Influence of Weekday and Seasonal Trends on Urgency and In-hospital Mortality of Emergency Department Patients.

Background: Given the scarcity of resources, the increasing use of emergency departments (ED) represents a major challenge for the care of emergency patients. Current health policy interventions focus on restructuring emergency care with the help of patient re-direction into outpatient treatment structures. A precise analysis of ED utilization, taking into account treatment urgency, is essential for demand-oriented adjustments of emergency care structures. Methods: Temporal and seasonal trends in the use of EDs were investigated, considering treatment urgency and hospital mortality. Secondary data of 287,119 ED visits between 2015 and 2017 of the two EDs of Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow Klinikum were analyzed. Result: EDs were used significantly more frequently on weekends than on weekdays (Mdn = 290 vs. 245 visits/day; p < 0.001). The proportion of less urgent, outpatient emergency visits on weekends was above average. Holiday periods were characterized by at least 6, and at most 176 additional ED visits. In a comparison of different holidays, most ED visits were observed at New Year (+68% above average). In addition, a significant increase in in-hospital mortality on holidays was evident among inpatients admitted to hospital via the ED (3.0 vs. 3.2%; p < 0.001), with New Year's Day being particularly striking (5.4%). Conclusion: These results suggest that, in particular, the resource planning of outpatient emergency treatment capacities on weekends and holidays should be adapted to the increased volume of non-urgent visits in EDs. Nevertheless, treatment capacities for the care of urgent, inpatient emergencies should not be disregarded and further research projects are necessary to investigate the causes of increased mortality during holiday periods.

SARS-CoV-2 screening in patients in need of urgent inpatient treatment in the Emergency Department (ED) by digitally integrated point-of-care PCR: a clinical cohort study.

Patients in need of urgent inpatient treatment were recruited prospectively. A rapid point of care polymerase chain reaction test (POC-PCR; Liat®) for SARS-CoV2 was conducted in the Emergency Department (ED) and a second PCR-test from the same swab was ordered in the central laboratory (PCR). POC-PCR analyzers were digitally integrated in the laboratory information system. Overall, 160 ED patients were included. A valid POC-PCR-test result was available in 96.3% (n = 154) of patients. N = 16 patients tested positive for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Corona Virus 2 (10.0%). The POC PCR test results were available within 102 minutes (median, interquartile range: 56-211), which was significantly earlier compared to the central laboratory PCR (811 minutes; interquartile range: 533-1289, P < 0.001). The diagnostic accuracy of the POC-PCR test was 100%. The implementation and digital laboratory information system integration was successfully done. Staff satisfaction with the POC process was high. The POC-PCR testing in the ED is feasible and shows a very high diagnostic performance. Trial registration: DRKS00019207.

Point-of-care testing for influenza in a university emergency department: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal influenza is a burden for emergency departments (ED). The aim of this study was to investigate whether point-of-care (POC) PCR testing can be used to reduce staff sick days and improve diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate whether point-of-care (POC) PCR testing can be used to reduce staff sick days and improve diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. METHODS: Using a cross-over design, the cobas® Liat® Influenza A/B POC PCR test (Liat) was compared with standard clinical practice during the 2019/2020 influenza season. All adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with fever (≥38°C) and respiratory symptoms were included. Primary end points were the prevalence of influenza infections in the ED and staff sick days. Secondary end points were frequency of antiviral and antibacterial therapy, time between admission and test result or treatment initiation, patient disposition, ED length of stay (LOS), and for inpatients mortality and LOS. Nurses were interviewed about handling and integration of POC testing. The occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infections coincided with the second half of the study. RESULTS: A total of 828 patients were enrolled in the study. All 375 patients of the intervention group were tested with Liat, and 103 patients of them (27.6%) tested positive. During the intervention period, staff sick days were reduced by 34.4% (P = .023). Significantly, more patients in the intervention group received antiviral therapy with neuraminidase inhibitors (7.2% vs 3.8%, P = .028) and tested patients received antibiotics more frequently (40.0% vs 31.6%, P = .033). Patients with POC test were transferred to external hospitals significantly more often (5.6% vs 1.3%, P = .01). CONCLUSION: We conclude that POC testing for influenza is useful in the ED, especially if it is heavily frequented by patients with respiratory symptoms.

