Dataset Information

Treatments, resource utilization, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients presenting to emergency departments across pandemic waves: an observational study by the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN).

ABSTRACT:

Background

Treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) evolved between pandemic waves. Our objective was to compare treatments, acute care utilization, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients presenting to emergency departments (ED) across pandemic waves.

Methods

This observational study enrolled consecutive eligible COVID-19 patients presenting to 46 EDs participating in the Canadian COVID-19 ED Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) between March 1 and December 31, 2020. We collected data by retrospective chart review. Our primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included treatments, hospital and ICU admissions, ED revisits and readmissions. Logistic regression modeling assessed the impact of pandemic wave on outcomes.

Results

We enrolled 9,967 patients in 8 provinces, 3,336 from the first and 6,631 from the second wave. Patients in the second wave were younger, fewer met criteria for severe COVID-19, and more were discharged from the ED. Adjusted for patient characteristics and disease severity, steroid use increased (odds ratio [OR] 7.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.2-8.9), and invasive mechanical ventilation decreased (OR 0.5; 95% CI 0.4-0.7) in the second wave compared to the first. After adjusting for differences in patient characteristics and disease severity, the odds of hospitalization (OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-0.8) and critical care admission (OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-0.9) decreased, while mortality remained unchanged (OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.5-1.1).

Interpretation

In patients presenting to cute care facilities, we observed rapid uptake of evidence-based therapies and less use of experimental therapies in the second wave. We observed increased rates of ED discharges and lower hospital and critical care resource use over time. Substantial reductions in mechanical ventilation were not associated with increasing mortality. Advances in treatment strategies created health system efficiencies without compromising patient outcomes.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04702945.

SUBMITTER: Hohl CM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8972682 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Treatments, resource utilization, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients presenting to emergency departments across pandemic waves: an observational study by the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN).

Hohl Corinne M CM Rosychuk Rhonda J RJ Hau Jeffrey P JP Hayward Jake J Landes Megan M Yan Justin W JW Ting Daniel K DK Welsford Michelle M Archambault Patrick M PM Mercier Eric E Chandra Kavish K Davis Philip P Vaillancourt Samuel S Leeies Murdoch M Small Serena S Morrison Laurie J LJ

CJEM 20220401 4

<h4>Background</h4>Treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) evolved between pandemic waves. Our objective was to compare treatments, acute care utilization, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients presenting to emergency departments (ED) across pandemic waves.<h4>Methods</h4>This observational study enrolled consecutive eligible COVID-19 patients presenting to 46 EDs participating in the Canadian COVID-19 ED Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) between March 1 and December 31, 2020. We collected ...[more]

PMID: 35362857

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPredicting mortality from COVID-19 using information available when patients present to the emergency department can inform goals-of-care decisions and assist with ethical allocation of critical care resources. The study objective was to develop and validate a clinical score to predict emergency department and in-hospital mortality among consecutive nonpalliative patients with COVID-19; in this study, we define palliative patients as those who do not want resuscitative measures, such as intubation, intensive care unit care or cardiopulmonary resuscitation.MethodsThis derivation and validation study used observational cohort data recruited from 46 hospitals in 8 Canadian provinces participating in the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN). We included adult (age ≥ 18 yr) nonpalliative patients with confirmed COVID-19 who presented to the emergency department of a participating site between Mar. 1, 2020, and Jan. 31, 2021. We randomly assigned hospitals to derivation or validation, and prespecified clinical variables as candidate predictors. We used logistic regression to develop the score in a derivation cohort and examined its performance in predicting emergency department and in-hospital mortality in a validation cohort.ResultsOf 8761 eligible patients, 618 (7.0%) died. The CCEDRRN COVID-19 Mortality Score included age, sex, type of residence, arrival mode, chest pain, severe liver disease, respiratory rate and level of respiratory support. The area under the curve was 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.93) in derivation and 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.93) in validation. The score had excellent calibration. These results suggest that scores of 6 or less would categorize patients as being at low risk for in-hospital death, with a negative predictive value of 99.9%. Patients in the low-risk group had an in-hospital mortality rate of 0.1%. Patients with a score of 15 or higher had an observed mortality rate of 81.0%.InterpretationThe CCEDRRN COVID-19 Mortality Score is a simple score that can be used for level-of-care discussions with patients and in situations of critical care resource constraints to accurately predict death using variables available on emergency department arrival. The score was derived and validated mostly in unvaccinated patients, and before variants of concern were circulating widely and newer treatment regimens implemented in Canada.Study registrationClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04702945.

