Search

Objective Design a risk model to predict bacteraemia in patients attended in emergency departments (ED) for an episode of infection. Methods This was a national, prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study of blood cultures (BC) collected from adult patients (>= 18 years) attended in 71 Spanish EDs from October 1 2019 to March 31, 2020. Variables with a p value < 0.05 were introduced in the univariate analysis together with those of clinical significance. The final selection of variables for the scoring scale was made by logistic regression with selection by introduction. The results obtained were internally validated by dividing the sample in a derivation and a validation cohort. Results A total of 4,439 infectious episodes were included. Of these, 899 (20.25%) were considered as true bacteraemia. A predictive model for bacteraemia was defined with seven variables according to the Bacteraemia Prediction Model of the INFURG-SEMES group (MPB-INFURG-SEMES). The model achieved an area under the curve-receiver operating curve of 0.924 (CI 95%:0.914-0.934) in the derivation cohort, and 0.926 (CI 95%: 0.910-0.942) in the validation cohort. Patients were then split into ten risk categories, and had the following rates of risk: 0.2%(0 points), 0.4%(1 point), 0.9%(2 points), 1.8%(3 points), 4.7%(4 points), 19.1% (5 points), 39.1% (6 points), 56.8% (7 points), 71.1% (8 points), 82.7% (9 points) and 90.1% (10 points). Findings were similar in the validation cohort. The cut-off point of five points provided the best precision with a sensitivity of 95.94%, specificity of 76.28%, positive predictive value of 53.63% and negative predictive value of 98.50%. Conclusion The MPB-INFURG-SEMES model may be useful for the stratification of risk of bacteraemia in adult patients with infection in EDs, together with clinical judgement and other variables independent of the process and the patient.

Objective: To validate a simple risk score to predict bacteremia (MPB5-Toledo) in patients seen in the emergency departments (ED) due to infections. Methods: Prospective and multicenter observational cohort study of the blood cultures (BC) ordered in 74 Spanish ED for adults (aged 18 or older) seen from from October 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020. The predictive ability of the model was analyzed with the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (AUC-ROC). The prognostic performance for true bacteremia was calculated with the cut-off values chosen for getting the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. Results: A total of 3.843 blood samples wered cultured. True cases of bacteremia were confirmed in 839 (21.83%). The remaining 3.004 cultures (78.17%) were negative. Among the negative, 172 (4.47%) were judged to be contaminated. Low risk for bacteremia was indicated by a score of 0 to 2 points, intermediate risk by 3 to 5 points, and high risk by 6 to 8 points. Bacteremia in these 3 risk groups was predicted for 1.5%, 16.8%, and 81.6%, respectively. The model's area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.930 (95% CI, 0.916-0.948). The prognostic performance with a model's cut-off value of > 5 points achieved 94.76% (95% CI: 92.97-96.12) sensitivity, 81.56% (95% CI: 80.11-82.92) specificity, and negative predictive value of 98.24% (95% CI: 97.62-98.70). Conclusion: The 5MPB-Toledo score is useful for predicting bacteremia in patients attended in hospital emergency departments for infection. (C) 2021 Sociedad Espanola de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiologia Clinica. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

We investigated the incidence, clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcome of meningoencephalitis (ME) in patients with COVID-19 attending emergency departments (ED), before hospitalization. We retrospectively reviewed all COVID patients diagnosed with ME in 61 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, COVID-ME) during the COVID pandemic. We formed two control groups: non-COVID patients with ME (non-COVID-ME) and COVID patients without ME (COVID-non-ME). Unadjusted comparisons between cases and controls were performed regarding 57 baseline and clinical characteristics and 4 outcomes. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biochemical and serologic findings of COVID-ME and non-COVID-ME were also investigated. We identified 29 ME in 71,904 patients with COVID-19 attending EDs (0.40 parts per thousand, 95%CI=0.27-0.58). This incidence was higher than that observed in non-COVID patients (150/1,358,134, 0.11 parts per thousand, 95%CI=0.09-0.13; OR=3.65, 95%CI=2.45-5.44). With respect to non-COVID-ME, COVID-ME more frequently had dyspnea and chest X-ray abnormalities, and neck stiffness was less frequent (OR=0.3, 95%CI=0.1-0.9). In 69.0% of COVID-ME, CSF cells were predominantly lymphocytes, and SARS-CoV-2 antigen was detected by RT-PCR in 1 patient. The clinical characteristics associated with a higher risk of presenting ME in COVID patients were vomiting (OR=3.7, 95%CI=1.4-10.2), headache (OR=24.7, 95%CI=10.2-60.1), and altered mental status (OR=12.9, 95%CI=6.6-25.0). COVID-ME patients had a higher in-hospital mortality than non-COVID-ME patients (OR=2.26; 95%CI=1.04-4.48), and a higher need for hospitalization (OR=8.02; 95%CI=1.19-66.7) and intensive care admission (OR=5.89; 95%CI=3.12-11.14) than COVID-non-ME patients. ME is an unusual form of COVID presentation (