Which parameters support disposition decision in suspected COVID-19 cases in the emergency department (ED): a German clinical cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: One major goal of the emergency department (ED) is to decide, whether patients need to be hospitalised or can be sent home safely. We aim at providing criteria for these decisions without knowing the SARS-CoV-2 test result in suspected cases. SETTING: Tertiary emergency medicine. PARTICIPANTS: All patients were treated at the ED of the Charité during the pandemic peak and underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing. Patients with positive test results were characterised in detail and underwent a 14-day-follow-up. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Logistic regression and classification and regression tree (CART) analyses were performed to identify predictors (primary endpoint), which confirm safe discharge. The clinical endpoint was all-cause mortality or need for mechanical ventilation during index stay or after readmission. RESULTS: The primary test population of suspected COVID-19 consisted of n=1255 cases, 45.2% were women (n=567). Of these, n=110 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (8.8%). The median age of SARS-CoV-2-positive cases was 45 years (IQR: 33-66 years), whereas the median age of the group tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 was 42 years (IQR: 30-60 years) (p=0.096). 43.6% were directly admitted to hospital care.CART analysis identified the variables oxygen saturation (<95%), dyspnoea and history of cardiovascular (CV) disease to distinguish between high and low-risk groups. If all three variables were negative, most patients were discharged from ED, and the incidence of the clinical endpoint was 0%. The validation cohort confirmed the safety of discharge using these variables and revealed an incidence of the clinical endpoint from 14.3% in patients with CV disease, 9.4% in patients with dyspnoea and 18.2% in patients with O2 satuaration below 95%. CONCLUSIONS: Based on easily available variables like dyspnoea, oxygen saturation, history of CV disease, approximately 25% of patients subsequently confirmed with COVID-19 can be identified for safe discharge. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00023117.

Evaluation of outcome relevance of quality indicators in the emergency department (ENQuIRE): study protocol for a prospective multicentre cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Quality of emergency department (ED) care affects patient outcomes substantially. Quality indicators (QIs) for ED care are a major challenge due to the heterogeneity of patient populations, health care structures and processes in Germany. Although a number of quality measures are already in use, there is a paucity of data on the importance of these QIs on medium-term and long-term outcomes. The evaluation of outcome relevance of quality indicators in the emergency department study (ENQuIRE) aims to identify and investigate the relevance of QIs in the ED on patient outcomes in a 12-month follow-up. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is a prospective non-interventional multicentre cohort study conducted in 15 EDs throughout Germany. Included are all patients in 2019, who were ≥18 years of age, insured at the Techniker Krankenkasse (statutory health insurance (SHI)) and gave their written informed consent to the study.The primary objective of the study is to assess the effect of selected quality measures on patient outcome. The data collected for this purpose comprise medical records from the ED treatment, discharge (claims) data from hospitalised patients, a patient questionnaire to be answered 6-8 weeks after emergency admission, and outcome measures in a 12-month follow-up obtained as claims data from the SHI.Descriptive and analytical statistics will be applied to provide summaries about the characteristics of QIs and associations between quality measures and patient outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval of the leading ethics committee at the Medical Faculty of the University of Magdeburg (reference number 163/18 from 19 November 2018) has been obtained and adapted by responsible local ethics committees.The findings of this work will be disseminated by publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts and presentations as conference contributions (abstracts, poster or oral presentations).Moreover, results will be discussed with clinical experts and medical associations before being proposed for implementation into the quality management of EDs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: German Clinical Trials Registry (DRKS00015203); Pre-results.