A comparative study of explainable ensemble learning and logistic regression for predicting in-hospital mortality in the emergency department.

This study addresses the challenges associated with emergency department (ED) overcrowding and emphasizes the need for efficient risk stratification tools to identify high-risk patients for early intervention. While several scoring systems, often based on logistic regression (LR) models, have been proposed to indicate patient illness severity, this study aims to compare the predictive performance of ensemble learning (EL) models with LR for in-hospital mortality in the ED. A cross-sectional single-center study was conducted at the ED of Imam Reza Hospital in northeast Iran from March 2016 to March 2017. The study included adult patients with one to three levels of emergency severity index. EL models using Bagging, AdaBoost, random forests (RF), Stacking and extreme gradient boosting (XGB) algorithms, along with an LR model, were constructed. The training and validation visits from the ED were randomly divided into 80% and 20%, respectively. After training the proposed models using tenfold cross-validation, their predictive performance was evaluated. Model performance was compared using the Brier score (BS), The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC), The area and precision-recall curve (AUCPR), Hosmer-Lemeshow (H-L) goodness-of-fit test, precision, sensitivity, accuracy, F1-score, and Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC). The study included 2025 unique patients admitted to the hospital's ED, with a total percentage of hospital deaths at approximately 19%. In the training group and the validation group, 274 of 1476 (18.6%) and 152 of 728 (20.8%) patients died during hospitalization, respectively. According to the evaluation of the presented framework, EL models, particularly Bagging, predicted in-hospital mortality with the highest AUROC (0.839, CI (0.802-0.875)) and AUCPR = 0.64 comparable in terms of discrimination power with LR (AUROC (0.826, CI (0.787-0.864)) and AUCPR = 0.61). XGB achieved the highest precision (0.83), sensitivity (0.831), accuracy (0.842), F1-score (0.833), and the highest MCC (0.48). Additionally, the most accurate models in the unbalanced dataset belonged to RF with the lowest BS (0.128). Although all studied models overestimate mortality risk and have insufficient calibration (P > 0.05), stacking demonstrated relatively good agreement between predicted and actual mortality. EL models are not superior to LR in predicting in-hospital mortality in the ED. Both EL and LR models can be considered as screening tools to identify patients at risk of mortality.

Author Response.

How to cite this article: Rahmatinejad Z, Hoseini B, Pourmand A, Reihani H, Rahmatinejad F, Eslami S, et al. Author Response. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(2):183-184.

Comparison of Six Scoring Systems for Predicting In-hospital Mortality among Patients with SARS-COV2 Presenting to the Emergency Department.

Background: The study aimed to compare the prognostic accuracy of six different severity-of-illness scoring systems for predicting in-hospital mortality among patients with confirmed SARS-COV2 who presented to the emergency department (ED). The scoring systems assessed were worthing physiological score (WPS), early warning score (EWS), rapid acute physiology score (RAPS), rapid emergency medicine score (REMS), national early warning score (NEWS), and quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA). Materials and methods: A cohort study was conducted using data obtained from electronic medical records of 6,429 confirmed SARS-COV2 patients presenting to the ED. Logistic regression models were fitted on the original severity-of-illness scores to assess the models' performance using the Area Under the Curve for ROC (AUC-ROC) and Precision-Recall curves (AUC-PR), Brier Score (BS), and calibration plots were used to assess the models' performance. Bootstrap samples with multiple imputations were used for internal validation. Results: The mean age of the patients was 64 years (IQR:50-76) and 57.5% were male. The WPS, REMS, and NEWS models had AUROC of 0.714, 0.705, and 0.701, respectively. The poorest performance was observed in the RAPS model, with an AUROC of 0.601. The BS for the NEWS, qSOFA, EWS, WPS, RAPS, and REMS was 0.18, 0.09, 0.03, 0.14, 0.15, and 0.11 respectively. Excellent calibration was obtained for the NEWS, while the other models had proper calibration. Conclusion: The WPS, REMS, and NEWS have a fair discriminatory performance and may assist in risk stratification for SARS-COV2 patients presenting to the ED. Generally, underlying diseases and most vital signs are positively associated with mortality and were different between the survivors and non-survivors. How to cite this article: Rahmatinejad Z, Hoseini B, Reihani H, Hanna AA, Pourmand A, Tabatabaei SM, et al. Comparison of Six Scoring Systems for Predicting In-hospital Mortality among Patients with SARS-COV2 Presenting to the Emergency Department. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(6):416-425.