BACKGROUND Recent reports of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) developing pneumothorax correspond mainly to case reports describing mechanically ventilated patients. The real incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcome of spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) as a form of COVID-19 presentation remain to be defined. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of SP in patients with COVID-19 attending EDs differ compared with COVID-19 patients without SP and non-COVID-19 patients with SP? STUDY DESIGN AND METHOD: This case-control study retrospectively reviewed all patients with COVID-19 diagnosed with SP (case group) in 61 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs) and compared them with two control groups: COVID-19 patients without SP and non-COVID-19 patients with SP. The relative frequencies of SP were estimated in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients in the ED, and annual standardized incidences were estimated for both populations. Comparisons between case subjects and control subjects included 52 clinical, analytical, and radiologic characteristics and four outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 40 occurrences of SP in 71,904 patients with COVID-19 attending EDs (0.56 parts per thousand; 95% CI, 0.40% 0 -0.76 parts per thousand). This relative frequency was higher than that among non-COVID-19 patients (387 of 1,358,134, 0.28 parts per thousand; 95% CI, 0.26 parts per thousand 0 -0.32 parts per thousand; OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.41-2.71). The standardized incidence of SP was also higher in patients with COVID-19 (34.2 vs 8.2/100,000/year; OR, 4.19; 95% CI, 3.64-4.81). Compared with COVID-19 patients without SP, COVID-19 patients developing SP more frequently had dyspnea and chest pain, low pulse oximetry readings, tachypnea, and increased leukocyte count. Compared with non-COVID-19 patients with SP, case subjects differed in 19 clinical variables, the most prominent being a higher frequency of dysgeusia/ anosmia, headache, diarrhea, fever, and lymphopenia (all with OR > 10). All the outcomes measured, including in-hospital death, were worse in case subjects than in both control groups. INTERPRETATION: SP as a form of COVID-19 presentation at the ED is unusual (< 1 parts per thousand cases) but is more frequent than in the non-COVID-19 population and could be associated with worse outcomes than SP in non-COVID-19 patients and COVID-19 patients without SP.

BACKGROUND: Recent reports of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) developing pneumothorax correspond mainly to case reports describing mechanically ventilated patients. The real incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcome of spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) as a form of COVID-19 presentation remain to be defined. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of SP in patients with COVID-19 attending EDs differ compared with COVID-19 patients without SP and non-COVID-19 patients with SP? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This case-control study retrospectively reviewed all patients with COVID-19 diagnosed with SP (case group) in 61 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs) and compared them with two control groups: COVID-19 patients without SP and non-COVID-19 patients with SP. The relative frequencies of SP were estimated in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients in the ED, and annual standardized incidences were estimated for both populations. Comparisons between case subjects and control subjects included 52 clinical, analytical, and radiologic characteristics and four outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 40 occurrences of SP in 71,904 patients with COVID-19 attending EDs (0.56‰; 95% CI, 0.40‰-0.76‰). This relative frequency was higher than that among non-COVID-19 patients (387 of 1,358,134, 0.28‰; 95% CI, 0.26‰-0.32‰; OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.41-2.71). The standardized incidence of SP was also higher in patients with COVID-19 (34.2 vs 8.2/100,000/year; OR, 4.19; 95% CI, 3.64-4.81). Compared with COVID-19 patients without SP, COVID-19 patients developing SP more frequently had dyspnea and chest pain, low pulse oximetry readings, tachypnea, and increased leukocyte count. Compared with non-COVID-19 patients with SP, case subjects differed in 19 clinical variables, the most prominent being a higher frequency of dysgeusia/anosmia, headache, diarrhea, fever, and lymphopenia (all with OR > 10). All the outcomes measured, including in-hospital death, were worse in case subjects than in both control groups. INTERPRETATION: SP as a form of COVID-19 presentation at the ED is unusual (< 1‰ cases) but is more frequent than in the non-COVID-19 population and could be associated with worse outcomes than SP in non-COVID-19 patients and COVID-19 patients without SP.

