First and second wave dynamics of emergency department utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective study in 3 hospitals in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: During certain phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, a decrease was observed in emergency department (ED) utilization. Although this phenomenon has been thoroughly characterized for the first wave (FW), second wave (SW) studies are limited. We examined the changes in ED utilization between the FW and SW, compared to 2019 reference periods. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of ED utilization in 3 Dutch hospitals in 2020. The FW and SW (March-June and September-December, respectively) were compared to the reference periods in 2019. ED visits were labeled as (non-)COVID-suspected. RESULTS: During the FW and SW ED visits decreased by 20.3% and 15.3%, respectively, when compared to reference periods in 2019. During both waves high urgency visits significantly increased with 3.1% and 2.1%, and admission rates (ARs) increased with 5.0% and 10.4%. Trauma related visits decreased by 5.2% and 3.4%. During the SW we observed less COVID-related visits compared to the FW (4,407 vs 3,102 patients). COVID-related visits were significantly more often in higher need of urgent care and ARs were at least 24.0% higher compared to non-COVID visits. CONCLUSION: During both COVID-19 waves, ED visits were significantly reduced. ED patients were more often triaged as high urgent, the ED length of stay was longer and ARs were increased compared to the reference period in 2019, reflecting a high burden on ED resources. During the FW, the reduction in ED visits was most pronounced. Here, ARs were also higher and patient were more often triaged as high urgency. These findings stress the need to gain better insight into the motives of patients to delay or avoid emergency care during pandemics, as well as to better prepare EDs for future outbreaks.

Interferon release does not add discriminatory value to smear-negative HIV-tuberculosis algorithms.

Clinical algorithms for evaluating HIV-infected individuals for tuberculosis (TB) prior to isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) perform poorly, and interferon-γ release assays (IGRAs) have moderate accuracy for active TB. It is unclear whether, when used as adjunct tests, IGRAs add any clinical discriminatory value for active TB diagnosis in the pre-IPT assessment. 779 sputum smear-negative HIV-infected persons, established on or about to commence combined antiretroviral therapy (ART), were screened for TB prior to IPT. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression was used to develop clinical prediction models. The discriminatory ability was assessed by receiver operator characteristic area under the curve (AUC). QuantiFERON-TB Gold in-tube (QFT-GIT) was evaluated. The prevalence of smear-negative TB by culture was 6.4% (95% CI 4.9-8.4%). Used alone, QFT-GIT and the tuberculin skin test (TST) had comparable performance; the post-test probability of disease based on single negative tests was 3-4%. In a multivariable model, the QFT-GIT test did not improve the ability of a clinical algorithm, which included not taking ART, weight <60 kg, no prior history of TB, any one positive TB symptom/sign (cough ≥ 2 weeks) and CD4+ count <250 cells per mm(3), to discriminate smear-negative culture-positive and -negative TB (72% to 74%; AUC comparison p=0.33). The TST marginally improved the discriminatory ability of the clinical model (to 77%, AUC comparison p=0.04). QFT-GIT does not improve the discriminatory ability of current TB screening clinical algorithms used to evaluate HIV-infected individuals for TB ahead of preventive therapy. Evaluation of new TB diagnostics for clinical relevance should follow a multivariable process that goes beyond test accuracy.

Reduced Emergency Department Utilization During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Viral Fear or Lockdown Effect?

OBJECTIVE: Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, several frontline workers have expressed their concerns about reduced emergency department (ED) utilization. We aimed to examine the changes in ED utilization during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, in a country with a well-developed primary care system. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of ED utilization was performed in 3 Dutch hospitals during a 60-day period, starting on February 15, 2020. The identical period in 2019 was used as a reference. ED visits were labeled as COVID-related (defined as COVID-19 suspected) or non-COVID-related. Admission rates were compared using chi-square tests, and the reduction in ED visits was assessed descriptively. RESULTS: During the study period, daily ED volume was 18% lower compared to that of 2019. ED utilization further declined (-29%) during lockdown. Combined admission rates were higher in 2020 compared to those in 2019 (P < 0.001), and they were higher for COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 ED visits (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ED utilization was markedly reduced during the local rise of COVID-19 in a region with a well-developed primary care system and relatively low ED self-referral rates. Although it cannot directly be concluded from the findings of our study, this observation likely reflects a complex interaction between pure lockdown effects and viral fear, which warrants further research.

