scholarly journals Post-exertion oxygen saturation as a prognostic factor for adverse outcome in patients attending the emergency department with suspected COVID-19: a substudy of the PRIEST observational cohort study

2020 ◽  
pp. emermed-2020-210528
Author(s):  
Steve Goodacre ◽  
Ben Thomas ◽  
Ellen Lee ◽  
Laura Sutton ◽  
Amanda Loban ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Oxygen Saturation ◽  
Adverse Outcome ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Likelihood Ratios ◽  
Hospital Records ◽  
C Statistic ◽  
Observational Cohort

BackgroundMeasurement of post-exertion oxygen saturation has been proposed to assess illness severity in suspected COVID-19 infection. We aimed to determine the accuracy of post-exertional oxygen saturation for predicting adverse outcome in suspected COVID-19.MethodsWe undertook a substudy of an observational cohort study across 70 emergency departments during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. We collected data prospectively, using a standardised assessment form, and retrospectively, using hospital records, from patients with suspected COVID-19, and reviewed hospital records at 30 days for adverse outcome (death or receiving organ support). Patients with post-exertion oxygen saturation recorded were selected for this analysis. We constructed receiver-operating characteristic curves, calculated diagnostic parameters, and developed a multivariable model for predicting adverse outcome.ResultsWe analysed data from 817 patients with post-exertion oxygen saturation recorded after excluding 54 in whom measurement appeared unfeasible. The c-statistic for post-exertion change in oxygen saturation was 0.589 (95% CI 0.465 to 0.713), and the positive and negative likelihood ratios of a 3% or more desaturation were, respectively, 1.78 (1.25 to 2.53) and 0.67 (0.46 to 0.98). Multivariable analysis showed that post-exertion oxygen saturation was not a significant predictor of adverse outcome when baseline clinical assessment was taken into account (p=0.368). Secondary analysis excluding patients in whom post-exertion measurement appeared inappropriate resulted in a c-statistic of 0.699 (0.581 to 0.817), likelihood ratios of 1.98 (1.26 to 3.10) and 0.61 (0.35 to 1.07), and some evidence of additional prognostic value on multivariable analysis (p=0.019).ConclusionsPost-exertion oxygen saturation provides modest prognostic information in the assessment of selected patients attending the emergency department with suspected COVID-19.Trial registration numberISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN56149622) http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN28342533.

scholarly journals Post-exertion oxygen saturation as a prognostic factor for adverse outcome in patients attending the emergency department with suspected COVID-19: Observational cohort study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Goodacre ◽  
Ben Thomas ◽  
Ellen Lee ◽  
Laura Sutton ◽  
Katie Biggs ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Oxygen Saturation ◽  
Adverse Outcome ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Likelihood Ratios ◽  
Hospital Records ◽  
C Statistic ◽  
Observational Cohort

Background Measurement of post-exertion oxygen saturation has been proposed to assess illness severity in suspected COVID-19 infection. We aimed to determine the accuracy of post-exertional oxygen saturation for predicting adverse outcome in suspected COVID-19. Methods We undertook an observational cohort study across 70 emergency departments during first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. We collected data prospectively, using a standardised assessment form, and retrospectively, using hospital records, from patients with suspected COVID-19, and reviewed hospital records at 30 days for adverse outcome (death or receiving organ support). Patients with post-exertion oxygen saturation recorded were selected for this analysis. Results We analysed data from 817 patients with post-exertion oxygen saturation recorded after excluding 54 in whom measurement appeared unfeasible. The c-statistic for post-exertion change in oxygen saturation was 0.589 (95% confidence interval 0.465 to 0.713), and the positive and negative likelihood ratios of a 3% or more desaturation were respectively 1.78 (1.25 to 2.53) and 0.67 (0.46 to 0.98). Multivariable analysis showed that post-exertion oxygen saturation was not a significant predictor of adverse outcome when baseline clinical assessment was taken into account (p=0.368). Secondary analysis excluding patients in whom post-exertion measurement appeared inappropriate resulted in a c-statistic of 0.699 (0.581 to 0.817), likelihood ratios of 1.98 (1.26 to 3.10) and 0.61 (0.35 to 1.07), and some evidence of additional prognostic value on multivariable analysis (p=0.019). Conclusions Post-exertion oxygen saturation provides modest prognostic information in the assessment of patients attending the emergency department with suspected COVID-19.

scholarly journals Derivation and validation of a clinical severity score for acutely ill adults with suspected COVID-19: The PRIEST observational cohort study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Goodacre ◽  
Ben Thomas ◽  
Laura Sutton ◽  
Matthew Bursnall ◽  
Ellen Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Adverse Outcome ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Clinical Score ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Observational Cohort ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Ill Adults

