Safety of treating acute pulmonary embolism at home: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Home treatment is considered safe in acute pulmonary embolism (PE) patients selected by a validated triage tool (e.g. simplified PE severity index score or Hestia rule), but there is uncertainty regarding the applicability in underrepresented subgroups. The aim was to evaluate the safety of home treatment by performing an individual patient-level data meta-analysis. METHODS: Ten prospective cohort studies or randomized controlled trials were identified in a systematic search, totalling 2694 PE patients treated at home (discharged within 24 h) and identified by a predefined triage tool. The 14- and 30-day incidences of all-cause mortality and adverse events (combined endpoint of recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and/or all-cause mortality) were evaluated. The relative risk (RR) for 14- and 30-day mortalities and adverse events is calculated in subgroups using a random effects model. RESULTS: The 14- and 30-day mortalities were 0.11% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.0-0.24, I2 = 0) and 0.30% (95% CI 0.09-0.51, I2 = 0). The 14- and 30-day incidences of adverse events were 0.56% (95% CI 0.28-0.84, I2 = 0) and 1.2% (95% CI 0.79-1.6, I2 = 0). Cancer was associated with increased 30-day mortality [RR 4.9; 95% prediction interval (PI) 2.7-9.1; I2 = 0]. Pre-existing cardiopulmonary disease, abnormal troponin, and abnormal (N-terminal pro-)B-type natriuretic peptide [(NT-pro)BNP] at presentation were associated with an increased incidence of 14-day adverse events [RR 3.5 (95% PI 1.5-7.9, I2 = 0), 2.5 (95% PI 1.3-4.9, I2 = 0), and 3.9 (95% PI 1.6-9.8, I2 = 0), respectively], but not mortality. At 30 days, cancer, abnormal troponin, and abnormal (NT-pro)BNP were associated with an increased incidence of adverse events [RR 2.7 (95% PI 1.4-5.2, I2 = 0), 2.9 (95% PI 1.5-5.7, I2 = 0), and 3.3 (95% PI 1.6-7.1, I2 = 0), respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of adverse events in home-treated PE patients, selected by a validated triage tool, was very low. Patients with cancer had a three- to five-fold higher incidence of adverse events and death. Patients with increased troponin or (NT-pro)BNP had a three-fold higher risk of adverse events, driven by recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding.

Validation and comparison of triage-based screening strategies for sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to externally validate and compare proposed methods for stratifying sepsis risk at emergency department (ED) triage. METHODS: This nested case/control study enrolled ED patients from four hospitals in Utah and evaluated the performance of previously-published sepsis risk scores amenable to use at ED triage based on their area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC, which balances positive predictive value and sensitivity) and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC, which balances sensitivity and specificity). Score performance for predicting whether patients met Sepsis-3 criteria in the ED was compared to patients' assigned ED triage score (Canadian Triage Acuity Score [CTAS]) with adjustment for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Among 2000 case/control patients, 981 met Sepsis-3 criteria on final adjudication. The best performing sepsis risk scores were the Predict Sepsis version #3 (AUPRC 0.183, 95 % CI 0.148-0.256; AUROC 0.859, 95 % CI 0.843-0.875) and Borelli scores (AUPRC 0.127, 95 % CI 0.107-0.160, AUROC 0.845, 95 % CI 0.829-0.862), which significantly outperformed CTAS (AUPRC 0.038, 95 % CI 0.035-0.042, AUROC 0.650, 95 % CI 0.628-0.671, p < 0.001 for all AUPRC and AUROC comparisons). The Predict Sepsis and Borelli scores exhibited sensitivity of 0.670 and 0.678 and specificity of 0.902 and 0.834, respectively, at their recommended cutoff values and outperformed Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria (AUPRC 0.083, 95 % CI 0.070-0.102, p = 0.052 and p = 0.078, respectively; AUROC 0.775, 95 % CI 0.756-0.795, p < 0.001 for both scores). CONCLUSIONS: The Predict Sepsis and Borelli scores exhibited improved performance including increased specificity and positive predictive values for sepsis identification at ED triage compared to CTAS and SIRS criteria.