Preparations of Dutch emergency departments for the COVID-19 pandemic: A questionnaire-based study.

BACKGROUND: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic was characterized by rapid increases in Emergency department (ED) patient visits. EDs required an appropriate transformation. The main challenges were: adapting capacity to respond to surges in the number of patient visits, protection of high risk (frontline) staff and the segregation of suspect-COVID-19 patients. To date, only a few studies have assessed the nation-wide response of EDs to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was designed to review the preparations of Dutch EDs during the initial phase of this public health crisis. METHODS: The study was designed as a nation-wide, cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study of Dutch hospital organizations having one or more EDs. One respondent completed the questionnaire for each hospital. The questionnaire was conducted between the first and the second COVID-19 wave in the Netherlands. It contained close-ended and open-ended questions on changes in ED infrastructure, ED workforce adaptions and the role of emergency physicians (EPs) in each hospital crisis management team. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 58 respondents. This represented 80% of the total number of EDs. All respondents had made preparations in anticipation of a COVID-19 patient surge. Treatment capacity was expanded in 70% of EDs, with a median increase of 49% (IQR 33-73%). Suspect-COVID-19 was segregated from non-COVID-19 patients in 89% of EDs. Alternative locations (such as outpatient departments) were more often used to assess non-COVID-19 patients, than for suspect-COVID-19 patients. Staff was expanded in 82% of EDs. This largely concerned nursing staff. A formal role for Emergency Physicians (EPs) in the hospital's crisis management team was reported by 94% of hospital organizations employing EPs. CONCLUSION: All Dutch EDs responded to the COVID-19 pandemic in a very short time span despite much uncertainty. Preparations predominantly concerned expansion of treatment capacity and segregation of COVID-19 ED care. EPs played a prominent role, both in direct COVID-19 care and in the hospital crises management team. It is vital for EDs to adapt to community needs swiftly. The ability of EDs to respond to the pandemic varied considerably.

Frequency of alterations in qSOFA, SIRS, MEWS and NEWS scores during the emergency department stay in infectious patients: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: For emergency department (ED) patients with suspected infection, a vital sign-based clinical rule is often calculated shortly after the patient arrives. The clinical rule score (normal or abnormal) provides information about diagnosis and/or prognosis. Since vital signs vary over time, the clinical rule scores can change as well. In this prospective multicentre study, we investigate how often the scores of four frequently used clinical rules change during the ED stay of patients with suspected infection. METHODS: Adult (≥ 18 years) patients with suspected infection were prospectively included in three Dutch EDs between March 2016 and December 2019. Vital signs were measured in 30-min intervals and the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score, the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria, the Modified Early Warning Score and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) score were calculated. Using the established cut-off points, we analysed how often alterations in clinical rule scores occurred (i.e. switched from normal to abnormal or vice versa). In addition, we investigated which vital signs caused most alterations. RESULTS: We included 1433 patients, of whom a clinical rule score changed once or more in 637 (44.5%) patients. In 6.7-17.5% (depending on the clinical rule) of patients with an initial negative clinical rule score, a positive score occurred later during ED stay. In over half (54.3-65.0%) of patients with an initial positive clinical rule score, the score became negative later on. The respiratory rate caused most (51.2%) alterations. CONCLUSION: After ED arrival, alterations in qSOFA, SIRS, MEWS and/or NEWS score are present in almost half of patients with suspected infection. The most contributing vital sign to these alterations was the respiratory rate. One in 6-15 patients displayed an abnormal clinical rule score after a normal initial score. Clinicians should be aware of the frequency of these alterations in clinical rule scores, as clinical rules are widely used for diagnosis and/or prognosis and the optimal moment of assessing them is unknown.

Enhanced diagnosis of HIV-1-associated tuberculosis by relating T-SPOT.TB and CD4 counts.