Comparing In-Hospital Mortality Prediction by Senior Emergency Resident's Judgment and Prognostic Models in the Emergency Department.

Background: A comparison of emergency residents' judgments and two derivatives of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), namely, the mSOFA and the qSOFA, was conducted to determine the accuracy of predicting in-hospital mortality among critically ill patients in the emergency department (ED). Methods: A prospective cohort research was performed on patients over 18 years of age presented to the ED. We used logistic regression to develop a model for predicting in-hospital mortality by using qSOFA, mSOFA, and residents' judgment scores. We compared the accuracy of prognostic models and residents' judgment in terms of the overall accuracy of the predicted probabilities (Brier score), discrimination (area under the ROC curve), and calibration (calibration graph). Analyses were carried out using R software version R-4.2.0. Results: In the study, 2,205 patients with median age of 64 (IQR: 50-77) years were included. There were no significant differences between the qSOFA (AUC 0.70; 95% CI: 0.67-0.73) and physician's judgment (AUC 0.68; 0.65-0.71). Despite this, the discrimination of mSOFA (AUC 0.74; 0.71-0.77) was significantly higher than that of the qSOFA and residents' judgments. Additionally, the AUC-PR of mSOFA, qSOFA, and emergency resident's judgments was 0.45 (0.43-0.47), 0.38 (0.36-0.40), and 0.35 (0.33-0.37), respectively. The mSOFA appears stronger in terms of overall performance: 0.13 vs. 0.14 and 0.15. All three models showed good calibration. Conclusion: The performance of emergency residents' judgment and the qSOFA was the same in predicting in-hospital mortality. However, the mSOFA predicted better-calibrated mortality risk. Large-scale studies should be conducted to determine the utility of these models.

Development and psychometric properties of teamwork scale in resuscitation: A sequential exploratory mixed-method study.

BACKGROUND: Non-technical skills as a complement to technical skills have become increasingly important in cardio-pulmonary resuscitation, and teamwork is one of the most prominent of these skills. Because of the limited number of tools introduced and validated for measuring teamwork in resuscitation, this study was conducted to develop and evaluate the psychometric properties of the Teamwork Scale in Resuscitation (TSR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a sequential exploratory mixed-method study and was conducted between March 2020 and April 2021 and in two phases. In the first phase (qualitative), semi-structured interviews were performed with resuscitation team members who were selected using a purposeful sampling method with maximum variation in terms of experience, level of education, age, and gender. Using directed qualitative content analysis, the data were analyzed and the primary item pool was developed. In the second phase (quantitative), assessing face, content, and construct validity as well as reliability via the internal consistency and stability, the psychometric properties of the instrument are evaluated. RESULTS: The initial tool consisted of 54 items; after assessing the face validity, ten items were removed during content validity, and the final tool consisted of 44 items and three main categories including the essential prerequisites for resuscitation, leadership, and teamwork, which was scored based on a 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The convergent validity and concurrent validity of the tool were confirmed. The reliability of the instrument was also confirmed using Cronbach's alpha test and re-test and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) between raters. CONCLUSION: The validity and reliability of TSR for measuring teamwork in resuscitation in a simulated environment are approved. Further studies are suggested for different contexts of resuscitation and with trained raters to evaluate its use in real resuscitation situations.

Investigating the psychological effects of home quarantine during the early peaks of the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey from Iran.

