Search

Purpose: Early diagnosis of COVID-19 has a crucial role in confining the spread among the population. Lung ultrasound (LUS) was included in the diagnostic pathway for its high sensitivity, low costs, non-invasiveness and safety. We aimed to test the sensitivity of LUS to rule out COVID-19 pneumonia (COVIDp) in a population of patients with suggestive symptoms.Methods: Multicentre prospective observational study in three EDs in Northeastern Italy during the first COVID-19 outbreak. A convenience sample of 235 patients admitted to the ED for symptoms suggestive COVIDp (fever, cough or shortness of breath) from 17 March 2020 to 26 April 2020 was enrolled. All patients underwent a sequential assessment involving: clinical examination, LUS, CXR and arterial blood gas. The index test under investigation was a standardised protocol of LUS compared with a pragmatic composite reference standard constituted by: clinical gestalt, real-time PCR test, radiological and blood gas results. Of the 235 enrolled patients, 90 were diagnosed with COVIDp according to the reference standard.Results: Among the patients with suspected COVIDp, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was 38.3%. The sensitivity of LUS for diagnosing COVIDp was 85.6% (95% CI 76.6% to 92.1%); the specificity was 91.7% (95% CI 86.0% to 95.7%). The positive predictive value and the negative predictive value were 86.5% (95%CI 78.8% to 91.7%) and 91.1% (95% CI 86.1% to 94.4%) respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of LUS for COVIDp was 89.4% (95% CI 84.7% to 93.0%). The positive likelihood ratio was 10.3 (95% CI 6.0 to 17.9), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.16 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.3).Conclusion: In a population with high SARS-CoV-2 prevalence, LUS has a high sensitivity (and negative predictive value) enough to rule out COVIDp in patients with suggestive symptoms. The role of LUS in diagnosing patients with COVIDp is perhaps even more promising. Nevertheless, further research with adequately powered studies is needed.Trial Registration Number: NCT04370275. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During the first COVID-19 lockdown in Italy, it was observed a reduction in emergency department (ED) attendances due to non-SARS-COV-2-related acute/chronic conditions. Objective: To analyze the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on patients reporting headache as the principal presenting symptom on admission to the ED of the tertiary care University Hospital of Trieste over the relevant period. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the frequency, features, and management of ED attendances for headache during the COVID-19 lockdown from 8 March to 31 May 2020, comparing it with the pre-lockdown period (January–February 2020) and the first 5 months of 2019. Results: A reduction in ED total attendances was observed in the first 5 months of 2020 compared to the same period in 2019 (21.574 and 30.364, respectively; − 29%), in particular with respect to headache-related attendances (174 and 339 respectively; − 49%). During the COVID-19 lockdown, it was recorded a minor reduction in the ED access rate of female patients (p = 0.03), while no significant variation was detected in repeaters' prevalence, diagnostic assessment, and acute treatment. The ratio of not otherwise specified, secondary, and primary headaches (48.4%, 30.6%, and 21.0% respectively) remained unchanged during the COVID-19 lockdown, in comparison to the control periods. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted the number of ED attendances for headache but not their management and setting. Despite a reduction of accesses for headache due to the pandemic emergency, the distribution of headache subtypes and the rate of repeaters did not change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Methods Results Conclusions Clinical Relevance Early identification of sepsis in the emergency department (ED) triage is both valuable and challenging. Numerous studies have endeavored to pinpoint clinical and biochemical criteria to assist clinicians in the prompt diagnosis of sepsis, but few studies have assessed the efficacy of these criteria in the ED triage setting. The aim of the study was to explore the accuracy of clinical and laboratory markers evaluated at the triage level in identifying patients with sepsis.A prospective study was conducted in a large academic urban hospital, implementing a triage protocol aimed at early identification of septic patients based on clinical and laboratory markers. A multidisciplinary panel of experts reviewed cases to ensure accurate identification of septic patients. Variables analyzed included: Charlson comorbidity index, mean arterial pressure (MAP), partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PetCO2), white cell count, eosinophil count, C‐reactive protein to albumin ratio, procalcitonin, and lactate.A total of 235 patients were included. Multivariable analysis identified procalcitonin ≥1 ng/mL (OR 5.2; p < 0.001); CRP‐to‐albumin ratio ≥32 (OR 6.6; p < 0.001); PetCO2 ≤ 28 mmHg (OR 2.7; p = 0.031), and MAP <85 mmHg (OR 7.5; p < 0.001) as independent predictors for sepsis. MAP ≥85 mmHg, CRP/albumin ratio <32, and procalcitonin <1 ng/mL demonstrated negative predictive values for sepsis of 90%, 89%, and 88%, respectively.Our study underscores the significance of procalcitonin and mean arterial pressure, while introducing CRP/albumin ratio and PetCO2 as important variables to consider in the very initial assessment of patients with suspected sepsis in the ED. Early identification of sepsis since the emergency department (ED) triage is challenging Implementing the ED triage protocol with simple clinical and laboratory markers allows to recognize patients with sepsis with a very good discriminatory power (AUC 0.88) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Early diagnosis of COVID-19 has a crucial role in confining the spread among the population. Lung ultrasound (LUS) was included in the diagnostic pathway for its high sensitivity, low costs, non-invasiveness and safety. We aimed to test the sensitivity of LUS to rule out COVID-19 pneumonia (COVIDp) in a population of patients with suggestive symptoms., Methods: Multicentre prospective observational study in three EDs in Northeastern Italy during the first COVID-19 outbreak. A convenience sample of 235 patients admitted to the ED for symptoms suggestive COVIDp (fever, cough or shortness of breath) from 17 March 2020 to 26 April 2020 was enrolled. All patients underwent a sequential assessment involving: clinical examination, LUS, CXR and arterial blood gas. The index test under investigation was a standardised protocol of LUS compared with a pragmatic composite reference standard constituted by: clinical gestalt, real-time PCR test, radiological and blood gas results. Of the 235 enrolled patients, 90 were diagnosed with COVIDp according to the reference standard., Results: Among the patients with suspected COVIDp, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was 38.3%. The sensitivity of LUS for diagnosing COVIDp was 85.6% (95% CI 76.6% to 92.1%); the specificity was 91.7% (95% CI 86.0% to 95.7%). The positive predictive value and the negative predictive value were 86.5% (95%CI 78.8% to 91.7%) and 91.1% (95% CI 86.1% to 94.4%) respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of LUS for COVIDp was 89.4% (95% CI 84.7% to 93.0%). The positive likelihood ratio was 10.3 (95% CI 6.0 to 17.9), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.16 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.3)., Conclusion: In a population with high SARS-CoV-2 prevalence, LUS has a high sensitivity (and negative predictive value) enough to rule out COVIDp in patients with suggestive symptoms. The role of LUS in diagnosing patients with COVIDp is perhaps even more promising. Nevertheless, further research with adequately powered studies is needed., Trial Registration Number: NCT04370275., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)