A Comparison of the Epidemiological Characteristics Between Influenza and COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective, Observational Cohort Study.

Background and objective It is crucial to make early differentiation between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and seasonal influenza infections at the time of a patient's presentation to the emergency department (ED). In light of this, this study aimed to identify key epidemiological, initial laboratory, and radiological differences that would enable early recognition during co-circulation. Methods This was a retrospective, observational cohort study. All adult patients presenting to our ED at the Watford General Hospital, UK, with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 (2019/20) or influenza (2018/19) infection were included in this study. Demographic, laboratory, and radiological data were collected. Binary logistic regression was employed to determine features associated with COVID-19 infection rather than influenza. Results Chest radiographs suggestive of viral pneumonitis and older age (≥80 years) were associated with increased odds of having COVID-19 [odds ratio (OR): 47.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 21.63-102.13 and OR: 64.85, 95% CI: 19.96-210.69 respectively]. Low eosinophils (<0.02 x 109/L) were found to increase the odds of COVID-19 (OR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.44-3.10, p<0.001). Conclusions Gaining awareness about the epidemiological, biological, and radiologic presentation of influenza-like illness can be useful for clinicians in ED to differentiate between COVID-19 and influenza. This study showed that older age, eosinopenia, and radiographic evidence of viral pneumonitis significantly increase the odds of having COVID-19 compared to influenza. Further research is needed to determine if these findings are affected by acquired or natural immunity.

Relevance of prediction scores derived from the SARS-CoV-2 first wave, in the evolving UK COVID-19 second wave, for safe early discharge and mortality: a PREDICT COVID-19 UK prospective observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Prospectively validate prognostication scores, SOARS and 4C Mortality Score, derived from the COVID-19 first wave, for mortality and safe early discharge in the evolving pandemic with SARS-CoV-2 variants (B.1.1.7 replacing D614) and healthcare responses altering patient demographic and mortality. DESIGN: Protocol-based prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Single site PREDICT and multisite ISARIC (International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium) cohorts in UK COVID-19 second wave, October 2020 to January 2021. PARTICIPANTS: 1383 PREDICT and 20 595 ISARIC SARS-CoV-2 patients. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Relevance of SOARS and 4C Mortality Score determining in-hospital mortality and safe early discharge in the evolving UK COVID-19 second wave. RESULTS: 1383 (median age 67 years, IQR 52-82; mortality 24.7%) PREDICT and 20 595 (mortality 19.4%) ISARIC patient cohorts showed SOARS had area under the curve (AUC) of 0.8 and 0.74, while 4C Mortality Score had AUC of 0.83 and 0.91 for hospital mortality, in the PREDICT and ISARIC cohorts respectively, therefore, effective in evaluating safe discharge and in-hospital mortality. 19.3% (231/1195, PREDICT cohort) and 16.7% (2550/14992, ISARIC cohort) with SOARS of 0-1 were candidates for safe discharge to a virtual hospital (VH) model. SOARS implementation in the VH pathway resulted in low readmission, 11.8% (27/229) and low mortality, 0.9% (2/229). Use to prevent admission is still suboptimal, as 8.1% in the PREDICT cohort and 9.5% in the ISARIC cohort were admitted despite SOARS score of 0-1. CONCLUSIONS: SOARS and 4C Mortality Score remains valid, transforming complex clinical presentations into tangible numbers, aiding objective decision making, despite SARS-CoV-2 variants and healthcare responses altering patient demographic and mortality. Both scores, easily implemented within urgent care pathways for safe early discharge, allocate hospital resources appropriately to the pandemic's needs while enabling normal healthcare services resumption.

Early prognostication of COVID-19 to guide hospitalisation versus outpatient monitoring using a point-of-test risk prediction score.

INTRODUCTION: Risk factors of adverse outcomes in COVID-19 are defined but stratification of mortality using non-laboratory measured scores, particularly at the time of prehospital SARS-CoV-2 testing, is lacking. METHODS: Multivariate regression with bootstrapping was used to identify independent mortality predictors in patients admitted to an acute hospital with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. Predictions were externally validated in a large random sample of the ISARIC cohort (N=14 231) and a smaller cohort from Aintree (N=290). RESULTS: 983 patients (median age 70, IQR 53-83; in-hospital mortality 29.9%) were recruited over an 11-week study period. Through sequential modelling, a five-predictor score termed SOARS (SpO2, Obesity, Age, Respiratory rate, Stroke history) was developed to correlate COVID-19 severity across low, moderate and high strata of mortality risk. The score discriminated well for in-hospital death, with area under the receiver operating characteristic values of 0.82, 0.80 and 0.74 in the derivation, Aintree and ISARIC validation cohorts, respectively. Its predictive accuracy (calibration) in both external cohorts was consistently higher in patients with milder disease (SOARS 0-1), the same individuals who could be identified for safe outpatient monitoring. Prediction of a non-fatal outcome in this group was accompanied by high score sensitivity (99.2%) and negative predictive value (95.9%). CONCLUSION: The SOARS score uses constitutive and readily assessed individual characteristics to predict the risk of COVID-19 death. Deployment of the score could potentially inform clinical triage in preadmission settings where expedient and reliable decision-making is key. The resurgence of SARS-CoV-2 transmission provides an opportunity to further validate and update its performance.