We assessed psychological symptoms among individuals who were quarantined during early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) peaks. This cross-sectional study was performed during April-October 2020 in Iran. We surveyed 100 individuals with COVID-19 patients in their families and 100 others with health conditions associated with a higher risk of developing critical forms of COVID-19 infection, who have completed at least 14 days of home quarantine. Validated Persian versions of the 21-item Depression, Anxiety, and Stress and 22-item Impact of Event Scale-Revised were used to measure the symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress and distress. The rates of stress, anxiety, depression and quarantine-related distress were 46.5, 48.5, 57.0 and 80.5%, respectively; however, they were not significantly different between the contact and no-contact groups. Female sex and being unemployed were significantly associated with quarantine-related distress, P = 0.007 and P = 0.018, respectively. Independent risk factors for anxiety were a history of medical comorbidity ( P = 0.025) and contact with COVID-19 patients ( P = 0.007). Findings show high prevalence rates of psychological symptoms among quarantined individuals, regardless of whether they had contact with COVID-19 patients or not. Female sex and unemployment were risk factors for quarantine-related distress.

Comparing the Emergency Medicine Residency Programs in Iran and around the World; a Descriptive Study.

Introduction: To identify the strengths and weaknesses of emergency medicine residency curriculum in Iran, and to benefit from the experiences of successful universities, comparative studies are crucial. This study compared the components of the national curriculum of emergency medicine in the United States, Canada, the European Union, Australia, and Saudi Arabia with Iran. Method: Data for this research was collected by searching the websites of different universities and also contacting them for requesting curriculums. The leading countries in emergency medicine and one of the countries in the Middle East region (Saudi Arabia) along with the World Federation of Emergency Medicine were selected as the sample. The model used in this field is a range model that identifies four stages of description, interpretation, proximity, and comparison in comparative studies. Results: In the curriculum of the United States, Canada, the European Union, Australia, and Saudi Arabia, there were lots of similarities in expressing the general characteristics of the curriculum, mission elements, vision, values, and ​beliefs of the discipline, educational strategy, techniques, expected competencies, rotation programs, and evaluation method, which were also similar to the Iranian curriculum. However, the duration of residency for emergency medicine in Iran is three years, which is shorter than other countries. As expected, the number and duration of rotations are less than other countries. Also, the process of entering into this field is different in Iran and is based on an exam for entrance, while most other countries use self-requested residency program. Conclusion: Considering the results of comparing the Iranian curriculum with the curriculums of the United States, Canada, the European Union, Australia, and Saudi Arabia, it seems that Iran's program is comprehensive and complete; but, a reappraisal of the course duration and entering options are necessary to eliminate or improve the inadequacies.

Resuscitation Team Members 'Experiences of Teamwork: A Qualitative Study.

Background: Despite the obvious importance of teamwork in emergency care, the dimensions of teamwork in resuscitation remain a subject of debate among specialists and researchers. The aim of this study was to identify the dimensions of teamwork based on the experiences of members of the resuscitation team. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted between March 2020 and April 2021. By purposive sampling, participants were selected. Sixteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with experienced emergency nurses and emergency medicine residents individually and analysed through deductive content analysis by using the Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS) model. Interviews were encoded for analysis using MAXQDA software (version 2020). Results: Three main categories were identified around teamwork in resuscitation. These categories were as follows (1) leadership, (2) teamwork, and (3) essential prerequisites for resuscitation. The main leadership category consisted of three sub-categories of time management, resource allocation, and task management. From sub-categories, situation monitoring, communication, and mutual support, the main category of teamwork emerged. Also, the emerging category of essential prerequisites for regeneration included two generic categories: professional requirements and workplace requirements and the teamwork category included situation monitoring, communication, and mutual support. Conclusions: Based on the experiences of the resuscitation team members, leadership, teamwork, and essential prerequisites for resuscitation are the most important dimensions of teamwork in resuscitation. Recognizing the dimensions of teamwork in resuscitation is an initial step and then should be reflected in educational programs and future guidelines.

Elements of Teamwork in Resuscitation: An Integrative Review.

