The syncope core management process in the emergency department: a consensus statement of the EUSEM syncope group.

The European Society of Cardiology issued updated syncope guidelines in 2018 which included recommendations for managing syncope in the emergency department (ED) setting. However, these guidelines lack detailed process-oriented instructions regarding the fact that ED syncope patients initially present with a transient loss of consciousness (TLOC), which can have a broad spectrum of causes. This study aims to establish a European consensus on the general process of the workup and care for patients with suspected syncope and provides rules for sufficient and systematic management of the broad group of syncope (initially presenting as TLOC) patients in the ED. A variety of European diagnostic and therapeutic standards for syncope patients were reviewed and summarized in three rounds of a modified Delphi process by the European Society for Emergency Medicine syncope group. Based on a consensus statement, a detailed process pathway is created. The primary outcome of this work is the presentation of a universal process pathway for the structured management of syncope patients in European EDs. The here presented extended event process chain (eEPC) summarizes and homogenizes the process management of European ED syncope patients. Additionally, an exemplary translation of the eEPC into a practice-based flowchart algorithm, which can be used as an example for practical use in the ED, is provided in this work. Syncope patients, initially presenting with TLOC, are common and pose challenges in the ED. Despite variations in process management across Europe, the development of a universally applicable syncope eEPC in the ED was successfully achieved. Key features of the consensus and eEPC include ruling out life-threatening causes, distinguishing syncope from nonsyncopal TLOCs, employing syncope risk stratification categories and based on this, making informed decisions regarding admission or discharge.

Predictive performance of the common red flags in emergency department headache patients: a HEAD and HEAD-Colombia study.

OBJECTIVES: Only a small proportion of patients presenting to an ED with headache have a serious cause. The SNNOOP10 criteria, which incorporates red and orange flags for serious causes, has been proposed but not well studied. This project aims to compare the proportion of patients with 10 commonly accepted red flag criteria (singly and in combination) between patients with and without a diagnosis of serious secondary headache in a large, multinational cohort of ED patients presenting with headache. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data obtained in the HEAD and HEAD-Colombia studies. The outcome of interest was serious secondary headache. The predictive performance of 10 red flag criteria from the SNNOOP10 criteria list was estimated individually and in combination. RESULTS: 5293 patients were included, of whom 6.1% (95% CI 5.5% to 6.8%) had a defined serious cause identified. New neurological deficit, history of neoplasm, older age (>50 years) and recent head trauma (2-7 days prior) were independent predictors of a serious secondary headache diagnosis. After adjusting for other predictors, sudden onset, onset during exertion, pregnancy and immune suppression were not associated with a serious headache diagnosis. The combined sensitivity of the red flag criteria overall was 96.5% (95% CI 93.2% to 98.3%) but specificity was low, 5.1% (95% CI 4.3% to 6.0%). Positive predictive value was 9.3% (95% CI 8.2% to 10.5%) with negative predictive value of 93.5% (95% CI 87.6% to 96.8%). CONCLUSION: The sensitivity and specificity of the red flag criteria in this study were lower than previously reported. Regarding clinical practice, this suggests that red flag criteria may be useful to identify patients at higher risk of a serious secondary headache cause, but their low specificity could result in increased rates of CT scanning. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANZCTR376695.