Concordance Between Initial Presumptive and Final Adjudicated Diagnoses of Infection Among Patients Meeting Sepsis-3 Criteria in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines emphasize rapid antibiotic treatment for sepsis, but infection presence is often uncertain at initial presentation. We investigated the incidence and drivers of false-positive presumptive infection diagnosis among emergency department (ED) patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria. METHODS: For a retrospective cohort of patients hospitalized after meeting Sepsis-3 criteria (acute organ failure and suspected infection including blood cultures drawn and intravenous antimicrobials administered) in 1 of 4 EDs from 2013 to 2017, trained reviewers first identified the ED-diagnosed source of infection and adjudicated the presence and source of infection on final assessment. Reviewers subsequently adjudicated final infection probability for a randomly selected 10% subset of subjects. Risk factors for false-positive infection diagnosis and its association with 30-day mortality were evaluated using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Of 8267 patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria in the ED, 699 (8.5%) did not have an infection on final adjudication and 1488 (18.0%) patients with confirmed infections had a different source of infection diagnosed in the ED versus final adjudication (ie, initial/final source diagnosis discordance). Among the subset of patients whose final infection probability was adjudicated (n = 812), 79 (9.7%) had only "possible" infection and 77 (9.5%) were not infected. Factors associated with false-positive infection diagnosis included hypothermia, altered mental status, comorbidity burden, and an "unknown infection source" diagnosis in the ED (odds ratio: 6.39; 95% confidence interval: 5.14-7.94). False-positive infection diagnosis was not associated with 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In this large multihospital study, <20% of ED patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria had no infection or only possible infection on retrospective adjudication.

Cost-effectiveness of managing low-risk pulmonary embolism patients without hospitalization. The low-risk pulmonary embolism prospective management study.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the cost-effectiveness and difference in length-of-stay when patients in the ED diagnosed with low-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) are managed with early discharge or observation. METHODS: Single cohort prospective management study from January 2013 to October 2016 of patients with PE diagnosed in the ED and evaluated for a primary composite endpoint of mortality, recurrent venous thromboembolism, and/or major bleeding event at 90 days. Low-risk patients had a PE Severity Index score < 86, no evidence of proximal deep vein thrombosis on venous compression ultrasonography of both lower extremities, and no evidence of right heart strain on echocardiography. Patients were managed either in the ED or in the hospital on observation status. Primary outcomes were total length of stay, total encounter costs, and 30-day costs. RESULTS: 213 patients were enrolled. 13 were excluded per the study protocol. Of the remaining 200, 122 were managed with emergency department observation (EDO) and 78 with hospital observation (HO). One patient managed with EDO met the composite outcome due to a major bleeding event on day 61. The mean length of stay for EDO was 793.4 min (SD -169.7, 95% CI:762-823) and for HO was 1170 (SD -211.4, 95% CI:1122-1218) with a difference of 376.8 (95% CI: 430-323, p < 0.0001). Total encounter mean costs for EDO were $1982.95 and $2759.59 for HO, with a difference of $776.64 (95% CI: 972-480, p > 0.0001). 30-day total mean costs for EDO were $2864.14 and $3441.52 for HO, with a difference of $577.38 (95% CI: -1372-217, p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low-risk PE managed with ED-based observation have a shorter length of stay and lower total encounter costs than patients managed with Hospital-based observation.