Objective: To identify the elements of teamwork in resuscitation, an integrative review and synthesize current primary studies conducted. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase, as well as Google Scholar search engine were searched from November 2015 to March 2020 to review previously published peer-reviewed studies. Out of the 5495 articles, 16 were finally included in the study. Search strategy implemented with these keywords (in the title/abstract) were (team* AND CPR) or (team* AND resuscitation). Six descriptive criteria was performed by using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline to analyze the articles and a modified version of Cooper's five-stage method. Results: Sixteen studies were included in this research. Twenty elements related to teamwork in resuscitation were identified by using data synthesis, then classified into four categories includes team interaction elements, leadership skills, individual elements and environmental elements. Communication, leadership, situation awareness and scene organization had the highest frequency of reviewed articles 10, 5, 4, 4, respectively. Conclusion: The interactions between resuscitation team members and the skills of the leader and team members along with environmental elements had attracted the most attention of researchers by focusing on teamwork in resuscitation. Due to the limited number of articles related to this subject, more research is needed to reveal all the key elements of teamwork in resuscitation.

Mesenchymal stromal cell therapy for COVID-19-induced ARDS patients: a successful phase 1, control-placebo group, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is the devastating complication of the new COVID-19 pandemic, directly correlated with releasing large amounts of inflammatory cytokines. Due to their immunoregulatory features, mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) provide a promising approach against this disease. In this regard, this study was designed as a single-center, open-label, phase 1 clinical trial with a control group to examine the safety and explore the possible potency of three injections of umbilical cord-derived MSCs (UC-MSCs) in mild-moderate COVID-19-induced ARDS patients. METHODS: Twenty confirmed COVID-19 patients with mild-to-moderate ARDS degree entered the study and were divided into two groups: control group (standard care) and intervention group (standard care + UC-MSCs). The patients received three intravenous infusions of UC-MSCs (1 × [Formula: see text] cells/kg BW per injection) every other day. Respiratory markers, CRP levels and specific serum cytokines were assessed four times (days of 0, 5, 10 and 17) during the 17-day follow-up period. RESULTS: During the study, there were no serious adverse effects after cell transplantations. Besides, significant improvement in SPO2/FIO2 ratio and serum CRP levels was observed. On the other hand, a significant decrease (P < 0.05) in serum cytokine levels of IL-6, IFN-g, TNF-α, IL-17 A and a significant increase in serum cytokine levels of TGF-B, IL-1B and IL-10 were observed. Also, no significant changes were observed in CT scan images of patients during the study period. CONCLUSION: Our obtained results demonstrated that multiple intravenous transplantations of allogenic UC-MSCs in non-severe COVID-19-induced ARDS patients are a safe procedure. In addition, this intervention is a hopeful approach to decline cytokine storm and recover respiratory functions. Indeed, more clinical trials with larger sample sizes are required to confirm these results. Trial registration This clinical trial was registered with the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (ID: IRCT20160809029275N1 at 2020.05.30).

An 18-Month Epidemiologic Survey of 3364 Deceased COVID-19 Cases; a Retrospective Cross-sectional Study.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has been considered an international problem. This study aimed to survey the demographic and clinical characteristics of the deceased COVID-19 patients. Methods: The present cross-sectional study was performed on all deceased COVID-19 patients who died in Imam Reza Hospital, Mashhad, Iran, from March 20, 2020, to September 23, 2021. Their data, including age, gender, complaints, and clinical symptoms at the time of admission, as well as information at the time of death (hour, shift, holiday/non-holiday) were analyzed and reported. Results: 3364 deaths due to COVID-19 have been registered during the study period (60.46% male). The patients' mean age was 66.99±16.97 (range: 1-101) years (92.7% of them were Iranian). The mortality at night shifts was less than day shifts (1643 vs. 1721). The average amount of deaths/day on holidays and workdays was (5.63 vs. 6.24). The number of deaths varied during the various hours of the day and night. Diabetes and cardiovascular diseases were the most common confounding factors, which were observed in 22.44% and 15.36% of the cases, respectively. Conclusion: Based on the findings of this series, COVID-19 mortality was frequently observed in male patients, those with the mean age of 66.99 years, morning shifts, and workdays.