AbstractObjectivesWe aimed to derive and validate a triage tool, based on clinical assessment alone, for predicting adverse outcome in acutely ill adults with suspected COVID-19 infection.MethodsWe undertook a mixed prospective and retrospective observational cohort study in 70 emergency departments across the United Kingdom (UK). We collected presenting data from 22445 people attending with suspected COVID-19 between 26 March 2020 and 28 May 2020. The primary outcome was death or organ support (respiratory, cardiovascular, or renal) by record review at 30 days. We split the cohort into derivation and validation sets, developed a clinical score based on the coefficients from multivariable analysis using the derivation set, and the estimated discriminant performance using the validation set.ResultsWe analysed 11773 derivation and 9118 validation cases. Multivariable analysis identified that age, sex, respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure, oxygen saturation/inspired oxygen ratio, performance status, consciousness, history of renal impairment, and respiratory distress were retained in analyses restricted to the ten or fewer predictors. We used findings from multivariable analysis and clinical judgement to develop a score based on the NEWS2 score, age, sex, and performance status. This had a c-statistic of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.79-0.81) in the validation cohort and predicted adverse outcome with sensitivity 0.98 (0.97-0.98) and specificity 0.34 (0.34-0.35) for scores above four points.ConclusionA clinical score based on NEWS2, age, sex, and performance status predicts adverse outcome with good discrimination in adults with suspected COVID-19 and can be used to support decision-making in emergency care.RegistrationISRCTN registry, ISRCTN28342533, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN28342533

scholarly journals Derivation and validation of a clinical severity score for acutely ill adults with suspected COVID-19: The PRIEST observational cohort study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. e0245840 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Goodacre ◽  
Ben Thomas ◽  
Laura Sutton ◽  
Matthew Burnsall ◽  
Ellen Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Adverse Outcome ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Clinical Score ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Clinical Severity ◽  
Observational Cohort ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Ill Adults

Objectives We aimed to derive and validate a triage tool, based on clinical assessment alone, for predicting adverse outcome in acutely ill adults with suspected COVID-19 infection. Methods We undertook a mixed prospective and retrospective observational cohort study in 70 emergency departments across the United Kingdom (UK). We collected presenting data from 22445 people attending with suspected COVID-19 between 26 March 2020 and 28 May 2020. The primary outcome was death or organ support (respiratory, cardiovascular, or renal) by record review at 30 days. We split the cohort into derivation and validation sets, developed a clinical score based on the coefficients from multivariable analysis using the derivation set, and the estimated discriminant performance using the validation set. Results We analysed 11773 derivation and 9118 validation cases. Multivariable analysis identified that age, sex, respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure, oxygen saturation/inspired oxygen ratio, performance status, consciousness, history of renal impairment, and respiratory distress were retained in analyses restricted to the ten or fewer predictors. We used findings from multivariable analysis and clinical judgement to develop a score based on the NEWS2 score, age, sex, and performance status. This had a c-statistic of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.79–0.81) in the validation cohort and predicted adverse outcome with sensitivity 0.98 (0.97–0.98) and specificity 0.34 (0.34–0.35) for scores above four points. Conclusion A clinical score based on NEWS2, age, sex, and performance status predicts adverse outcome with good discrimination in adults with suspected COVID-19 and can be used to support decision-making in emergency care. Registration ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN28342533, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN28342533

scholarly journals Prognostic accuracy of emergency department triage tools for children with suspected COVID-19: The PRIEST observational cohort study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie Biggs ◽  
Ben Thomas ◽  
Steve Goodacre ◽  
Ellen Lee ◽  
Laura Sutton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Adverse Outcome ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Swine Flu ◽  
Severe Illness ◽  
Prognostic Accuracy ◽  
Emergency Department Triage ◽  
Observational Cohort

Objectives: Emergency department clinicians can use triage tools to predict adverse outcome and support management decisions for children presenting with suspected COVID-19. We aimed to estimate the accuracy of triage tools for predicting severe illness in children presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected COVID-19 infection. Methods: We undertook a mixed prospective and retrospective observational cohort study in 44 EDs across the United Kingdom (UK). We collected data from children attending with suspected COVID-19 between 26 March 2020 and 28 May 2020, and used presenting data to determine the results of assessment using the WHO algorithm, swine flu hospital pathway for children (SFHPC), Paediatric Observation Priority Score (POPS) and Childrens Observation and Severity Tool (COAST). We recorded 30-day outcome data (death or receipt of respiratory, cardiovascular or renal support) to determine prognostic accuracy for adverse outcome. Results: We collected data from 1530 children, including 26 (1.7%) with an adverse outcome. C-statistics were 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.73-0.87) for the WHO algorithm, 0.80 (0.71-0.90) for POPS, 0.76 (0.67-0.85) for COAST, and 0.71 (0.59-0.82) for SFHPC. Using pre-specified thresholds, the WHO algorithm had the highest sensitivity (0.85) and lowest specificity (0.75), but POPS and COAST could optimise sensitivity (0.96 and 0.92 respectively) at the expense of specificity (0.25 and 0.38 respectively) by using a threshold of any score above zero instead of the pre-specified threshold. Conclusion: Existing triage tools have good but not excellent prediction for adverse outcome in children with suspected COVID-19. POPS and COAST could achieve an appropriate balance of sensitivity and specificity for supporting decisions to discharge home by considering any score above zero to be positive.

