Management and Outcome of COVID-19 Positive and Negative Patients in French Emergency Departments During the First COVID-19 Outbreak: A Prospective Controlled Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Few studies have investigated the management of COVID-19 cases from the operational perspective of the emergency department (ED), We sought to compare the management and outcome of COVID-19 positive and negative patients who presented to French EDs. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, observational study in four EDs. Included in the study were adult patients (≥18 years) between March 6-May 10, 2020, were hospitalized, and whose presenting symptoms were evocative of COVID-19. We compared the clinical features, management, and prognosis of patients according to their confirmed COVID-19 status. RESULTS: Of the 2,686 patients included in this study, 760 (28.3%) were COVID-19 positive. Among them, 364 (48.0%) had hypertension, 228 (30.0%) had chronic cardiac disease, 186 (24.5%) had diabetes, 126 (16.6%) were obese, and 114 (15.0%) had chronic respiratory disease. The proportion of patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) was higher among COVID-19 positive patients (185/760, 24.3%) compared to COVID-19 negative patients (206/1,926, 10.7%; P <0.001), and they required mechanical ventilation (89, 11.9% vs 37, 1.9%; P <0.001) and high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (135, 18.1% vs 41, 2.2%; P < 0.001) more frequently. The in-hospital mortality was significantly higher among COVID-19 positive patients (139, 18.3% vs 149, 7.7%; P <0.001). CONCLUSION: Emergency departments were on the frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic and had to manage potential COVID-19 patients. Understanding what happened in the ED during this first outbreak is crucial to underline the importance of flexible organizations that can quickly adapt the bed capacities to the incoming flow of COVID-19 positive patients.

Increased risk of severe COVID-19 in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 Alpha variant infection: a multicentre matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the variant of concern (VOC) Alpha on the severity of COVID-19 has been debated. We report our analysis in France. METHODS: We conducted an exposed/unexposed cohort study with retrospective data collection, comparing patients infected by VOC Alpha to contemporaneous patients infected by historical lineages. Participants were matched on age (± 2.5 years), sex and region of hospitalization. The primary endpoint was the proportion of hospitalized participants with severe COVID-19, defined as a WHO-scale > 5 or by the need of a non-rebreather mask, occurring up to day 29 after admission. We used a logistic regression model stratified on each matched pair and accounting for factors known to be associated with the severity of the disease. RESULTS: We included 650 pairs of patients hospitalized between Jan 1, 2021, and Feb 28, 2021, in 47 hospitals. Median age was 70 years and 61.3% of participants were male. The proportion of participants with comorbidities was high in both groups (85.0% vs 90%, p = 0.004). Infection by VOC Alpha was associated with a higher odds of severe COVID-19 (41.7% vs 38.5%-aOR = 1.33 95% CI [1.03-1.72]). CONCLUSION: Infection by the VOC Alpha was associated with a higher odds of severe COVID-19.

Corticosteroids in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia who require oxygen: observational comparative study using routine care data.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids on outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia requiring oxygen without mechanical ventilation. METHODS: We used routine care data from 51 hospitals in France and Luxembourg to assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids at 0.8 mg/kg/day eq. prednisone (CTC group) versus standard of care (no-CTC group) among adults 18-80 years old with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia requiring oxygen without mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was intubation or death by day 28. In our main analysis, characteristics of patients at baseline (i.e. time when patients met all inclusion criteria) were balanced by using propensity-score inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: Among the 891 patients included in the analysis, 203 were assigned to the CTC group. Use of corticosteroids was not significantly associated with risk of intubation or death by day 28 (weighted hazard ratio (wHR) 0.92, 95%CI 0.61-1.39) nor cumulative death rate (wHR 1.03, 95%CI 0.54-1.98). However, use of corticosteroids was associated with reduced risk of intubation or death by day 28 in the prespecified subgroups of patients requiring oxygen ≥3 L/min (wHR 0.50, 95%CI 0.30-0.85) or C-reactive protein level ≥100 mg/L (wHR 0.44, 95%CI 0.23-0.85). The number of hyperglycaemia events was higher for patients with corticosteroids than for those without, but the number of infections was similar. CONCLUSIONS: We found no association between the use of corticosteroids and intubation or death in the broad population of patients 18-80 years old, with COVID-19, hospitalized in settings non intensive care units. However, the treatment was associated with a reduced risk of intubation or death for patients with ≥3 L/min oxygen or C-reactive protein level ≥100 mg/L at baseline. Further research is needed to confirm the right timing for corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19 requiring oxygen only.

Chest CT for rapid triage of patients in multiple emergency departments during COVID-19 epidemic: experience report from a large French university hospital.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic performances of chest CT for triage of patients in multiple emergency departments during COVID-19 epidemic, in comparison with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. METHOD: From March 3 to April 4, 2020, 694 consecutive patients from three emergency departments of a large university hospital, for which a hospitalization was planned whatever the reasons, i.e., COVID- or non-COVID-related, underwent a chest CT and one or several RT-PCR tests. Chest CTs were rated as "Surely COVID+," "Possible COVID+," or "COVID-" by experienced radiologists. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated using the final RT-PCR test as standard of reference. The delays for CT reports and RT-PCR results were recorded and compared. RESULTS: Among the 694 patients, 287 were positive on the final RT-PCR exam. Concerning the 694 chest CT, 308 were rated as "Surely COVID+", 34 as "Possible COVID+," and 352 as "COVID-." When considering only the "Surely COVID+" CT as positive, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV reached 88.9%, 90.2%, 88%, 84.1%, and 92.7%, respectively, with respect to final RT-PCR test. The mean delay for CT reports was three times shorter than for RT-PCR results (187 ± 148 min versus 573 ± 327 min, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: During COVID-19 epidemic phase, chest CT is a rapid and most probably an adequately reliable tool to refer patients requiring hospitalization to the COVID+ or COVID- hospital units, when response times for virological tests are too long. KEY POINTS: • In a large university hospital in Lyon, France, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of chest CT for COVID-19 reached 88.9%, 90.2%, 88%, 84.1%, and 92.7%, respectively, using RT-PCR as standard of reference. • The mean delay for CT reports was three times shorter than for RT-PCR results (187 ± 148 min versus 573 ± 327 min, p < 0.0001). • Due to high accuracy of chest CT for COVID-19 and shorter time for CT reports than RT-PCR results, chest CT can be used to orient patients suspected to be positive towards the COVID+ unit to decrease congestion in the emergency departments.