Specific Clinical and Immunological Changes Following Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation in COVID-19-induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Patients: A Phase-I Clinical Trial.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a systemic inflammation resulting from immune system overactivity. ARDS is also a fatal complication of COVID-19. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have immune modulatory properties. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of three times transplantation of umbilical cord-derived MSCs (UC-MSCs) in terms of specific immunological and clinical changes in mild-to-moderate COVID-19-induced ARDS patients. In this single-center, open-label, phase 1 clinical trial, 20 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and mild-to-moderate ARDS were included and were divided into two groups: a control group receiving standard care and an intervention group receiving UC-MSC in addition to standard care. Three consecutive intravenous transplants of UC-MSC (1×  cells/kg body weight per each transplant) were performed in the intervention group on days 1, 3, and 5. The biological assay was investigated four times (days 0, 5, 10, and 17). UC-MSCs improved the patients' clinical and paraclinical parameters, including leukocytosis, lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia, and liver enzyme abnormalities compared to the control group. They also decreased pro-inflammatory lymphocytes (TH1 and TH17) and increased anti-inflammatory T lymphocytes. Cell therapy also reduced the mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) in overactivated CD8+ T cells.  These findings show that three UC-MSC injections could regulate a hyperactivated immune system in COVID-19-induced ARDS patients by decreasing the inflammatory T lymphocyte subset and can improve the patient's hematological condition and liver function. However, more studies are needed in this area.

Oral nano-curcumin formulation efficacy in the management of mild to moderate outpatient COVID-19: A randomized triple-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Curcumin, a natural polyphenolic compound, is proposed as a potential treatment option for patients with coronavirus disease by inhibiting the entry of virus to the cell, encapsulation of the virus and viral protease, as well as modulating various cellular signaling pathways. In this study, the efficacy and safety of nanocurcumin oral formulation has been evaluated in patients with mild-moderate Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in outpatient setting. METHODS: In this triple-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial, sixty mild to moderate COVID-19 patients in outpatient setting who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were randomly allocated to treatment (n = 30) group to receive oral nanocurcumin formulation (Sinacurcumin soft gel which contains 40 mg curcuminoids as nanomicelles), two soft gels twice a day after food for 2 weeks or placebo (n = 30) group. Patients' symptoms and laboratory data were assessed at baseline and during follow-up period and compared between two groups. RESULTS: All symptoms except sore throat resolved faster in the treatment group and the difference was significant for chills, cough and smell and taste disturbances. The CRP serum level was lower in the treatment group at the end of two weeks and the lymphocyte count was significantly higher in treatment group. No significant adverse reaction reported in the treatment group. CONCLUSION: Oral nanoformulation of curcumin can significantly improve recovery time in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 in outpatient setting. Further studies with larger sample size are recommended.

Internal validation and comparison of the prognostic performance of models based on six emergency scoring systems to predict in-hospital mortality in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Medical scoring systems are potentially useful to make optimal use of available resources. A variety of models have been developed for illness measurement and stratification of patients in Emergency Departments (EDs). This study was aimed to compare the predictive performance of the following six scoring systems: Simple Clinical Score (SCS), Worthing physiological Score (WPS), Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS), Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and Routine Laboratory Data (RLD) to predict in-hospital mortality. METHODS: A prospective single-center observational study was conducted from March 2016 to March 2017 in Edalatian ED in Emam Reza Hospital, located in the northeast of Iran. All variables needed to calculate the models were recorded at the time of admission and logistic regression was used to develop the models' prediction probabilities. The Area Under the Curve for Receiver Operating Characteristic (AUC-ROC) and Precision-Recall curves (AUC-PR), Brier Score (BS), and calibration plots were used to assess the models' performance. Internal validation was obtained by 1000 bootstrap samples. Pairwise comparison of AUC-ROC was based on the DeLong test. RESULTS: A total of 2205 patients participated in this study with a mean age of 61.8 ± 18.5 years. About 19% of the patients died in the hospital. Approximately 53% of the participants were male. The discrimination ability of SCS, WPS, RAPS, REMS, MEWS, and RLD methods were 0.714, 0.727, 0.661, 0.678, 0.698, and 0.656, respectively. Additionally, the AUC-PR of SCS, WPS, RAPS, REMS, EWS, and RLD were 0.39, 0.42, 0.35, 0.34, 0.36, and 0.33 respectively. Moreover, BS was 0.1459 for SCS, 0.1713 for WPS, 0.0908 for RAPS, 0.1044 for REMS, 0.1158 for MEWS, and 0.073 for RLD. Results of pairwise comparison which was performed for all models revealed that there was no significant difference between the SCS and WPS. The calibration plots demonstrated a relatively good concordance between the actual and predicted probability of non-survival for the SCS and WPS models. CONCLUSION: Both SCS and WPS demonstrated fair discrimination and good calibration, which were superior to the other models. Further recalibration is however still required to improve the predictive performance of all available models and their use in clinical practice is still unwarranted.