scholarly journals Prognostic accuracy of emergency department triage tools for adults with suspected COVID-19: The PRIEST observational cohort study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Thomas ◽  
Steve Goodacre ◽  
Ellen Lee ◽  
Laura Sutton ◽  
Amanda Loban ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Adverse Outcome ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Organ Support ◽  
Good Sensitivity ◽  
Who Criteria ◽  
Prognostic Accuracy ◽  
Observational Cohort

Objectives: The World Health Organisation (WHO) and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommend various triage tools to assist decision-making for patients with suspected COVID-19. We aimed to estimate the accuracy of triage tools for predicting severe illness in adults presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected COVID-19 infection. Methods: We undertook a mixed prospective and retrospective observational cohort study in 70 EDs across the United Kingdom (UK). We collected data from people attending with suspected COVID-19 between 26 March 2020 and 28 May 2020, and used presenting data to determine the results of assessment with the following triage tools: the WHO algorithm, NEWS2, CURB-65, CRB-65, PMEWS and the swine flu adult hospital pathway (SFAHP). We used 30-day outcome data (death or receipt of respiratory, cardiovascular or renal support) to determine prognostic accuracy for adverse outcome. Results: We analysed data from 20892 adults, of whom 4672 (22.4%) died or received organ support (primary outcome), with 2058 (9.9%) receiving organ support and 2614 (12.5%) dying without organ support (secondary outcomes). C-statistics for the primary outcome were: CURB-65 0.75; CRB-65 0.70; PMEWS 0.77; NEWS2 (score) 0.77; NEWS2 (rule) 0.69; SFAHP (6-point) 0.70; SFAHP (7-point) 0.68; WHO algorithm 0.61. All triage tools showed worse prediction for receipt of organ support and better prediction for death without organ support. At the recommended threshold, PMEWS and the WHO criteria showed good sensitivity (0.96 and 0.95 respectively), at the expense of specificity (0.31 and 0.27 respectively). NEWS2 showed similar sensitivity (0.96) and specificity (0.28) when a lower threshold than recommended was used. Conclusion: CURB-65, PMEWS and NEWS2 provide good but not excellent prediction for adverse outcome in suspected COVID-19, and predicted death without organ support better than receipt of organ support. PMEWS, the WHO criteria and NEWS2 (using a lower threshold than usually recommended) provide good sensitivity at the expense of specificity.

scholarly journals Predictors of brain infarction in adult patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: an observational cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Riccardo Iacobelli ◽  
Alexander Fletcher-Sandersjöö ◽  
Caroline Lindblad ◽  
Boris Keselman ◽  
Eric Peter Thelin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Brain Infarction ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Group Analysis ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Observational Cohort ◽  
Va Ecmo

AbstractNon-hemorrhagic brain infarction (BI) is a recognized complication in adults treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and associated with increased mortality. However, predictors of BI in these patients are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of BI in ECMO-treated adult patients. We conducted an observational cohort study of all adult patients treated with venovenous or venoarterial (VA) ECMO at our center between 2010 and 2018. The primary endpoint was a computed tomography (CT) verified BI. Logistic regression models were employed to identify BI predictors. In total, 275 patients were included, of whom 41 (15%) developed a BI. Pre-ECMO Simplified Acute Physiology Score III, pre-ECMO cardiac arrest, VA ECMO and conversion between ECMO modes were identified as predictors of BI. In the multivariable analysis, VA ECMO demonstrated independent risk association. VA ECMO also remained the independent BI predictor in a sub-group analysis excluding patients who did not undergo a head CT scan during ECMO treatment. The incidence of BI in adult ECMO patients may be higher than previously believed and is independently associated with VA ECMO mode. Larger prospective trials are warranted to validate these findings and ascertain their clinical significance.

scholarly journals Obesity and smoking as risk factors for invasive mechanical ventilation in COVID-19: A retrospective, observational cohort study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. e0238552
Author(s):  
Ana C. Monteiro ◽  
Rajat Suri ◽  
Iheanacho O. Emeruwa ◽  
Robert J. Stretch ◽  
Roxana Y. Cortes-Lopez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Smoking History ◽  
Observational Cohort ◽  
Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