You Can Teach Every Patient: A Health Literacy and Clear Communication Curriculum for Pediatric Clerkship Students.

Introduction: Poor health literacy has a negative impact on various health care outcomes. Medical schools are not consistently providing health literacy training; when they do, they overly rely on didactics. Methods: Our curriculum for third-year pediatric clerkship students taught principles of health literacy and evidence-supported clear communication strategies. Communication skills were structured on a novel mnemonic: CTEP (clear language, teach-back, effectively encouraging questions, and pictures). The curriculum included a 30-minute didactic, followed 1-2 weeks later by a 90-minute interactive workshop. All 188 clerkship students attended the didactic lecture; approximately half (90) attended the follow-up workshop. All students completed a formative objective structured clinical encounter. Standardized patients then evaluated students' use of the four clear communication skills. Students completed a survey to assess confidence, knowledge, and use of the skills. Results: Compared to the didactic-only group, students in the didactic + workshop group more frequently used teach-back (53% vs. 27%, p < .01) and pictures (46% vs. 10%, p < .01). In addition, the didactic + workshop group had improved recall, self-reported use, and comfort with the skills. The didactic + workshop group solicited questions from the standardized patient less often, and there was no difference in use of clear language between the two groups. Discussion: An interactive curriculum in health literacy and clear communication for pediatric clerkship students was superior to a didactic alone. Optimizing instructional methods for health literacy skills can help future physicians properly communicate with their patients to improve health outcomes.

Applying High-Value Care Principles in a Pediatric Case: A Workshop for Health Professions Students.

Introduction: The cost of health care in the US is rapidly rising. Understanding the financial cost of medical care is an important competency for physicians and physicians-in-training. Medical students in their clinical clerkships are being exposed to health care decision-making often for the first time and are forming habits they will carry throughout their training and careers. Teaching high-value care (HVC) principles is crucial for students as they will be the future leaders in health care. Methods: This 1-hour workshop was interactive and aimed to prepare medical students to apply HVC when making medical decisions. The topic of HVC was initially introduced by eliciting tests that students want to order and highlighting the concept of whether or not a test changes the management of the patient. This exercise was followed by a PowerPoint presentation which discussed HVC, Choosing Wisely guidelines in pediatrics, and how to communicate with parents and patients about this topic. Results: Of third-year medical students, 125 participated in the workshop, with a survey response rate of 90% (n = 112). Ninety-nine percent reported that this workshop was helpful, and 97% reported that they will change their practice to reflect more cost-conscious care. Most students reported that their knowledge of HVC improved after the session, with 88% reporting scores of 3 (moderately improved) or 4 (significantly improved). Discussion: This ready-to-implement workshop offered students an understanding of how the cost of medical care impacts patients and families and how to practice cost-conscious care in pediatrics.

Providing Pediatric Palliative Care Education Using Problem-Based Learning.

BACKGROUND: The Institute of Medicine and the American Academy of Pediatrics has called for improvement in education and training of pediatricians in pediatric palliative care (PPC). Given the shortage of PPC physicians and the immediate need for PPC medical education, this study reports the outcomes of a problem-based learning (PBL) module facilitated by academic general and subspecialty pediatric faculty (non-PPC specialists) to third year medical students. Objectives/Setting: To test the effectiveness of a PPC-PBL module on third year medical students' and pediatric faculty's declarative knowledge, attitudes toward, perceived exposure, and self-assessed competency in PPC objectives. DESIGN: A PBL module was developed using three PPC learning objectives as a framework: define core concepts in palliative care; list the components of a total pain assessment; and describe key principles in establishing therapeutic relationships with patients. A PPC physician and nurse practitioner guided pediatric faculty on facilitating the PPC-PBL. In Part 1, students identified domains of palliative care for a child with refractory leukemia and self-assigned questions to research and present at the follow-up session. In Part 2, students were expected to develop a care plan demonstrating the three PPC objectives. MEASUREMENTS: Measures included a knowledge exam and a survey instrument to assess secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Students' declarative knowledge, perceived exposure, and self-assessed competency in all three PPC learning objectives improved significantly after the PPC-PBL, p = 0.002, p < 0.001, and p < 0.001, respectively. There were no significant differences in faculty knowledge test scores from baseline to follow-up, but scores were generally high (median >80%). Students and faculty rated palliative care education as "important or very important" at baseline and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that key concepts in PPC can be taught to medical students utilizing a PBL format and pediatric faculty resulting in improved knowledge and self-assessed competency in PPC.