Targeted prophylactic anticoagulation based on the TRiP(cast) score in patients with lower limb immobilisation: a multicentre, stepped wedge, randomised implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic anticoagulation in emergency department patients with lower limb trauma requiring immobilisation is controversial. The Thrombosis Risk Prediction for Patients with Cast Immobilisation-TRiP(cast)-score could identify a large subgroup of patients at low risk of venous thromboembolism for whom prophylactic anticoagulation can be safely withheld. We aimed to prospectively assess the safety of withholding anticoagulation for patients with lower limb trauma at low risk of venous thromboembolism, defined by a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7. METHODS: CASTING was a stepped-wedge, multicentre, cluster-randomised trial with blinded outcome assessment. 15 emergency departments in France and Belgium were selected and randomly assigned staggered start dates for switching from the control phase (ie, anticoagulation prescription according to the physician's usual practice) to the intervention phase (ie, targeted anticoagulation according to TRiP(cast) score: no prescription if score <7 and anticoagulation if score was ≥7). Patients were included if they presented to a participating emergency department with lower limb trauma requiring immobilisation for at least 7 days and were aged 18 years or older. The primary outcome was the 3-month cumulative rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolism during the intervention phase in patients with a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7. The targeted strategy was considered safe if this rate was less than 1% with an upper 95% CI of less than 2%. The primary analysis was performed in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04064489). FINDINGS: Between June 16, 2020, and Sept 15, 2021, 15 clusters and 2120 patients were included. Of the 1505 patients analysed in the intervention phase, 1159 (77·0%) had a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7 and did not receive anticoagulant treatment. The symptomatic venous thromboembolism rate was 0·7% (95% CI 0·3-1·4, n=8/1159). There was no difference between the control and the intervention phases in the cumulative rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolism or in bleeding rates. INTERPRETATION: Patients with a TRiP(cast) score of less than 7 who are not receiving anticoagulation have a very low risk of venous thromboembolism. A large proportion of patients with lower limb trauma and immobilisation could safely avoid thromboprophylaxis. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health.

Ketamine Compared With Morphine for Out-of-Hospital Analgesia for Patients With Traumatic Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Pain is a common out-of-hospital symptom among patients, and opioids are often prescribed. Research suggests that overprescribing for acute traumatic pain is still prevalent, even when limits restricting opioid prescriptions have been implemented. Ketamine hydrochloride is an alternative to opioids in adults with out-of-hospital traumatic pain. Objective: To assess the noninferiority of intravenous ketamine compared with intravenous morphine sulfate to provide pain relief in adults with out-of-hospital traumatic pain. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Intravenous Subdissociative-Dose Ketamine Versus Morphine for Prehospital Analgesia (KETAMORPH) study was a multicenter, single-blind, noninferiority randomized clinical trial comparing ketamine hydrochloride (20 mg, followed by 10 mg every 5 minutes) with morphine sulfate (2 or 3 mg every 5 minutes) in adult patients with out-of-hospital trauma and a verbal pain score equal to or greater than 5. Enrollment occurred from November 23, 2017, to November 26, 2022, in 11 French out-of-hospital emergency medical units. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to ketamine (n = 128) or morphine (n = 123). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the between-group difference in mean change in verbal rating scale pain scores measured from the time before administration of the study drug to 30 minutes later. A noninferiority margin of 1.3 was chosen. Results: A total of 251 patients were randomized (median age, 51 [IQR, 34-69] years; 111 women [44.9%] and 140 men [55.1%] among the 247 with data available) and were included in the intention-to-treat population. The mean pain score change was -3.7 (95% CI, -4.2 to -3.2) in the ketamine group compared with -3.8 (95% CI, -4.2 to -3.4) in the morphine group. The difference in mean pain score change was 0.1 (95% CI, -0.7 to 0.9) points. There were no clinically meaningful differences for vital signs between the 2 groups. The intravenous morphine group had 19 of 113 (16.8% [95% CI, 10.4%-25.0%]) adverse effects reported (most commonly nausea [12 of 113 (10.6%)]) compared with 49 of 120 (40.8% [95% CI, 32.0%-49.6%]) in the ketamine group (most commonly emergence phenomenon [24 of 120 (20.0%)]). No adverse events required intervention. Conclusions and Relevance: In the KETAMORPH study of patients with out-of-hospital traumatic pain, the use of intravenous ketamine compared with morphine showed noninferiority for pain reduction. In the ongoing opioid crisis, ketamine administered alone is an alternative to opioids in adults with out-of-hospital traumatic pain. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03236805.

Guideline adherence in the management of acute pulmonary oedema: Study protocol for a French survey involving cardiologists, emergency physicians and intensivists.

