Novel Use of Home Pulse Oximetry Monitoring in COVID-19 Patients Discharged From the Emergency Department Identifies Need for Hospitalization.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to evaluate patient-reported oxygen saturation (SpO2 ) using pulse oximetry as a home monitoring tool for patients with initially nonsevere COVID-19 to identify need for hospitalization. METHODS: Patients were enrolled at the emergency department (ED) and outpatient testing centers. Each patient was given a home pulse oximeter and instructed to record their SpO2 every 8 hours. Patients were instructed to return to the ED for sustained home SpO2  < 92% or if they felt they needed emergent medical attention. Relative risk was used to assess the relation between hospitalization and home SpO2  < 92% in COVID-19-positive patients. RESULTS: We enrolled 209 patients with suspected COVID-19, of whom 77 patients tested positive for COVID-19 and were included. Subsequent hospitalization occurred in 22 of 77 (29%) patients. Resting home SpO2  < 92% was associated with an increased likelihood of hospitalization compared to SpO2  ≥ 92% (relative risk = 7.0, 95% confidence interval = 3.4 to 14.5, p < 0.0001). Home SpO2  < 92% was also associated with increased risk of intensive care unit admission, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and septic shock. In our cohort, 50% of patients who ended up hospitalized only returned to the ED for incidental finding of low home SpO2 without worsening of symptoms. One-third (33%) of nonhospitalized patients stated that they would have returned to the ED if they did not have a pulse oximeter to reassure them at home. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that home pulse oximetry monitoring identifies need for hospitalization in initially nonsevere COVID-19 patients when a cutoff of SpO2 92% is used. Half of patients who ended up hospitalized had SpO2  < 92% without worsening symptoms. Home SpO2 monitoring also reduces unnecessary ED revisits.

Critical Errors in Inhaler Technique among Children Hospitalized with Asthma.

Past studies have not evaluated inhaler use in hospitalized children with asthma. The objectives of this study were to evaluate inhaler technique in hospitalized pediatric patients with asthma and identify risk factors for improper use. We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study in a tertiary children's hospital for children 2-16 years of age admitted for an asthma exacerbation, and inhaler technique demonstrations were analyzed. Of 113 participants enrolled, 55% had uncontrolled asthma, and 42% missed a critical step in inhaler technique. More patients missed a critical step when they used a spacer with mouthpiece instead of a spacer with mask (75% [51%-90%] vs 36% [27%-46%]) and were older (7.8 [6.7-8.9] vs 5.8 [5.1-6.5] years). Patients using the spacer with mouthpiece remained significantly more likely to miss a critical step when adjusting for other clinical covariates (odds ratio 6.95 [1.71-28.23], P = .007). Hospital-based education may provide teachable moments to address poor proficiency, especially for older children using a mouthpiece.