Purpose To describe the trajectory of respiratory failure in COVID-19 and explore factors associated with risk of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Materials and methods A retrospective, observational cohort study of 112 inpatient adults diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 12 and April 16, 2020. Data were manually extracted from electronic medical records. Multivariable and Univariable regression were used to evaluate association between baseline characteristics, initial serum markers and the outcome of IMV. Results Our cohort had median age of 61 (IQR 45–74) and was 66% male. In-hospital mortality was 6% (7/112). ICU mortality was 12.8% (6/47), and 18% (5/28) for those requiring IMV. Obesity (OR 5.82, CI 1.74–19.48), former (OR 8.06, CI 1.51–43.06) and current smoking status (OR 10.33, CI 1.43–74.67) were associated with IMV after adjusting for age, sex, and high prevalence comorbidities by multivariable analysis. Initial absolute lymphocyte count (OR 0.33, CI 0.11–0.96), procalcitonin (OR 1.27, CI 1.02–1.57), IL-6 (OR 1.17, CI 1.03–1.33), ferritin (OR 1.05, CI 1.005–1.11), LDH (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.13–2.17) and CRP (OR 1.13, CI 1.06–1.21), were associated with IMV by univariate analysis. Conclusions Obesity, smoking history, and elevated inflammatory markers were associated with increased need for IMV in patients with COVID-19.

scholarly journals Clinical characteristics of children and young people admitted to hospital with covid-19 in United Kingdom: prospective multicentre observational cohort study

BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m3249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivia V Swann ◽  
Karl A Holden ◽  
Lance Turtle ◽  
Louisa Pollock ◽  
Cameron J Fairfield ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Young People ◽  
Clinical Features ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Case Definition ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
High Dependency ◽  
Observational Cohort

Abstract Objective To characterise the clinical features of children and young people admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the UK and explore factors associated with admission to critical care, mortality, and development of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children and adolescents temporarily related to coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) (MIS-C). Design Prospective observational cohort study with rapid data gathering and near real time analysis. Setting 260 hospitals in England, Wales, and Scotland between 17 January and 3 July 2020, with a minimum follow-up time of two weeks (to 17 July 2020). Participants 651 children and young people aged less than 19 years admitted to 138 hospitals and enrolled into the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emergency Infections Consortium (ISARIC) WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK study with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2. Main outcome measures Admission to critical care (high dependency or intensive care), in-hospital mortality, or meeting the WHO preliminary case definition for MIS-C. Results Median age was 4.6 (interquartile range 0.3-13.7) years, 35% (225/651) were under 12 months old, and 56% (367/650) were male. 57% (330/576) were white, 12% (67/576) South Asian, and 10% (56/576) black. 42% (276/651) had at least one recorded comorbidity. A systemic mucocutaneous-enteric cluster of symptoms was identified, which encompassed the symptoms for the WHO MIS-C criteria. 18% (116/632) of children were admitted to critical care. On multivariable analysis, this was associated with age under 1 month (odds ratio 3.21, 95% confidence interval 1.36 to 7.66; P=0.008), age 10-14 years (3.23, 1.55 to 6.99; P=0.002), and black ethnicity (2.82, 1.41 to 5.57; P=0.003). Six (1%) of 627 patients died in hospital, all of whom had profound comorbidity. 11% (52/456) met the WHO MIS-C criteria, with the first patient developing symptoms in mid-March. Children meeting MIS-C criteria were older (median age 10.7 (8.3-14.1) v 1.6 (0.2-12.9) years; P<0.001) and more likely to be of non-white ethnicity (64% (29/45) v 42% (148/355); P=0.004). Children with MIS-C were five times more likely to be admitted to critical care (73% (38/52) v 15% (62/404); P<0.001). In addition to the WHO criteria, children with MIS-C were more likely to present with fatigue (51% (24/47) v 28% (86/302); P=0.004), headache (34% (16/47) v 10% (26/263); P<0.001), myalgia (34% (15/44) v 8% (21/270); P<0.001), sore throat (30% (14/47) v (12% (34/284); P=0.003), and lymphadenopathy (20% (9/46) v 3% (10/318); P<0.001) and to have a platelet count of less than 150 × 10 9 /L (32% (16/50) v 11% (38/348); P<0.001) than children who did not have MIS-C. No deaths occurred in the MIS-C group. Conclusions Children and young people have less severe acute covid-19 than adults. A systemic mucocutaneous-enteric symptom cluster was also identified in acute cases that shares features with MIS-C. This study provides additional evidence for refining the WHO MIS-C preliminary case definition. Children meeting the MIS-C criteria have different demographic and clinical features depending on whether they have acute SARS-CoV-2 infection (polymerase chain reaction positive) or are post-acute (antibody positive). Study registration ISRCTN66726260.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document