BACKGROUND: Because of their high morbidity and mortality, patients with acute pulmonary oedema (APE) require early recognition of symptoms, identification of precipitating factors and admission to specialized care units (cardiac critical care or intensive care). APE is at the crossroads of different specialties (cardiology, emergency medicine and intensive care medicine). Although multidisciplinary expertise and management may be a strength, it can also be a source of confusion, with unexpected heterogeneity in patient care. We hypothesized that the management of severe APE may be heterogeneous between specialties and, in some situations, may differ from international recommendations. AIM: We designed a survey to compare management of different APE phenotypes according to the physicians' medical specialty, and to compare the results with what experts would do and European guidelines. METHODS: Four clinical cases of typical APE with questions pertaining to the latest guidelines were designed by a Scientific Committee designated by the French Scientific Societies for Cardiology, Emergency Medicine and Intensive Care Medicine. We focused on oxygenation and ventilation strategies, management of precipitating factors, including timing of coronary revascularization, use of diuretics and management of diuretic resistance, and discharge coverage. From 20 June 2022 until 09 September 2022, the four cases of APE (two during hypertensive crises, two during acute coronary syndromes) were proposed to French physicians involved in APE care, and to experts, using an open online survey. To avoid any diagnostic ambiguity, the diagnosis of APE was given at the beginning of each clinical case. RESULTS: The intention is to present the results at national and international conferences and publish them in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this survey are intended to pave the way for the generation of novel hypotheses for future clinical trials in case of equipoise between subsets of therapeutic procedures in APE.

Management of syncope in the Emergency Department: a European prospective cohort study (SEED).

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: In 2018, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) produced syncope guidelines that for the first-time incorporated Emergency Department (ED) management. However, very little is known about the characteristics and management of this patient group across Europe. OBJECTIVES: To examine the prevalence, clinical presentation, assessment, investigation (ECG and laboratory testing), management and ESC and Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) categories of adult European ED patients presenting with transient loss of consciousness (TLOC, undifferentiated or suspected syncope). DESIGN: Prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: Adults (≥18 years) presenting to European EDs with TLOC, either undifferentiated or thought to be of syncopal origin. MAIN RESULTS: Between 00:01 Monday, September 12th to 23:59 Sunday 25 September 2022, 952 patients presenting to 41 EDs in 14 European countries were enrolled from 98 301 ED presentations (n = 40 sites). Mean age (SD) was 60.7 (21.7) years and 487 participants were male (51.2%). In total, 379 (39.8%) were admitted to hospital and 573 (60.2%) were discharged. 271 (28.5%) were admitted to an observation unit first with 143 (52.8%) of these being admitted from this. 717 (75.3%) participants were high-risk according to ESC guidelines (and not suitable for discharge from ED) and 235 (24.7%) were low risk. Admission rate increased with increasing ESC high-risk factors; 1 ESC high-risk factor; n = 259 (27.2%, admission rate=34.7%), 2; 189 (19.9%; 38.6%), 3; 106 (11.1%, 54.7%, 4; 62 (6.5%, 60.4%), 5; 48 (5.0%, 67.9%, 6+; 53 (5.6%, 67.9%). Furthermore, 660 (69.3%), 250 (26.3%), 34 (3.5%) and 8 (0.8%) participants had a low, medium, high, and very high CSRS respectively with respective admission rates of 31.4%, 56.0%, 76.5% and 75.0%. Admission rates (19.3-88.9%), use of an observation/decision unit (0-100%), and percentage high-risk (64.8-88.9%) varies widely between countries. CONCLUSION: This European prospective cohort study reported a 1% prevalence of syncope in the ED. 4 in 10 patients are admitted to hospital although there is wide variation between country in syncope management. Three-quarters of patients have ESC high-risk characteristics with admission percentage rising with increasing ESC high-risk factors.

Overnight Stay in the Emergency Department and Mortality in Older Patients.

