dyskalemia, remains unclear in this regard. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the knowledge and reflexive practices of general medicine students in regard to dyskalemia. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey, based on a self-questionnaire, of all of the students enrolled in general medicine studies at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Nancy (France) at the end of their degree. The students were asked questions pertaining to specific clinical situations. The answers were compared to the information provided in the medical curriculum as well as to the relevant European guidelines. RESULTS: We collected 290 of the questionnaires (participation rate: 81.2%). The hyper- and hypokalemia thresholds considered pathological (3.5-5.0 mmol/L) were known by 78% and 67% of the students, respectively. The perception of danger in case of severe hypokalemia was underestimated by 62.7% of them. In most cases, the proposed management of hyperkalemia in heart and renal failure did not comply with the relevant guidelines. The students tended to favor permanent discontinuation of the administration of converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE) and/or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) without considering the need for their reintroduction (51.6%). Sodium polystyrene sulfate was frequently seen as an appropriate first-line treatment for hyperkalemia (45%). CONCLUSIONS: The knowledge and competence of general medicine students appear to be lacking for hyperkalemia in heart and renal failure, and they are long way from full compliance with the relevant European guidelines. Exposure to complex clinical situations as part of the medical curriculum, therefore, seems essential to improve the way dyskalemia is managed in France.