Project description:ObjectiveThe risk of occupational exposure during endotracheal intubation has required the global Emergency Medicine (EM), Anesthesia, and Critical Care communities to institute new COVID- protected intubation guidelines, checklists, and protocols. This survey aimed to deepen the understanding of the changes in intubation practices across Canada by evaluating the pre-COVID-19, early-COVID-19, and present-day periods, elucidating facilitators and barriers to implementation, and understanding provider impressions of the effectiveness and safety of the changes made.MethodsWe conducted an electronic, self-administered, cross-sectional survey of EM physician site leads within the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) to characterize and compare airway management practices in the pre-COVID-19, early-COVID-19, and present-day periods. Ethics approval for this study was obtained from the University of Manitoba Health Research Ethics Board. The electronic platform SurveyMonkey ( www.surveymonkey.com ) was used to collect and store survey tool responses. Categorical item responses, including the primary outcome, are reported as numbers and proportions. Variations in intubation practices over time were evaluated through mixed-effects logistic regression models.ResultsInvitations were sent to 33 emergency department (ED) physician site leads in the CCEDRRN. We collected 27 survey responses, 4 were excluded, and 23 analysed. Responses were collected in English (87%) and French (13%), from across Canada and included mainly physicians practicing in mainly Academic and tertiary sites (83%). All respondents reported that the intubation protocols used in their EDs changed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (100%, n = 23, 95% CI 0.86-1.00).ConclusionsThis study provides a novel summary of changes to airway management practices in response to the evolving COVID-19 pandemic in Canada. Information from this study could help inform a consensus on safe and effective emergent intubation of persons with communicable respiratory infections in the future.

Project description:ObjectivesTo develop and validate a clinical risk score that can accurately quantify the probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients presenting to an emergency department without the need for laboratory testing.DesignCohort study of participants in the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) registry. Regression models were fitted to predict a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result using clinical and demographic predictors, as well as an indicator of local SARS-CoV-2 incidence.Setting32 emergency departments in eight Canadian provinces.Participants27 665 consecutively enrolled patients who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 in participating emergency departments between 1 March and 30 October 2020.Main outcome measuresPositive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test result within 14 days of an index emergency department encounter for suspected COVID-19 disease.ResultsWe derived a 10-item CCEDRRN COVID-19 Infection Score using data from 21 743 patients. This score included variables from history and physical examination and an indicator of local disease incidence. The score had a c-statistic of 0.838 with excellent calibration. We externally validated the rule in 5295 patients. The score maintained excellent discrimination and calibration and had superior performance compared with another previously published risk score. Score cut-offs were identified that can rule-in or rule-out SARS-CoV-2 infection without the need for nucleic acid testing with 97.4% sensitivity (95% CI 96.4 to 98.3) and 95.9% specificity (95% CI 95.5 to 96.0).ConclusionsThe CCEDRRN COVID-19 Infection Score uses clinical characteristics and publicly available indicators of disease incidence to quantify a patient's probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The score can identify patients at sufficiently high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection to warrant isolation and empirical therapy prior to test confirmation while also identifying patients at sufficiently low risk of infection that they may not need testing.Trial registration numberNCT04702945.

Project description:ObjectiveIntubation practices changed during the COVID-19 pandemic to protect healthcare workers from transmission of disease. Our objectives were to describe intubation characteristics and outcomes for patients tested for SARS CoV-2 infection. We compared outcomes between patients testing SARS COV-2 positive with those testing negative.MethodsWe conducted a health records review using the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) registry. We included consecutive eligible patients who presented to one of 47 EDs across Canada between March 1, 2020 and June 20, 2021, were tested for SARS-CoV-2 and intubated in the ED. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients experiencing a post-intubation adverse event during the ED stay. Secondary outcomes included first-pass success, intubation practices, and hospital mortality. We used descriptive statistics to summarize variables with subgroup differences examined using t tests, z tests, or chi-squared tests where appropriate with 95% CIs.ResultsOf 1720 patients with suspected COVID-19 who were intubated in the ED during the study period, 337 (19.6%) tested SARS-CoV-2 positive and 1383 (80.4%) SARS-CoV-2 negative. SARS-CoV-2 positive patients presented to hospital with lower oxygen levels than SARS-CoV-2 negative patients (mean pulse oximeter SaO2 86 vs 94%, p < 0.001). In total, 8.5% of patients experienced an adverse event post-intubation. More patients in the SARS-CoV-2 positive subgroup experienced post-intubation hypoxemia (4.5 vs 2.2%, p = 0.019). In-hospital mortality was greater for patients who experienced intubation-related adverse events (43.2 vs 33.2%, p = 0.018). There was no significant difference in adverse event-associated mortality by SARS-CoV-2 status. First-pass success was achieved in 92.4% of all intubations, with no difference by SARS-CoV-2 status.ConclusionsDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed a low risk of adverse events associated with intubation, even though hypoxemia was common in patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2. We observed high rates of first-pass success and low rates of inability to intubate. The limited number of adverse events precluded multivariate adjustments. Study findings should reassure emergency medicine practitioners that system modifications made to intubation processes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic do not appear to be associated with worse outcomes compared to pre-COVID-19 practices.