Importance: Patients in the emergency department (ED) who are waiting for hospital admission on a wheeled cot may be subject to harm. However, mortality and morbidity among older patients who spend the night in the ED while waiting for a bed in a medical ward are unknown. Objective: To assess whether older adults who spend a night in the ED waiting for admission to a hospital ward are at increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Design, Settings, and Participants: This was a prospective cohort study of older patients (≥75 years) who visited the ED and were admitted to the hospital on December 12 to 14, 2022, at 97 EDs across France. Two groups were defined and compared: those who stayed in the ED from midnight until 8:00 am (ED group) and those who were admitted to a ward before midnight (ward group). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was in-hospital mortality, truncated at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital adverse events (ie, falls, infection, bleeding, myocardial infarction, stroke, thrombosis, bedsores, and dysnatremia) and hospital length of stay. A generalized linear-regression mixed model was used to compare end points between groups. Results: The total sample comprised 1598 patients (median [IQR] age, 86 [80-90] years; 880 [55%] female and 718 [45%] male), with 707 (44%) in the ED group and 891 (56%) in the ward group. Patients who spent the night in the ED had a higher in-hospital mortality rate of 15.7% vs 11.1% (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.07-1.81). They also had a higher risk of adverse events compared with the ward group (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04-1.49) and increased median length of stay (9 vs 8 days; rate ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.11-1.31). In a prespecified subgroup analysis of patients who required assistance with the activities of daily living, spending the night in the ED was associated with a higher in-hospital mortality rate (aRR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.25-2.61). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this prospective cohort study indicate that for older patients, waiting overnight in the ED for admission to a ward was associated with increased in-hospital mortality and morbidity, particularly in patients with limited autonomy. Older adults should be prioritized for admission to a ward.

Computed tomography brain scan utilization in patients with headache presenting to emergency departments: a multinational study.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Recommended indications for emergency computed tomography (CT) brain scans are not only complex and evolving, but it is also unknown whether they are being followed in emergency departments (EDs). OBJECTIVE: To determine the CT utilization and diagnostic yield in the ED in patients with headaches across broad geographical regions. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from a multinational cross-sectional study of ED headache presentations over one month in 2019. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Hospitals from 10 participating countries were divided into five geographical regions [Australia and New Zealand (ANZ); Colombia; Europe: Belgium, France, UK, and Romania; Hong Kong and Singapore (HKS); and Turkey). Adult patients with nontraumatic headache as the primary presenting complaint were included. Patients were identified from ED management systems. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: The outcome measures were CT utilization and diagnostic yield. CT utilization was calculated using a multilevel binary logistic regression model to account for clustering of patients within hospitals and regions. Imaging data (CT requests and reports) were sourced from radiology management systems. MAIN RESULTS: The study included 5281 participants. Median (interquartile range) age was 40 (29-55) years, 66% were women. Overall mean CT utilization was 38.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 30.4-47.4%]. Regional utilization was highest in Europe (46.0%) and lowest in Turkey (28.9%), with HKS (38.0%), ANZ (40.0%), and Colombia (40.8%) in between. Its distribution across hospitals was approximately symmetrical. There was greater variation in CT utilization between hospitals within a region than between regions (hospital variance 0.422, region variance 0.100). Overall mean CT diagnostic yield was 9.9% (95% CI, 8.7-11.3%). Its distribution across hospitals was positively skewed. Regional yield was lower in Europe (5.4%) than in other regions: Colombia (9.1%), HKS (9.7%), Turkey (10.6%), and ANZ (11.2%). There was a weak negative correlation between utilization and diagnostic yield ( r  = -0.248). CONCLUSION: In this international study, there was a high variation (28.9-46.6%) in CT utilization and diagnostic yield (5.4-11.2%) across broad geographic regions. Europe had the highest utilization and the lowest yield. The study findings provide a foundation to address variation in neuroimaging in ED headache presentations.

Evaluation of the appropriateness of nursing home residents' transfer to emergency departments.