Effect of Antithrombotic Therapy on Clinical Outcomes in Outpatients With Clinically Stable Symptomatic COVID-19: The ACTIV-4B Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Acutely ill inpatients with COVID-19 typically receive antithrombotic therapy, although the risks and benefits of this intervention among outpatients with COVID-19 have not been established. Objective: To assess whether anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy can safely reduce major adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes among symptomatic but clinically stable outpatients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ACTIV-4B Outpatient Thrombosis Prevention Trial was designed as a minimal-contact, adaptive, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to compare anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy among 7000 symptomatic but clinically stable outpatients with COVID-19. The trial was conducted at 52 US sites between September 2020 and June 2021; final follow-up was August 5, 2021. Prior to initiating treatment, participants were required to have platelet count greater than 100 000/mm3 and estimated glomerular filtration rate greater than 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Interventions: Random allocation in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to aspirin (81 mg orally once daily; n = 164), prophylactic-dose apixaban (2.5 mg orally twice daily; n = 165), therapeutic-dose apixaban (5 mg orally twice daily; n = 164), or placebo (n = 164) for 45 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was a composite of all-cause mortality, symptomatic venous or arterial thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, or hospitalization for cardiovascular or pulmonary cause. The primary analyses for efficacy and bleeding events were limited to participants who took at least 1 dose of trial medication. Results: On June 18, 2021, the trial data and safety monitoring board recommended early termination because of lower than anticipated event rates; at that time, 657 symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 had been randomized (median age, 54 years [IQR, 46-59]; 59% women). The median times from diagnosis to randomization and from randomization to initiation of study treatment were 7 days and 3 days, respectively. Twenty-two randomized participants (3.3%) were hospitalized for COVID-19 prior to initiating treatment. Among the 558 patients who initiated treatment, the adjudicated primary composite end point occurred in 1 patient (0.7%) in the aspirin group, 1 patient (0.7%) in the 2.5-mg apixaban group, 2 patients (1.4%) in the 5-mg apixaban group, and 1 patient (0.7%) in the placebo group. The risk differences compared with placebo for the primary end point were 0.0% (95% CI not calculable) in the aspirin group, 0.7% (95% CI, -2.1% to 4.1%) in the 2.5-mg apixaban group, and 1.4% (95% CI, -1.5% to 5.0%) in the 5-mg apixaban group. Risk differences compared with placebo for bleeding events were 2.0% (95% CI, -2.7% to 6.8%), 4.5% (95% CI, -0.7% to 10.2%), and 6.9% (95% CI, 1.4% to 12.9%) among participants who initiated therapy in the aspirin, prophylactic apixaban, and therapeutic apixaban groups, respectively, although none were major. Findings inclusive of all randomized patients were similar. Conclusions and Relevance: Among symptomatic clinically stable outpatients with COVID-19, treatment with aspirin or apixaban compared with placebo did not reduce the rate of a composite clinical outcome. However, the study was terminated after enrollment of 9% of participants because of an event rate lower than anticipated. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04498273.

Patient utilization of prescription opioids after discharge from the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) visits associated with prescription opioids have increased in the last ten years. This study describes the opioid utilization of patients discharged from the ED with an opioid prescription for pain, 14 to 21 days post discharge. METHODS: This is a prospective, single-centered, survey-based observational descriptive study conducted from December 2017 to February 2018 in the ED at a tertiary level 1 trauma center. The primary outcomes were the percentage of patients with unused opioids and the quantity of opioids remaining 14 to 21 days post ED discharge. A sample of ED patients who received an oral opioid prescription were approached for informed consent and received a telephone survey 14 to 21 days post discharge. RESULTS: Of 178 patients approached for consent, 122 were enrolled. Among them, 98 were successfully surveyed (80.3%). The median number of pills prescribed was 8 (IQR:8-12). Nearly half (49%) of patients had unused opioids 14 to 21 days post ED discharge, not including 9.2% of patients who never filled their prescriptions. Of the total 980 pills prescribed, 327 pills remained unused (33.4%). Only 55.1% of patients reported receiving counseling on side effect of opioids and 21.4% of patients reported they received counseling on storage and disposal. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients in this study had unused or unfilled opioids 14 to 21 days post ED discharge, and approximately one third of the opioids prescribed remained unused. Most patients did not recall receiving opioid related education including proper disposal of medication.

Emergency Department Crowding Is Associated With Delayed Antibiotics for Sepsis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Barriers to early antibiotic administration for sepsis remain poorly understood. We investigated the association between emergency department (ED) crowding and door-to-antibiotic time in ED sepsis. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ED sepsis patients presenting to 2 community hospitals, a regional referral hospital, and a tertiary teaching hospital. The primary exposure was ED occupancy rate, defined as the ratio of registered ED patients to licensed ED beds. We defined ED overcrowding as an ED occupancy rate greater than or equal to 1. We used multivariable regression to measure the adjusted association between ED crowding and door-to-antibiotic time (elapsed time from ED arrival to first antibiotic initiation). Using Markov multistate models, we also investigated the association between ED crowding and pre-antibiotic care processes. RESULTS: Among 3,572 eligible sepsis patients, 70% arrived when the ED occupancy rate was greater than or equal to 0.5 and 14% arrived to an overcrowded ED. Median door-to-antibiotic time was 158 minutes (interquartile range 109 to 216 minutes). When the ED was overcrowded, 46% of patients received antibiotics within 3 hours of ED arrival compared with 63% when it was not (difference 14.4%; 95% confidence interval 9.7% to 19.2%). After adjustment, each 10% increase in ED occupancy rate was associated with a 4.0-minute increase (95% confidence interval 2.8 to 5.2 minutes) in door-to-antibiotic time and a decrease in the odds of antibiotic initiation within 3 hours (odds ratio 0.90; 95% confidence interval 0.88 to 0.93). Increasing ED crowding was associated with slower initial patient assessment but not further delays after the initial assessment. CONCLUSION: ED crowding was associated with increased sepsis antibiotic delay. Hospitals must devise strategies to optimize sepsis antibiotic administration during periods of ED crowding.