Are mesenchymal stem cells able to manage cytokine storm in COVID-19 patients? A review of recent studies.

The Covid-19 disease has recently become one of the biggest challenges globally, and there is still no specific medication. Findings showed the immune system in severe Covid-19 patients loses regulatory control of pro-inflammatory cytokines, especially IL-6 production, called the "Cytokine storm" process. This process can cause injury to vital organs, including lungs, kidneys, liver, and ultimately death if not inhibited. While many treatments have been proposed to reduce cytokine storm, but the safety and effectiveness of each of them are still in doubt. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are multipotent cells with self-renewal potential capable of suppressing overactive immune responses and leading to tissue restoration and repair. These immuno-modulatory properties of MSCs and their derivatives (like exosomes) can improve the condition of Covid-19 patients with serious infectious symptoms caused by adaptive immune system dysfunction. Many clinical trials have been conducted in this field using various MSCs around the world. Some of these have been published and summarized in the present article, while many have not yet been completed. Based on these available data, MSCs can reduce inflammatory cytokines, increase oxygen saturation, regenerate lung tissue and improve clinical symptoms in Covid-19 patients. The review article aims to collect available clinical data in more detail and investigate the role of MSCs in reducing cytokine storms as well as improving clinical parameters of Covid-19 patients for use in future clinical studies.

Prognostic utilization of models based on the APACHE II, APACHE IV, and SAPS II scores for predicting in-hospital mortality in emergency department.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to evaluate and compare the prognostic value of the APACHE II, APACHE IV, and SAPSII scores for predicting in-hospital mortality in the ED on a large sample of patients. Earlier studies in the ED setting have either used a small sample or focused on specific diagnoses. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted to include patients with higher risk of mortality from March 2016 to March 2017 in the ED of Emam Reza Hospital, northeast of Iran. Logistic regression was used to develop three models. Evaluation was performed in terms of the overall performance (Brier Score, BS, and Brier Skill Score, BSS), discrimination (Area Under the Curve, AUC), and calibration (calibration graph). RESULTS: A total of 2205 patients met the study criteria (53% male and median age of 64, IQR: 50-77). In-hospital mortality amounted to 19%. For APACHE II, APACHE IV, and SAPS II the BS was 0.132, 0.125 and 0.133 and the BSS was 0.156, 0.2, and 0.144, respectively. The AUC was 0.755 (0.74 to 0.779) for APACHE II, 0.794 (0.775 to 0.818) for APACHE IV, and 0.751 (0.727 to 0.776) for SAPS II. The APACHE IV showed significantly greater AUC in comparison to the APACHE II and SAPS II. The graphical evaluation revealed good calibration of the APACHE IV model. CONCLUSION: APACHEIV outperformed APACHEII and SAPSII in terms of discrimination and calibration. More validation is needed for using these models for decision-making about individual patients, although they would perform best at a cohort level.

Ocular Manifestations of Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 in Northeast of Iran.

PURPOSE: To evaluate ocular findings in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the Northeast of Iran. METHODS: In a cross-sectional, observational study all consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis at the central referral center of these patients in northeast of Iran were included. Ocular examinations (external and slit) were randomly performed for the patients who were admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and six COVID wards of the hospital. Moreover, Chart records and serum chemistry results were collected. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients with the mean age of 62.6 ± 15 years (range: 23-96 years) and almost equal gender distribution (male: N = 77, 54.2%) were included in the study. During the initial external examination by the ophthalmologist, 44 (31%) patients were found to have conjunctival hyperemia and 22 (15.5%) patients had chemosis. Consecutive slit examination showed 41 (28.9%) conjunctival hyperemia, 22 (15.5%) chemosis, 11 (7.7%) cataract, and 9 (6.3%) diabetic retinopathy. The patients with at least one ocular manifestation had significantly higher blood urea levels at the time of admission compared to those with no obvious ocular involvement (median: 41.5, IQR: 28-66.3 vs. median: 33, IQR: 23.8-51.8, P = .023). Moreover, a significant difference was observed in the total white blood cell count, lymphocyte percent, neutrophil count, Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR), and blood urea level between patients with positive and negative Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 virus. None of the patients reported ocular symptoms prior to systemic involvement. The proportion of patients with at least one ocular manifestation was significantly higher in those admitted in the ICU compared to the non-ICU wards. wards. While conjunctival hyperemia was the most prevalent ocular finding in all patients, chemosis was the most common ocular manifestation in ICU admitted patients. CONCLUSION: Ocular manifestation was observed in more than half of our COVID-19 patients. Hence, it seems important to involve ophthalmologist in the diagnosis and management of these patients.