INTRODUCTION: France is experiencing a steady increase in the number of residents living in nursing homes (NHs). Each year, 25% of these residents are hospitalized, half of them through emergency departments (EDs). A part of these transfers to EDs are unjustified and not without consequences. The first aim of our study is to evaluate the proportion of avoidable NHs resident transfer to EDs. METHODS: An observational, prospective and multicentric study was conducted between January and August 2019 in the 6 EDs of a French county during 3 inclusion periods. A multidisciplinary expert panel determined the appropriateness of each ED transfer. The results were expressed in gross values and %. Expert agreement was assessed by Fleiss' kappa statistical measure. RESULTS: Transfers were deemed avoidable in 12 to 35% of cases and appropriate in 53 to 81% of cases according to the experts. Fleiss' Kappa score on the concordance of the different experts' answers concerning the relevance of transfers was slight with k = 0.28 with a significant p-value (p < 0.0001). Infection could benefit of direct hospitalization whereas trauma/wound and acute heart/pulmonary failure are the most relevant reasons of presentation to the ED. CONCLUSIONS: Too many ED transfers of NH residents remain avoidable. There is a disparity of results among the experts reflecting a limitation of this study related to the subjective nature of relevance. In a society where demographic projections predict a continuing aging population anywhere EDs are regularly crowded, it would be interesting to identify and prevent factors predisposing to ED transfer and consider alternative managements with a better geriatric and emergency physicians collaboration for this specific population.

Temporal Trends in the Use of Computed Tomographic Pulmonary Angiography for Suspected Pulmonary Embolism in the Emergency Department : A Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recently, validated clinical decision rules have been developed that avoid unnecessary use of computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: To measure any resulting change in CTPA use for suspected PE. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: 26 European EDs in 6 countries. PATIENTS: Patients with CTPA performed for suspected PE in the ED during the first 7 days of each odd month between January 2015 and December 2019. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end points were the CTPAs done for suspected PE in the ED and the number of PEs diagnosed in the ED each year adjusted to an annual census of 100 000 ED visits. Temporal trends were estimated using generalized linear mixed regression models. RESULTS: 8970 CTPAs were included (median age, 63 years; 56% female). Statistically significant temporal trends for more frequent use of CTPA (836 per 100 000 ED visits in 2015 vs. 1112 in 2019; P < 0.001), more diagnosed PEs (138 per 100 000 in 2015 vs. 164 in 2019; P = 0.028), a higher proportion of low-risk PEs (annual percent change [APC], 13.8% [95% CI, 2.6% to 30.1%]) with more ambulatory management (APC, 19.3% [CI, 4.1% to 45.1%]), and a lower proportion of intensive care unit admissions (APC, -8.9% [CI, -17.1% to -0.3%]) were observed. LIMITATION: Data were limited to 7 days every 2 months. CONCLUSION: Despite the recent validation of clinical decision rules to limit the use of CTPA, an increase in the CTPA rate along with more diagnosed PEs and especially low-risk PEs were instead observed. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None specific for this study.

Deconvolution of BNP and NT-proBNP Immunoreactivities by Mass Spectrometry in Heart Failure and Sacubitril/Valsartan Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Elevated BNP and the N-terminal fragment of the proBNP (NT-proBNP) are hallmarks of heart failure (HF). Generally, both biomarkers parallel each other. In patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan, BNP remained stable while NT-proBNP decreased. As BNP and NT-proBNP assays have limited specificity due to cross-reactivity, we quantified by mass spectrometry (MS) the contributing molecular species. METHODS: We included 356 healthy volunteers, 100 patients with acute dyspnoea (49 acute decompensated HF; 51 dyspnoea of non-cardiac origin), and 73 patients with chronic HF and reduced ejection fraction treated with sacubitril/valsartan. BNP and NT-proBNP immunoreactivities (BNPir and NT-proBNPir) were measured by immunoassays (Abbott ARCHITECT and Roche Diagnostics proBNPII) and proBNP-derived peptides and glycosylation at serine 44 by MS on plasma samples. RESULTS: BNPir corresponded to the sum of proBNP1-108, BNP1-32, BNP3-32, and BNP5-32 (R2 = 0.9995), while NT-proBNPir corresponded to proBNP1-108 and NT-proBNP1-76 not glycosylated at serine 44 (R2 = 0.992). NT-proBNPir was better correlated (R2 = 0.9597) than BNPir (R2 = 0.7643) with proBNP signal peptide (a surrogate of proBNP production). In patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan, non-glycosylated NT-proBNP1-76 remained constant (P = 0.84) despite an increase in NT-proBNP1-76 and its glycosylation (P < 0.0001). ProBNP1-108 remained constant (P = 0.12) while its glycosylation increased (P < 0.0001), resulting in a decrease in non-glycosylated proBNP1-108 (P < 0.0001), and in NT-proBNPir. CONCLUSIONS: Glycosylation interfered with NT-proBNPir measurement, explaining the discrepant evolution of these 2 biomarkers in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan. Both BNPir and NT-proBNPir are surrogates of proBNP1-108 production, NT-proBNPir being more robust in the clinical contexts studied.