Practice Variation in the Diagnosis of Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Survey of US and Canadian Emergency Medicine Physicians.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) from a brain aneurysm, if untreated in the acute phase, leads to loss of functional independence in about 30% of patients and death in 27-44%. To evaluate for SAH, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Clinical Policy recommends obtaining a non-contrast brain computed tomography (CT) scan followed by a lumbar puncture (LP) if the CT is negative. On the other hand, current evidence from prospectively collected data suggests that CT alone may be sufficient to rule out SAH in patients who present within 6 h of symptom onset while anecdotal evidence suggests that CT angiogram (CTA) may be used to detect aneurysms, which are the probable cause of SAH. Since many different options are available to emergency physicians, we examined their practice pattern variation by observing their diagnostic approaches and their adherence to the ACEP Clinical Policy. METHODS: We developed, validated, and distributed a survey to emergency physicians at three practice sites: (1) Stanford Healthcare, California, (2) Intermountain Healthcare (five emergency departments), Utah, and (3) Ottawa General Hospital, Toronto. The survey questions examined physician knowledge on CT and LP's test performance and used case-based scenarios to assess diagnostic approaches, variation in practice, and adherence to guidelines. Results were presented as proportions with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Of the 216 physicians surveyed, we received 168 responses (77.8%). The responses by site were: (1) (n = 38, 23.2%), (2) (n = 70, 42.7%), (3) (n = 56, 34.1%). To the CT and LP test performance question, most physicians indicated that CT alone detects > 90% of SAH in those with a confirmed SAH [n = 150 (89.3%, 95% CI 83.6-93.5]. To the case-based questions, most physicians indicated that they would perform a CTA along with a CT [n = 110 (65.5%, 95% CI 57.8-72.6)], some indicated a LP along with a CT [n = 57, 33.9% 95% CI 26.8-41.6)], and a few indicated both a CTA and a LP [n = 16, 9.5%, 95% CI 5.5-15.0]. We also observed practice site variation in the proportion of physicians who indicated that they would use CTA: (1) (n = 25, 65.8%), (2) (n = 54, 77.1%), and (3) (n = 28, 50.0%) (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Survey responses indicate that physicians use some or all of the imaging tests, with or without LP to diagnose SAH. We observed variation in the use of CTA by site and academic setting and divergence from ACEP Clinical Policy.

Post-discharge venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized trauma patients: A retrospective comparison of patients receiving versus not receiving post-discharge prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in many trauma patients extends beyond hospitalization, but there is a paucity of evidence to guide the use of post-discharge prophylaxis (PDP). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of trauma patients deemed moderate-to-high risk for VTE (risk assessment profile score [RAP] ≥5) who were prescribed PDP based on an internal clinical guideline assessing injury pattern and mobility status. PDP patients were compared with those that did not receive post-discharge prophylaxis (NPDP). RESULTS: 1512 patients were included. PDP group had higher mean RAP score (7.3 vs. 6.4, p â€‹< â€‹0.001), more likely to have a complex orthopedic fracture and underwent a longer median hospital (4.7 vs. 2.9 days, p â€‹< â€‹0.001). No difference between groups in 90-day VTE (11 [1.5 â€‹%] (PDP) vs. 8 [1.0 â€‹%] (NPDP), p â€‹= â€‹0.50), clinically relevant bleeding (p â€‹= â€‹0.58), or readmission (p â€‹= â€‹0.46). CONCLUSIONS: VTE incidence, clinically relevant bleeding, and readmission 90-days after hospital discharge were low and similar between PDP and NPDP groups. PDP prescribed in a presumably higher VTE risk trauma population may mitigate the long-term risk of VTE.