The sensitivity of the tuberculin skin test is impaired in HIV-1-infected persons. Enzyme-linked immunospot-based detection of immune sensitisation may be less affected. Furthermore, the quantitative response can be related to the CD4 count, potentially improving specificity for active disease. The T-SPOT.TB assay was performed on HIV-1-infected participants, 85 with active tuberculosis (TB) and 81 healthy patients (non-TB). The ratio of the sum of the 6-kDa early secretory antigenic target and culture filtrate protein 10 response to the CD4 count (spot-forming cell (SFC)/CD4) was calculated. Using the manufacturer's guidelines, active TB was diagnosed with 76% sensitivity and 53% specificity. Using an SFC/CD4 ratio of 0.12, sensitivity (80%) and specificity (62%) improved. The quantitative T-cell response increased with increasing smear-positivity in the active TB group (p = 0.0008). In the non-TB group, the proportion of persons scored positive by T-SPOT.TB assay was lower in the group with a CD4 count of <200 cells·mm(-3) (p = 0.029). The ratio of the summed T-cell response to CD4 count improved the diagnostic accuracy of the T-SPOT.TB assay in HIV-1-infected persons, and a ratio of SFC/CD4 of >0.12 should prompt investigation for active disease. A strong association between the degree of sputum positivity and T-SPOT.TB score was found. The sensitivity of the T-SPOT.TB assay in active disease may be less impaired by advanced immunosuppression.

Accuracy and interobserver-agreement of respiratory rate measurements by healthcare professionals, and its effect on the outcomes of clinical prediction/diagnostic rules.

OBJECTIVE: In clinical prediction/diagnostic rules aimed at early detection of critically ill patients, the respiratory rate plays an important role. We investigated the accuracy and interobserver-agreement of respiratory rate measurements by healthcare professionals, and the potential effect of incorrect measurements on the scores of 4 common clinical prediction/diagnostic rules: Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria, quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS). METHODS: Using an online questionnaire, we showed 5 videos with a healthy volunteer, breathing at a fixed (true) rate (13-28 breaths/minute). Respondents measured the respiratory rate, and categorized it as low, normal, or high. We analysed how accurate the measurements were using descriptive statistics, and calculated interobserver-agreement using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and agreement between measurements and categorical judgments using Cohen's Kappa. Finally, we analysed how often incorrect measurements led to under/overestimation in the selected clinical rules. RESULTS: In total, 448 healthcare professionals participated. Median measurements were slightly higher (1-3/min) than the true respiratory rate, and 78.2% of measurements were within 4/min of the true rate. ICC was moderate (0.64, 95% CI 0.39-0.94). When comparing the measured respiratory rates with the categorical judgments, 14.5% were inconsistent. Incorrect measurements influenced the 4 rules in 8.8% (SIRS) to 37.1% (NEWS). Both underestimation (4.5-7.1%) and overestimation (3.9-32.2%) occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy and interobserver-agreement of respiratory rate measurements by healthcare professionals are suboptimal. This leads to both over- and underestimation of scores of four clinical prediction/diagnostic rules. The clinically most important effect could be a delay in diagnosis and treatment of (critically) ill patients.

Characteristics of the prehospital phase of adult emergency department patients with an infection: A prospective pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: Research on serious infections/sepsis has focused on the hospital environment, while potentially the most delay, and therefore possibly the best opportunity to improve quality of care, lies in the prehospital setting. In this study we investigated the prehospital phase of adult emergency department (ED) patients with an infection. METHODS: In this prospective pilot study all adult (≥18y) patients with a suspected/proven infection, based on the notes in the patient's ED chart, were included during a 4-week period in 2017. Prehospital course, ED findings, presence of sepsis and 30-day outcomes were registered. RESULTS: A total of 440 patients were identified, with a median symptom duration before ED visit of 3 days (IQR 1-7 days). Before arrival in the ED, 23.9% of patients had used antibiotics. Most patients (83.0%) had been referred by a general practitioner (GP), while 41.1% of patients had visited their GP previously during the current disease episode. Patients referred by a GP were triaged as high-urgency less often, while vital parameters were similar. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) transported 268 (60.9%) of patients. Twenty-two patients (5.0%) experienced an adverse outcome (30-day all-cause mortality and/or admission to intensive care). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a suspected infection had symptoms for 3 (IQR 1-7) days at the moment of presentation to the ED. During this prehospital phase patients often had consulted, and were treated by, their GP. Many were transported to the ED by EMS. Future research on severe infections should focus on the prehospital phase, targeting patients and primary care professionals.