The aim was to develop a predictive model of infection by multidrug-resistant microorganisms (MDRO). A national, retrospective cohort study was carried out including all patients attended for an infectious disease in 54 Spanish Emergency Departments (ED), in whom a microbiological isolation was available from a culture obtained during their attention in the ED. A MDRO infection prediction model was created in a derivation cohort using backward logistic regression. Those variables significant at p < 0.05 assigned an integer score proportional to the regression coefficient. The model was then internally validated by k-fold cross-validation and in the validation cohort. A total of 5460 patients were included; 1345 (24.6%) were considered to have a MDRO infection. Twelve independent risk factors were identified in the derivation cohort and were combined into an overall score, the ATM (assessment of threat for MDRO) score. The model achieved an area under the curve-receiver operating curve of 0.76 (CI 95% 0.74-0.78) in the derivation cohort and 0.72 (CI 95% 0.70-0.75) in the validation cohort (p = 0.0584). Patients were then split into 6 risk categories and had the following rates of risk: 7% (0-2 points), 16% (3-5 points), 24% (6-9 points), 33% (10-14 points), 47% (15-21 points), and 71% (> 21 points). Findings were similar in the validation cohort. Several patient-specific factors were independently associated with MDRO infection risk. When integrated into a clinical prediction rule, higher risk scores and risk classes were related to an increased risk for MDRO infection. This clinical prediction rule could be used by providers to identify patients at high risk and help to guide antibiotic strategy decisions, while accounting for clinical judgment.

Background: The performance of blood biomarkers (mid-regional proadrenomedullin (MR-proADM), procalcitonin (PCT), C-reactive protein (CRP), and lactate) and clinical scores (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), and quick SOFA) was compared to identify patient populations at risk of delayed treatment initiation and disease progression after presenting to the emergency department (ED) with a suspected infection. Methods: A prospective observational study across three EDs. Biomarker and clinical score values were calculated upon presentation and 72 h, and logistic and Cox regression used to assess the strength of association. Primary outcomes comprised of 28-day mortality prediction and delayed antibiotic administration or intensive care (ICU) admission, whilst secondary outcomes identified subsequent disease progression. Results: Six hundred eighty-four patients were enrolled with hospitalisation, ICU admission, and infection-related 28-day mortality rates of 72.8%, 3.4%, and 4.4%, respectively. MR-proADM and NEWS had the strongest association with hospitalisation and the requirement for antibiotic administration, whereas MR-proADM alone had the strongest association with ICU admission (OR [95% CI]: 5.8 [3.1 - 10.8]) and mortality (HR [95% CI]: 3.8 [2.2 - 6.5]). Patient subgroups with high MR-proADM concentrations (>= 1.77 nmol/L) and low NEWS (< 5 points) values had significantly higher rates of ICU admission (8.1% vs 1.6%; p < 0.001), hospital readmission (18.9% vs. 5.9%; p < 0.001), infection-related mortality (13.5% vs. 0.2%; p < 0.001), and disease progression (29.7% vs. 4.9%; p < 0.001) than corresponding patients with low MR-proADM concentrations. ICU admission was delayed by 1.5 [0.25 - 5.0] days in patients with high MR-proADM and low NEWS values compared to corresponding patients with high NEWS values, despite similar 28-day mortality rates (13.5% vs. 16.5%). Antibiotics were withheld in 17.4% of patients with high MR-proADM and low NEWS values, with higher subsequent rates of ICU admission (27.3% vs. 4.8%) and infection-related hospital readmission (54.5% vs. 14.3%) compared to those administered antibiotics during ED treatment. Conclusions: Patients with low severity signs of infection but high MR-proADM concentrations had an increased likelihood of subsequent disease progression, delayed antibiotic administration or ICU admission. Appropriate triage decisions and the rapid use of antibiotics in patients with high MR-proADM concentrations may constitute initial steps in escalating or intensifying early treatment strategies.

Fundamento. Determinar las características clínicas de los enfermos con infección que ingresan desde urgencias y comparar las que lo hacen en una unidad de corta estancia (UCE) con las unidades de hospitalización convencional (UHC). Material y métodos. Estudio descriptivo multicéntrico con análisis transversal en 10 servicios de urgencias con UCE de pacientes con infección que ingresan. Se analizó edad, género, comorbilidad, factores de riesgo para patógenos multirresistentes, tipo de infección, criterios de sepsis, microbiología y antibioticoterapia. Resultados. Ingresaron 780 enfermos; edad media 70,43 años; 31% con cardiopatía, 29% con EPOC, 26% con diabetes mellitus, 15% con antibioticoterapia previa y neoplasia sólida. El 54% eran infecciones respiratorias, 22% urinarias y 8% intraabdominales. El 13% presentó síndrome séptico y los antibióticos más prescritos fueron betalactámicos (64%) y fluorquinolonas (29%). Al comparar los episodios que ingresaron en UCE (183) respecto UHC (597), estos últimos tenían más comorbilidad (86% vs. 78%) y factores de riesgo de patógenos multirresistentes (42% vs. 25%) y se practicaban más cultivos (80% vs. 64%) (p