Methods of a cluster-randomized, type II hybrid implementation effectiveness trial to prospectively assess extended-duration thromboprophylaxis for at-risk medical patients being discharged to prevent hospital-associated venous thromboembolism.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the third leading cause of preventable hospital-associated (HA) death. Most HA-VTE, including fatal pulmonary emboli, occur among medically ill patients. The rate of symptomatic VTE more than doubles over the first 21 days after hospital discharge. Trials have demonstrated that the burden of HA-VTE may be reduced with postdischarge thromboprophylaxis; however, few patients receive this therapy. We formerly validated the ability of eVTE (eVTE is the abbreviation for a risk assessment tool constituted by 2 calculations: one predicts 90-day VTE and the other predicts 30-day major bleeding derived from only elements of the complete blood count and basic metabolic panel and age) to identify medical patients being discharged with both an elevated risk of VTE and a low risk of bleeding. Objectives: Implement a cluster-randomized, stepped wedge, type II hybrid implementation/effectiveness trial generating an alert among select at-risk patients upon discharge for implementation of thrombosis chemoprophylaxis in a 23-hospital not-for-profit healthcare system. Methods: We use the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework to guide implementation and outcomes reporting. Results: The primary outcome for aim 1 (implementation) is the prescription of rivaroxaban 10 mg daily for 30 days as postdischarge thromboprophylaxis among at-risk patients. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes (effectiveness) are the 90-day composite of symptomatic VTE, myocardial infartcion, nonhemorrhagic stroke, all-cause mortality, and 30-day major bleeding. Conclusion: The eVTE trial will provide high-quality, real-world evidence on the effectiveness and safety of a pragmatic intervention to implement targeted postdischarge thromboprophylaxis using decision support embedded in the electronic health record.

Effectiveness and Safety of an Emergency Department Code Sepsis Protocol: A Pragmatic Clinical Trial.

Rationale: Sepsis care delivery-including the initiation of prompt, appropriate antimicrobials-remains suboptimal. Objectives: This study was conducted to determine direct and off-target effects of emergency department (ED) sepsis care reorganization. Methods: This pragmatic pilot trial enrolled adult patients who presented from November 2019 to February 2021 to an ED in Utah before and after implementation of a multimodal, team-based "Code Sepsis" protocol. Patients who presented to two other EDs where usual care was continued served as contemporaneous control subjects. The primary outcome was door-to-antimicrobial time among patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria before ED departure. Secondary and safety outcomes included all-cause 30-day mortality, antimicrobial utilization and overtreatment, and antimicrobial-associated adverse events. Multivariable regression analyses used difference-in-differences methods to account for trends in outcomes unrelated to the studied intervention. Results: Code Sepsis protocol activation (N = 307) exhibited 8.5% sensitivity and 66% positive predictive value for patients meeting sepsis criteria before ED departure. Among 10,151 patients who met sepsis criteria during the study, adjusted difference-in-differences analysis demonstrated a 13-minute (95% confidence interval = 7-19) decrease in door-to-antimicrobial time associated with Code Sepsis implementation (P < 0.001). Mortality and clinical safety outcomes were unchanged, but Code Sepsis implementation was associated with increased false-positive presumptive infection diagnoses among patients who met sepsis criteria in the ED and increased antimicrobial utilization. Conclusions: Implementation of a team-based protocol for rapid sepsis evaluation and treatment during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic's first year was associated with decreased ED door-to-antimicrobial time but also increased antimicrobial utilization. Measurement of both patient-centered and off-target effects of sepsis care improvement interventions is essential to comprehensive assessment of their value. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04148989).

First steps toward a BIG change: A pilot study to implement the Brain Injury Guidelines across a 24-hospital system.