The Effects of Using Checklists on Electrocardiogram Interpretation: A Cross- Sectional Study on Medical Interns.

INTRODUCTION: Electrocardiogram (ECG), behind medical examination, is the easiest way to check the heart diseases, especially in an emergency department. Although the acquisition of Terrace from patients in the right method does not require a high level of expertise, the interpretation of this Terrace needs adequate knowledge, proficiency, and experience. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of using the checklist in the ECG interpretation by medical interns. METHODS: The present cross-section descriptive study was carried out on medical interns of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences in 2015. 40 students who were attending a one-month emergency medicine course were randomly divided into two groups of 20. In one group, 9 standard tracings classified with equal difficulty level (easy, medium, and hard) with a standard checklist form and a questionnaire for each were completed and in the other group, the same tracings of the first group were first handed without checklists and then handed with checklists for the second time. Finally, the scores of completing the checklists and the correctness of tracing interpretations were recorded in both groups. Data analysis was done using descriptive and inferential statistical tests. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of baseline variables. The first group identified 41.6% of the terraces correctly using the checklist. The second group, without using the checklist, correctly identified 25.5% of the terraces; and after using the checklist, this indicator increased to 32.7% in this group. Considering at least three correct responses in the ECG interpretation as "desirable response", it was found that 50% of the subjects in the first group (using the checklist) (n=10) and only 15% (n=3) of the second group (without using the checklist) had desirable responses (p = 0.531). On the other hand, the comparison of responses before and after the use of the checklist in the second group showed a significant improvement in the number of desirable responses (15% (n=3) versus 25% (n=5), p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: The use of a checklist for the ECG interpretation by interns of emergency medicine did not affect improving the accuracy of the interpretation than the object-oriented system, but was effective in the diagnostic review and confirmation step.

Predictive performance of the SOFA and mSOFA scoring systems for predicting in-hospital mortality in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and modified SOFA (mSOFA) are risk stratification systems which incorporate respiratory, coagulatory, liver, cardiovascular, renal, and neurologic systems to quantify the overall severity of acute disorder in the intensive care unit. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic performance of the SOFA and mSOFA scores at arrival for predicting in-hospital mortality in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: All adult patients with an Emergency Severity Index (ESI) of 1-3 in the ED of Imam Reza Hospital, northeast of Iran were included from March 2016 to March 2017. The predictive performance of the SOFA or mSOFA scores were expressed in terms of accuracy (Brier Score, BS and Brier Skill Score, BSS), discrimination (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve, AUC), and calibration. RESULTS: A total of 2205 patients (mean age 61.8 ±â€¯18.5 years, 53% male) were included. The overall in-hospital mortality was 19%. For SOFA and mSOFA the BS was 0.209 and 0.192 and the BSS was 0.11 and 0.09, respectively. The estimated AUCs of SOFA and mSOFA models were 0.751 and 0.739, respectively. No significant difference was observed between the AUCs (P = 0.186). The Hosmer-Lemeshow test did not show that the predictions deviated from the true probabilities. Also, the calibration plots revealed good agreement between the actual and predicted probabilities. CONCLUSION: The SOFA and mSOFA scores demonstrated fair discrimination and good calibration in predicting in-hospital mortality when applied to ED. However, further external validation studies are needed before their use in routine clinical care.