Accuracy of Emergency Department Clinical Findings for Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We seek to describe the medical history and clinical findings of patients attending the emergency department (ED) with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and estimate the diagnostic accuracy of patients' characteristics for predicting COVID-19. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled all patients tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction in our ED from March 9, 2020, to April 4, 2020. We abstracted medical history, physical examination findings, and the clinical probability of COVID-19 (low, moderate, and high) rated by emergency physicians, depending on their clinical judgment. We assessed diagnostic accuracy of these characteristics for COVID-19 by calculating positive and negative likelihood ratios. RESULTS: We included 391 patients, of whom 225 had positive test results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction result was more likely to be negative when the emergency physician thought that clinical probability was low, and more likely to be positive when he or she thought that it was high. Patient-reported anosmia and the presence of bilateral B lines on lung ultrasonography had the highest positive likelihood ratio for the diagnosis of COVID-19 (7.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.36 to 24.36; and 7.09, 95% CI 2.77 to 18.12, respectively). The absence of a high clinical probability determined by the emergency physician and the absence of bilateral B lines on lung ultrasonography had the lowest negative likelihood ratio for the diagnosis of COVID-19 (0.33, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.43; and 0.26, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.45, respectively). CONCLUSION: Anosmia, emergency physician estimate of high clinical probability, and bilateral B lines on lung ultrasonography increased the likelihood of identifying COVID-19 in patients presenting to the ED.

Central venous oxygen saturation is not predictive of early complications in cancer patients presenting to the emergency department.

Central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) is easily observable in oncology patients with long-term central venous catheters (CVC), and has been studied as a prognostic factor in patients with sepsis. We sought to investigate the association between ScvO2 and early complications in cancer patients presenting to the ED. We prospectively enrolled adult cancer patients with pre-existing CVC who presented to the ED. ScvO2 was measured on their CVC. The outcome was admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) or mortality by day 7. ScvO2 was first studied as a continuous variable (%) with a ROC analysis and as a categorical variable (cut-off at < 70%) with a multivariate analysis. A total of 210 cancer patients were enrolled. At baseline, ScvO2 showed no significant difference between patients who were admitted to the ICU or died before day 7, and patients who did not (67%; IQR 62-68% vs. 71%; IQR 65-78% respectively, P = 0.3). The ROC analysis showed the absence of discrimination accuracy for ScvO2 to predict the outcome (AUC = 0.56). By multivariate analysis, ScvO2 < 70% was not associated with the outcome (OR 1.67; 95% CI 0.64-4.36). Variables that were associated with ICU admission or death by day 7 included a shock-index (heart rate/systolic blood pressure) > 1 and a performance status > 2 (OR 4.76; 95% CI 1.81-12.52 and OR 6.23, 95% CI 2.40-16.17, respectively). This study does not support the use of ScvO2 to risk stratify cancer patients presenting to the ED.