INTRODUCTION: The modified Brain Injury Guidelines (mBIG) support a subset of low-risk patients to be managed without repeat head computed tomography (RHCT), neurosurgical consult (NSC), or hospital transfer/admission. This pilot aimed to assess mBIG implementation at a single facility to inform future systemwide implementation. METHODS: Single cohort pilot trial at a level I trauma center, December 2021-August 2022. Adult patients included if tICH meeting BIG 1 or 2 criteria. BIG 3 patients excluded. RESULTS: No patients required neurosurgical intervention. 72 RHCT and 83 NSC were prevented. 21 isolated BIG 1 were safely discharged home from the ED. No hospital readmissions for tICH. Protocol adherence rate was 92%. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the mBIG at a single trauma center is feasible and optimizes resource utilization. This pilot study will inform an implementation trial of the mBIG across a 24-hospital integrated health system.

GlideScope versus flexible fiber optic for awake upright laryngoscopy.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: We compare laryngoscopic quality and time to highest-grade view between a face-to-face approach with the GlideScope and traditional flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy in awake, upright volunteers. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover study in which we performed awake laryngoscopy under local anesthesia on 23 healthy volunteers, using both a GlideScope video laryngoscopy face-to-face technique with the blade held upside down and flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy. Operator reports of Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic views and video-reviewed time to highest-grade view, as well as number of attempts, were recorded. RESULTS: Ten women and 13 men participated. A grade II or better view was obtained with GlideScope video laryngoscopy in 22 of 23 (95.6%) participants and in 23 of 23 (100%) participants with flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy (relative risk GlideScope video laryngoscopy versus flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy 0.96; 95% confidence interval 0.88 to 1.04). Median time to highest-grade view for GlideScope video laryngoscopy was 16 seconds (interquartile range 9 to 34) versus 51 seconds (interquartile range 35 to 96) for flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy. A distribution of interindividual differences demonstrated that GlideScope video laryngoscopy was, on average, 39 seconds faster than flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy (95% confidence interval 0.2 to 76.9 seconds). CONCLUSION: GlideScope video laryngoscopy can be used to obtain a Cormack-Lehane grade II or better view in the majority of awake, healthy volunteers when an upright face-to-face approach is used and was slightly faster than traditional flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy. However, flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy may be more reliable at obtaining high-grade views of the larynx. Awake, face-to-face GlideScope use may offer an alternative approach to the difficulty airway, particularly among providers uncomfortable with flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy.

Biomarker derived risk scores predict venous thromboembolism and major bleeding among patients with COVID-19.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk is increased in patients with COVID-19 infection. Understanding which patients are likely to develop VTE may inform pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis decision making. The hospital-associated venous thromboembolism-Intermountain Risk Score (HA-VTE IMRS) and the hospital-associated major bleeding-Intermountain Risk Score (HA-MB IMRS) are risk scores predictive of VTE and bleeding that were derived from only patient age and data found in the complete blood count (CBC) and basic metabolic panel (BMP). Objectives: We assessed the HA-VTE IMRS and HA-MB IMRS for predictiveness of 90-day VTE and major bleeding, respectively, among patients diagnosed with COVID-19, and further investigated if adding D-dimer improved these predictions. We also reported 30-day outcomes. Patients/Methods: We identified 5047 sequential patients with a laboratory confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and a CBC and BMP between 2 days before and 7 days following the diagnosis of COVID-19 from March 12, 2020, to February 28, 2021. We calculated the HA-VTE IMRS and the HA-MB IMRS for all patients. We assessed the added predictiveness of D-dimer obtained within 48 hours of the COVID test. Results: The HA-VTE IMRS yielded a c-statistic of 0.70 for predicting 90-day VTE and adding D-dimer improved the c-statistic to 0.764 with the corollary sensitivity/specificity/positive/negative predictive values of 49.4%/75.7%/6.7%/97.7% and 58.8%/76.2%/10.9%/97.4%, respectively. Among hospitalized and ambulatory patients separately, the HA-VTE IMRS performed similarly. The HA-MB IMRS predictiveness for 90-day major bleeding yielded a c-statistic of 0.64. Conclusion: The HA-VTE IMRS and HA-MB IMRS predict 90- and 30-day VTE and major bleeding among COVID-19 patients. Adding D-dimer improved the predictiveness of the HA-VTE IMRS for VTE.

D-dimer Thresholds to Exclude Pulmonary Embolism among COVID-19 Patients in the Emergency Department: Derivation with Independent Validation.