Project description:IntroductionDuring the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic, there were substantial changes in United States (U.S.) emergency department (ED) volumes and acuity of patient presentation compared to more recent years. Thus, the purpose of this study was to characterize the incidence of specific upper extremity (UE) injuries presenting to U.S. EDs during the COVID-19 pandemic and analyze trends across age groups and rates of hospital admission compared to years prior.MethodsThe National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) database was queried to identify patients who presented to U.S. EDs for an UE orthopaedic injury between 2016 and 2020. Chi-square analysis and logistic regression were used to assess for differences in ED presentation volume and hospital admissions between pre-pandemic (2016 through 2019) and during-pandemic (2020) times.ResultsThese queries returned 285,583 cases, representing a total estimate of 10,452,166 injuries presenting to EDs across the U.S. The mean incidence of UE orthopaedic injuries was 640.2 (95% CI, 638.2-642.3) injuries per 100,000 person-years, with the greatest year to year decrease in incidence occurring between 2019 and 2020 (20.1%). The largest number of estimated admissions occurred in 2020, with a total 135,018 admissions (95% CI, 131,518-138,517), a 41.6% increase from the average number of admissions between 2016 and 2019.ConclusionThere was a 20.1% decrease in the incidence of UE orthopaedic injuries presenting to EDs after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic with a concomitant 41.2% increase in the number of hospital admissions from the ED in 2020 compared to recent pre-pandemic years. We speculate that at least some elective, semi-elective or urgent ambulatory surgeries were canceled or delayed due to the pandemic and were subsequently directed to the ED for admission. Regardless of the cause of increased UE orthopaedic admissions, policy planners and administrators should be aware of the additional stresses placed on already burdened ED and inpatient services.Level of evidenceLevel III - Retrospective Cohort Study.

Project description:IntroductionAs the COVID-19 pandemic unfolded, emergency departments (EDs) across the world braced for surges in volume and demand. However, many EDs experienced decreased demand even for higher acuity illnesses. In this study we sought to examine the change in utilization at a large Canadian community ED, including changes in patient demographics and presentations, as well as structural and administrative changes made in response to the pandemic.MethodsThis retrospective observational study took place in Ontario, Canada, from March 17-June 30, 2020, during province-wide lockdowns in response to COVID-19. We used a control period of March 17-June 30 in 2018-2019. Differences between observed and expected values were calculated for total visits, Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) groups, and age groups using Fisher's exact test. Length of stay (LOS), physician initial assessment time (PIA), and top primary and admission diagnoses were also examined.ResultsPatient visits fell to 66.3% of expected volume in the exposure period (20,901 vs 31,525, P<0.0001). CTAS-1 (highest acuity) patient volumes dropped to 86.8% of expected (P = 0.1964) while CTAS-5 (lowest acuity) patient volumes dropped to 32.4% of expected (P <0.0001). Youth (0-17), adult (18-64), and senior (65+) visits all decreased to 37.4%, 71.7%, and 72.9% of expected volumes, respectively (P <0.0001). Median PIA and median ED LOS both decreased (1.1 to 0.6 hours and 3.3 to 3.0 hours, respectively). The most common primary diagnosis in both periods was "other chest pain." Viral syndromes were more prevalent in the exposure period. The top admission diagnoses were congestive heart failure in the control period (4.8%) and COVID-19 in the study period (3.5%).ConclusionED utilization changed drastically during COVID-19. Our ED responded with wide stakeholder engagement, spatial reorganization, and human resources changes informed by real-time data. Our experiences can help prepare for potential subsequent "waves" of COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Dataset Information

Treatments, resource utilization, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients presenting to emergency departments across pandemic waves: an observational study by the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN).

Background

Methods

Results

Interpretation

Trial registration

Publications

Treatments, resource utilization, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients presenting to emergency departments across pandemic waves: an observational study by the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets