Costs and Consequences of a Novel Emergency Department Sepsis Diagnostic Test: The IntelliSep Index.

Sepsis causes 270,000 deaths and costs $38 billion annually in the United States. Most cases of sepsis present in the emergency department (ED), where rapid diagnosis remains challenging. The IntelliSep Index (ISI) is a novel diagnostic test that analyzes characteristics of WBC structure and provides a reliable early signal for sepsis. This study performs a cost-consequence analysis of the ISI relative to procalcitonin for early sepsis diagnosis in the ED. PERSPECTIVE: U.S. healthcare system. SETTING: Community hospital ED. METHODS: A decision tree analysis was performed comparing ISI with procalcitonin. Model parameters included prevalence of sepsis, sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests (both ISI and procalcitonin), costs of hospitalization, and mortality rate stratified by diagnostic test result. Mortality and prevalence of sepsis were estimated from best available literature. Costs were estimated based on an analysis of a large, national discharge dataset, and adjusted to 2018 U.S. dollars. Outcomes included expected costs and survival. RESULTS: Assuming a confirmed sepsis prevalence of 16.9% (adjudicated to Sepsis-3), the ISI strategy had an expected cost per patient of $3,849 and expected survival rate of 95.08%, whereas the procalcitonin strategy had an expected cost of $4,656 per patient and an expected survival of 94.98%. ISI was both less costly and more effective than procalcitonin, primarily because of fewer false-negative results. These results were robust in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: ISI was both less costly and more effective in preventing mortality than procalcitonin, primarily because of fewer false-negative results. The ISI may provide health systems with a higher-value diagnostic test in ED sepsis evaluation. Additional work is needed to validate these results in clinical practice.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of SARS-Cov-2 B.1.1.529 infections in hospitalized patients and multi-surge comparison in Louisiana.

BACKGROUND: Peer reviewed data describing SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant symptoms and clinical outcomes as compared to prior surges in the United States is thus far limited. We sought to determine disease severity, presenting features, and epidemiologic factors of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant compared to prior surges. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis was performed on patients admitted during five surges in Louisiana between March 2020 and January 2022. Patient data was pulled from the medical record and a subset of patients during Surge 5 were manually abstracted. Patients who were admitted to one of six Louisiana hospitals with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test during the 5 defined surge periods were included. Surges were compared using chi-squared tests and one way ANOVA for age, sex, vaccination status, length of stay, ICU status, ventilation requirement, and disposition at discharge. The records of patients admitted during the omicron surge were analyzed for presenting symptoms and incidental SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. RESULTS: With each subsequent surge, a smaller proportion of patients presenting to the emergency department were admitted. Patients admitted during surge 5 had shorter lengths of stay and fewer comorbidities than prior surges. Fewer patients in surge 5 presented with a respiratory condition and fewer required ICU admission. In surges 4 and 5, fewer vaccinated patients were admitted compared to their unvaccinated counterparts. Overall mortality was lower in surge 5 (9%) than in surge 4 (15%) p < .0005. Of the SARS-Cov-2 admissions in surge 5, 22.3% were felt to be incidental diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed, a younger and less vaccinated population was associated with higher risk for severe disease, fewer patients required ICU admission and overall mortality decreased. Vaccinations seemed to be protective for overall risk of hospitalization but once admitted did not seem to confer additional protection against severe illness during the omicron surge. Age also contributed to patient outcomes.

Reduced turnaround times through multi-sectoral community collaboration during the first surge of SARS-CoV-2 and associated effect on patient care and hospital operations.

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, an influx of admissions in COVID-19 positive patients threatened to overwhelm healthcare facilities in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. Exacerbating this problem was an overall shortage of diagnostic testing capability at that time, resulting in a delay in time-to-result return. An improvement in diagnostic testing availability and timeliness was necessary to improve the allocation of resources and ultimate throughput of patients. The management of a COVID-19 positive patient or patient under investigation requires infection control measures that can quickly consume personal protective equipment (PPE) stores and personnel available to treat these patients. Critical shortages of both PPE and personnel also negatively impact care in patients admitted with non-COVID-19 illnesses. METHODS: A multisectoral partnership of healthcare providers, facilities and academicians created a molecular diagnostic lab within an academic research facility dedicated to testing inpatients and healthcare personnel for SARS-CoV-2. The purpose of the laboratory was to provide a temporary solution to the East Baton Rouge Parish healthcare community until individual facilities were self-sustaining in testing capabilities. We describe the partnership and the impacts of this endeavor by developing a model derived from a combination of data sources, including electronic health records, hospital operations, and state and local resources. FINDINGS: Our model demonstrates two important principles: the impact of reduced turnaround times (TAT) on potential differences in inpatient population numbers for COVID-19 and savings in PPE attributed to the more rapid TAT.