OBJECTIVE: To derive and validate a D-dimer cutoff for ruling out pulmonary embolism (PE) in COVID-19 patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in an integrated healthcare system including 22 adult ED's between March 1, 2020, and January 31, 2021. Results were validated among patients enrolled in the RECOVER Registry, representing data from 154 ED's from 26 US states. Consecutive ED patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19, a D-dimer performed within 48 h of ED arrival, and with objectively confirmed PE were compared to those without PE. After identifying a D-dimer threshold at which the 95% confidence lower bound of the negative predictive value for PE was higher than 98% in the derivation cohort, it was validated using RECOVER registry data. RESULTS: Among 3978 patients with a D-dimer result, 3583 with confirmed COVID-19 infection were included in the derivation cohort. Overall, PE incidence was 4.1% and a D-dimer cutoff of <2 µ/mL (2000 ng/mL) was associated with a NPV of 98.5% (95% CI = 98.0%-98.9%). In the validation cohort of 13,091 patients with a D-dimer, 7748 had confirmed COVID-19 infection, and the PE incidence was 1.14%. A D-dimer cutoff of <2 µ/mL was associated with a NPV of 99.5% (95% CI = 99.3%-99.7%). CONCLUSION: A D-dimer cutoff of <2 µ/ml was associated with a high negative predictive value for PE among patients with COVID-19. However, the resultant sensitivity for PE result at that threshold without pre-test probability assessment would be considered clinically unsafe.

Synoptic reporting accuracy for computed tomography pulmonary arteriography among patients suspected of pulmonary embolism.

Background: Structured reporting is an efficient and replicable method of presenting diagnostic results that eliminates variability inherent in narrative descriptive reporting and may improve clinical decisions. Synoptic element reporting can generate discrete coded data that then may inform clinical decision support and trigger downstream actions in computerized electronic health records. Objective: Limited evidence exists for use of synoptic reporting for computed tomography pulmonary arteriography (CTPA) among patients suspected of pulmonary embolism. We reported the accuracy of synoptic reporting for the outcome of pulmonary embolism among patients who presented to an integrated health care system with CTPA performed for suspected pulmonary embolism. Methods: Structured radiology reports with embedded synoptic elements were implemented for all CTPA examinations on March 1, 2018. Four hundred CTPA reports between January 4, 2019 and July 30, 2020 (200 reports each for which synoptic reporting recorded the presence or absence of pulmonary embolism [PE]) were selected at random. One non-diagnostic study was excluded from analysis. We then assessed the accuracy of synoptic reporting compared with the gold standard of manual chart review. Results: Synoptic reporting and manual review agreed in 99.2% of patients undergoing CTPA for suspected PE, agreed on the presence of PE in 196 of 199 (98.5%) cases, the absence of PE in 200 of 200 (100%) cases with a sensitivity of 87.6% (76.1-96.1) a specificity of 99.9% (99.7%-100%), a positive predictive value of 99.5% (98.1-100), and a negative predictive value of 98% (95.7%-99.5%). Conclusion: The overall rate of agreement was 99.2%, but we observed an unacceptable false-negative rate for clinical reliance on synoptic element reporting in isolation from dictated reports.

Prevalence, Characteristics, and Outcomes of Emergency Department Discharge Among Patients With Sepsis.