Epidemiology of geriatric patients presenting to emergency departments in Europe: EGERS study.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Patients aged 65 and above constitute a large and growing part of emergency department (ED) visits in western countries. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this European prospective study was to determine the epidemiologic characteristics of elderly patients presenting to EDs across Europe. Our secondary objective was to determine the hospitalization rate, characteristics, and in-hospital mortality rates of geriatric patients presenting to EDs. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: An observational prospective cohort study over seven consecutive days between 19 October and 30 November 2020, in 36 EDs from nine European countries. Patients aged 65 years and older presenting to EDs with any complaint during a period of seven consecutive days were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: Data were collected on demographics, the major presenting complaint, the presenting vital signs, comorbidities, usual medication, and outcomes after the ED, including disposition, in-hospital outcome, and the final hospital diagnosis. The patients were stratified into three groups: old (65-74 years), older (75-84 years), and oldest age (>85 years). MAIN RESULTS: A total of 5767 patients were included in the study. The median age of the patients was 77 (interquartile range: 71-84) years. The majority presented with a non-traumatic complaint (81%) and about 90% of the patients had at least one comorbid disease and were on chronic medication. An ED visit resulted in subsequent hospital admission in 51% of cases, with 9% of patients admitted to an intensive care unit. Overall in-hospital mortality was 8%, and ED mortality was 1%. Older age was associated with a higher female proportion, comorbidities, need for home care service, history of previous falls, admission rates, length of ED, and hospital stay. CONCLUSION: The characteristics of ED elderly patients and their subsequent hospital stay are reported in this prospective study.

Central anticholinergic syndrome secondary to atropine eye drops: A case study.

Atropine eye drops are frequently used in the treatment of keratitis and during ophthalmic surgery. We described a rare complication of central anticholinergic syndrome secondary to atropine eye drops.

Clinical Characteristics and Management of Patients with a Suspected COVID-19 Infection in Emergency Departments: A European Retrospective Multicenter Study.

Background: Our aim is to describe and compare the profile and outcome of patients attending the ED with a confirmed COVID-19 infection with patients with a suspected COVID-19 infection. Methods: We conducted a multicentric retrospective study including adults who were seen in 21 European emergency departments (ED) with suspected COVID-19 between 9 March and 8 April 2020. Patients with either a clinical suspicion of COVID-19 or confirmed COVID-19, detected using either a RT-PCR or a chest CT scan, formed the C+ group. Patients with non-confirmed COVID-19 (C− group) were defined as patients with a clinical presentation in the ED suggestive of COVID-19, but if tests were performed, they showed a negative RT-PCR and/or a negative chest CT scan. Results: A total of 7432 patients were included in the analysis: 1764 (23.7%) in the C+ group and 5668 (76.3%) in the C− group. The population was older (63.8 y.o. ±17.5 vs. 51.8 y.o. +/− 21.1, p < 0.01), with more males (54.6% vs. 46.1%, p < 0.01) in the C+ group. Patients in the C+ group had more chronic diseases. Half of the patients (n = 998, 56.6%) in the C+ group needed oxygen, compared to only 15% in the C− group (n = 877). Two-thirds of patients from the C+ group were hospitalized in ward (n = 1128, 63.9%), whereas two-thirds of patients in the C− group were discharged after their ED visit (n = 3883, 68.5%). Conclusion: Our study was the first in Europe to examine the emergency department's perspective on the management of patients with a suspected COVID-19 infection. We showed an overall more critical clinical situation group of patients with a confirmed COVID-19 infection.