Neighborhood-Level Risk Factors for Severe Hyperglycemia among Emergency Department Patients without a Prior Diabetes Diagnosis.

A person's place of residence is a strong risk factor for important diagnosed chronic diseases such as diabetes. It is unclear whether neighborhood-level risk factors also predict the probability of undiagnosed disease. The objective of this study was to identify neighborhood-level variables associated with severe hyperglycemia among emergency department (ED) patients without a history of diabetes. We analyzed patients without previously diagnosed diabetes for whom a random serum glucose value was obtained in the ED. We defined random glucose values ≥ 200 mg/dL as severe hyperglycemia, indicating probable undiagnosed diabetes. Patient addresses were geocoded and matched with neighborhood-level socioeconomic measures from the American Community Survey and claims-based surveillance estimates of diabetes prevalence. Neighborhood-level exposure variables were standardized based on z-scores, and a series of logistic regression models were used to assess the association of selected exposures and hyperglycemia adjusting for biological and social individual-level risk factors for diabetes. Of 77,882 ED patients without a history of diabetes presenting in 2021, 1,715 (2.2%) had severe hyperglycemia. Many geospatial exposures were associated with uncontrolled hyperglycemia, even after controlling for individual-level risk factors. The most strongly associated neighborhood-level variables included lower markers of educational attainment, higher percentage of households where limited English is spoken, lower rates of white-collar employment, and higher rates of Medicaid insurance. Including these geospatial factors in risk assessment models may help identify important subgroups of patients with undiagnosed disease.

Acute stroke care in a New York City comprehensive stroke center during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused unprecedented demand and burden on emergency health care services in New York City. We aim to describe our experience providing acute stroke care at a comprehensive stroke center (CSC) and the impact of the pandemic on the quality of care for patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from a quality improvement registry of consecutive AIS patients at New York University Langone Health's CSC between 06/01/2019-05/15/2020. During the early stages of the pandemic, the acute stroke process was modified to incorporate COVID-19 screening, testing, and other precautionary measures. We compared stroke quality metrics including treatment times and discharge outcomes of AIS patients during the pandemic (03/012020-05/152020) compared with a historical pre-pandemic group (6/1/2019-2/29/2020). RESULTS: A total of 754 patients (pandemic-120; pre-pandemic-634) were admitted with a principal diagnosis of AIS; 198 (26.3%) received alteplase and/or mechanical thrombectomy. Despite longer median door to head CT times (16 vs 12 minutes; p = 0.05) and a trend towards longer door to groin puncture times (79.5 vs. 71 min, p = 0.06), the time to alteplase administration (36 vs 35 min; p = 0.83), door to reperfusion times (103 vs 97 min, p = 0.18) and defect-free care (95.2% vs 94.7%; p = 0.84) were similar in the pandemic and pre-pandemic groups. Successful recanalization rates (TICI≥2b) were also similar (82.6% vs. 86.7%, p = 0.48). After adjusting for stroke severity, age and a prior history of transient ischemic attack/stroke, pandemic patients had increased discharge mortality (adjusted OR 2.90 95% CI 1.77 - 7.17, p = 0.021) CONCLUSION: Despite unprecedented demands on emergency healthcare services, early multidisciplinary efforts to adapt the acute stroke treatment process resulted in keeping the stroke quality time metrics close to pre-pandemic levels. Future studies will be needed with a larger cohort comparing discharge and long-term outcomes between pre-pandemic and pandemic AIS patients.

Expanding Diabetes Screening to Identify Undiagnosed Cases Among Emergency Department Patients.

Introduction: Diabetes screening traditionally occurs in primary care settings, but many who are at high risk face barriers to accessing care and therefore delays in diagnosis and treatment. These same high-risk patients do frequently visit emergency departments (ED) and, therefore, might benefit from screening at that time. Our objective in this study was to analyze one year of results from a multisite, ED-based diabetes screening program. Methods: We assessed the demographics of patients screened, identified differences in rates of newly diagnosed diabetes by clinical site, and the geographic distribution of high and low hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) results. Results: We performed diabetes screening (HbA1c) among 4,211 ED patients 40-70 years old, with a body mass index ≥25, and no prior history of diabetes. Of these patients screened for diabetes, 9% had a HbA1c result consistent with undiagnosed diabetes, and nearly half of these patients had a HbA1c ≥9.0%. Rates of newly diagnosed diabetes were notably higher at EDs located in neighborhoods of lower socioeconomic status. Conclusion: Emergency department-based diabetes screening may be a practical and scalable solution to screen high-risk patients and reduce health disparities experienced in specific neighborhoods and demographic groups.