Importance: Sepsis guidelines and research have focused on patients with sepsis who are admitted to the hospital, but the scope and implications of sepsis that is managed in an outpatient setting are largely unknown. Objective: To identify the prevalence, risk factors, practice variation, and outcomes for discharge to outpatient management of sepsis among patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted at the EDs of 4 Utah hospitals, and data extraction and analysis were performed from 2017 to 2021. Participants were adult ED patients who presented to a participating ED from July 1, 2013, to December 31, 2016, and met sepsis criteria before departing the ED alive and not receiving hospice care. Exposures: Patient demographic and clinical characteristics, health system parameters, and ED attending physician. Main Outcomes and Measures: Information on ED disposition was obtained from electronic medical records, and 30-day mortality data were acquired from Utah state death records and the US Social Security Death Index. Factors associated with ED discharge rather than hospital admission were identified using penalized logistic regression. Variation in ED discharge rates between physicians was estimated after adjustment for potential confounders using generalized linear mixed models. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used in the primary analysis to assess the noninferiority of outpatient management for 30-day mortality (noninferiority margin of 1.5%) while adjusting for multiple potential confounders. Results: Among 12 333 ED patients with sepsis (median [IQR] age, 62 [47-76] years; 7017 women [56.9%]) who were analyzed in the study, 1985 (16.1%) were discharged from the ED. After penalized regression, factors associated with ED discharge included age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.90 per 10-y increase; 95% CI, 0.87-0.93), arrival to ED by ambulance (aOR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.52-0.71), organ failure severity (aOR, 0.58 per 1-point increase in the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score; 95% CI, 0.54-0.60), and urinary tract (aOR, 4.56 [95% CI, 3.91-5.31] vs pneumonia), intra-abdominal (aOR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.39-0.65] vs pneumonia), skin (aOR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.14-1.72] vs pneumonia) or other source of infection (aOR, 1.67 [95% CI, 1.40-1.97] vs pneumonia). Among 89 ED attending physicians, adjusted ED discharge probability varied significantly (likelihood ratio test, P < .001), ranging from 8% to 40% for an average patient. The unadjusted 30-day mortality was lower in discharged patients than admitted patients (0.9% vs 8.3%; P < .001), and their adjusted 30-day mortality was noninferior (propensity-adjusted odds ratio, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.09-0.48]; adjusted risk difference, 5.8% [95% CI, 5.1%-6.5%]; P < .001). Alternative confounder adjustment strategies yielded odds ratios that ranged from 0.21 to 0.42. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, discharge to outpatient treatment of patients who met sepsis criteria in the ED was more common than previously recognized and varied substantially between ED physicians, but it was not associated with higher mortality compared with hospital admission. Systematic, evidence-based strategies to optimize the triage of ED patients with sepsis are needed.

Outpatient Randomized Controlled Trials in the Covid-19 Era and Beyond.

Outpatient Trials in the Covid-19 Era and BeyondA group of investigators had a meeting at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute in May 2020 to discuss ways to decrease thrombotic complications among symptomatic outpatients with Covid-19. The investigators discuss their approach to three specific challenges: conducting a trial remotely, working through regulatory hurdles, and recruiting a diverse population of participants.

Association of the Intermountain Risk Score with major adverse health events in patients positive for COVID-19: an observational evaluation of a US cohort.

OBJECTIVES: The Intermountain Risk Score (IMRS), composed using published sex-specific weightings of parameters in the complete blood count (CBC) and basic metabolic profile (BMP), is a validated predictor of mortality. We hypothesised that IMRS calculated from prepandemic CBC and BMP predicts COVID-19 outcomes and that IMRS using laboratory results tested at COVID-19 diagnosis is also predictive. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Primary, secondary, urgent and emergent care, and drive-through testing locations across Utah and in sections of adjacent US states. Viral RNA testing for SARS-CoV-2 was conducted from 3 March to 2 November 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥18 years were evaluated if they had CBC and BMP measured in 2019 and tested positive for COVID-19 in 2020. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalisation or mortality, with secondary outcomes being hospitalisation and mortality separately. RESULTS: Among 3883 patients, 8.2% were hospitalised and 1.6% died. Subjects with low, mild, moderate and high-risk IMRS had the composite endpoint in 3.5% (52/1502), 8.6% (108/1256), 15.5% (152/979) and 28.1% (41/146) of patients, respectively. Compared with low-risk, subjects in mild-risk, moderate-risk and high-risk groups had HR=2.33 (95% CI 1.67 to 3.24), HR=4.01 (95% CI 2.93 to 5.50) and HR=8.34 (95% CI 5.54 to 12.57), respectively. Subjects aged <60 years had HR=3.06 (95% CI 2.01 to 4.65) and HR=7.38 (95% CI 3.14 to 17.34) for moderate and high risks versus low risk, respectively; those ≥60 years had HR=1.95 (95% CI 0.99 to 3.86) and HR=3.40 (95% CI 1.63 to 7.07). In multivariable analyses, IMRS was independently predictive and was shown to capture substantial risk variation of comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: IMRS, a simple risk score using very basic laboratory results, predicted COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality. This included important abilities to identify risk in younger adults with few diagnosed comorbidities and to predict risk prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection.