Interest of Absolute Eosinopenia as a Marker of Influenza in Outpatients during the Fall-Winter Seasons 2016–2018 in the Greater Paris Area: The SUPERFLUOUS Study

Introduction: Prior to the emergence of COVID-19, when influenza was the predominant cause of viral respiratory tract infections (VRTIs), this study aimed to analyze the distinct biological abnormalities associated with influenza in outpatient settings. Methods: A multicenter retrospective study was conducted among outpatients, with the majority seeking consultation at the emergency department, who tested positive for VRTIs using RT-PCR between 2016 and 2018. Patient characteristics were compared between influenza (A and B types) and non-influenza viruses, and predictors of influenza were identified using two different models focusing on absolute eosinopenia (0/mm3) and lymphocyte count 3. Results: Among 590 VRTIs, 116 (19.7%) were identified as outpatients, including 88 cases of influenza. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed the following predictors of influenza: in the first model, winter season (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 7.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12–45.08) and absolute eosinopenia (aOR 6.16, 95% CI 1.14–33.24); in the second model, winter season (aOR 9.08, 95% CI 1.49–55.40) and lymphocyte count 3 (aOR 7.37, 95% CI 1.86–29.20). Absolute eosinopenia exhibited the highest specificity and positive predictive value (92% and 92.3%, respectively). Conclusion: During the winter season, specific biological abnormalities can aid physicians in identifying influenza cases and guide the appropriate use of antiviral therapy when rapid molecular tests are not readily available

Association between Covid-19 and Pulmonary Embolism (AC-19-PE study)

International audienceThe frequency of PE in COVID patients attending Spanish and French ED is around 0.7%The risk of PE in patients coming to ED is more than 7-fold higher in COVID than in non-COVID population.However, once PE is suspected and CTPA is ordered, the rate of PE diagnosis is similar in COVID and non-COVID patients

Comparison of Patients Infected With Delta Versus Omicron COVID-19 Variants Presenting to Paris Emergency Departments

International audienceBackground: At the end of 2021, the B.1.1.529 SARS-CoV-2 variant (Omicron) wave superseded the B.1.617.2 variant (Delta) wave.Objective: To compare baseline characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Delta variant versus the Omicron variant in the emergency department (ED).Design: Retrospective chart reviews.Setting: 13 adult EDs in academic hospitals in the Paris area from 29 November 2021 to 10 January 2022.Patients: Patients with a positive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test result for SARS-CoV-2 and variant identification.Measurements: Main outcome measures were baseline clinical and biological characteristics at ED presentation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality.Results: A total of 3728 patients had a positive RT-PCR test result for SARS-CoV-2 during the study period; 1716 patients who had a variant determination (818 Delta and 898 Omicron) were included. Median age was 58 years, and 49% were women. Patients infected with the Omicron variant were younger (54 vs. 62 years; difference, 8.0 years [95% CI, 4.6 to 11.4 years]), had a lower rate of obesity (8.0% vs. 12.5%; difference, 4.5 percentage points [CI, 1.5 to 7.5 percentage points]), were more vaccinated (65% vs. 39% for 1 dose and 22% vs. 11% for 3 doses), had a lower rate of dyspnea (26% vs. 50%; difference, 23.6 percentage points [CI, 19.0 to 28.2 percentage points]), and had a higher rate of discharge home from the ED (59% vs. 37%; difference, 21.9 percentage points [-26.5 to -17.1 percentage points]). Compared with Delta, Omicron infection was independently associated with a lower risk for ICU admission (adjusted difference, 11.4 percentage points [CI, 8.4 to 14.4 percentage points]), mechanical ventilation (adjusted difference, 3.6 percentage points [CI, 1.7 to 5.6 percentage points]), and in-hospital mortality (adjusted difference, 4.2 percentage points [CI, 2.0 to 6.5 percentage points]).Limitation: Patients with COVID-19 illness and no SARS-CoV-2 variant determination in the ED were excluded.Conclusion: Compared with the Delta variant, infection with the Omicron variant in patients in the ED had different clinical and biological patterns and was associated with better in-hospital outcomes, including higher survival

Effect of an Emergency Department Care Bundle on 30-Day Hospital Discharge and Survival Among Elderly Patients With Acute Heart Failure: The ELISABETH Randomized Clinical Trial

International audienceKey PointsQuestionDoes an intervention aimed at improving guideline adherence for the management of acute heart failure, including intensive intravenous nitrate therapy and management of precipitating factors, improve hospital discharge and survival at 30 days?FindingsIn this stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial that included 503 patients 75 years and older who presented to the emergency department with acute heart failure, implementation of an early and comprehensive care bundle compared with usual care improved guideline adherence, but had no significant effect on number of days alive and out of hospital at 30 days (median of 19 d in both groups).MeaningsThis emergency department care bundle did not improve 30-day outcomes among older patients with acute heart failure. AbstractImportanceClinical guidelines for the early management of acute heart failure in the emergency department (ED) setting are based on only moderate levels of evidence, with subsequent low adherence to these guidelines.ObjectiveTo test the effect of an early guideline-recommended care bundle on short-term prognosis in older patients with acute heart failure in the ED.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsStepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in 15 EDs in France of 503 patients 75 years and older with a diagnosis of acute heart failure in the ED from December 2018 to September 2019 and followed up for 30 days until October 2019.InterventionsA care bundle that included early intravenous nitrate boluses; management of precipitating factors, such as acute coronary syndrome, infection, or atrial fibrillation; and moderate dose of intravenous diuretics (n = 200). In the control group, patient care was left to the discretion of the treating emergency physician (n = 303). Each center was randomized to the order in which they switched to the “intervention period.” After the initial 4-week control period for all centers, 1 center entered in the intervention period every 2 weeks.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end point was the number of days alive and out of hospital at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included 30-day all-cause mortality, 30-day cardiovascular mortality, unscheduled readmission, length of hospital stay, and kidney impairment.ResultsAmong 503 patients who were randomized (median age, 87 years; 298 [59%] women), 502 were analyzed. In the intervention group, patients received a median (interquartile range) of 27.0 (9-54) mg of intravenous nitrates in the first 4 hours vs 4.0 (2.0-6.0) mg in the control group (adjusted difference, 23.8 [95% CI, 13.5-34.1]). There was a significantly higher percentage of patients in the intervention group treated for their precipitating factors than in the control group (58.8% vs 31.9%; adjusted difference, 31.1% [95% CI, 14.3%-47.9%]). There was no statistically significant difference in the primary end point of the number of days alive and out of hospital at 30 days (median [interquartile range], 19 [0- 24] d in both groups; adjusted difference, −1.9 [95% CI, −6.6 to 2.8]; adjusted ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.64-1.21]). At 30 days, there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups in mortality (8.0% vs 9.7%; adjusted difference, 4.1% [95% CI, −17.2% to 25.3%]), cardiovascular mortality (5.0% vs 7.4%; adjusted difference, 2.1% [95% CI, −15.5% to 19.8%]), unscheduled readmission (14.3% vs 15.7%; adjusted difference, −1.3% [95% CI, −26.3% to 23.7%]), median length of hospital stay (8 d in both groups; adjusted difference, 2.5 [95% CI, −0.9 to 5.8]), and kidney impairment (1% in both groups).Conclusions and RelevanceAmong older patients with acute heart failure, use of a guideline-based comprehensive care bundle in the ED compared with usual care did not result in a statistically significant difference in the number of days alive and out of the hospital at 30 days. Further research is needed to identify effective treatments for acute heart failure in older patients.Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0368321

Pre-test probability for SARS-Cov-2-related infection score: The PARIS score.

IntroductionIn numerous countries, large population testing is impossible due to the limited availability of RT-PCR kits and CT-scans. This study aimed to determine a pre-test probability score for SARS-CoV-2 infection.MethodsThis multicenter retrospective study (4 University Hospitals) included patients with clinical suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Demographic characteristics, clinical symptoms, and results of blood tests (complete white blood cell count, serum electrolytes and CRP) were collected. A pre-test probability score was derived from univariate analyses of clinical and biological variables between patients and controls, followed by multivariate binary logistic analysis to determine the independent variables associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.Results605 patients were included between March 10th and April 30th, 2020 (200 patients for the training cohort, 405 consecutive patients for the validation cohort). In the multivariate analysis, lymphocyte (ConclusionsThe PARIS score has a good performance to categorize the pre-test probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection based on complete white blood cell count. It could help clinicians adapt testing and for rapid triage of patients before test results

Effect of the Pulmonary Embolism Rule-Out Criteria on Subsequent Thromboembolic Events Among Low-Risk Emergency Department Patients

International audienceImportance: The safety of the pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC), an 8-item block of clinical criteria aimed at ruling out pulmonary embolism (PE), has not been assessed in a randomized clinical trial.Objective: To prospectively validate the safety of a PERC-based strategy to rule out PE.Design, setting, and patients: A crossover cluster-randomized clinical noninferiority trial in 14 emergency departments in France. Patients with a low gestalt clinical probability of PE were included from August 2015 to September 2016, and followed up until December 2016.Interventions: Each center was randomized for the sequence of intervention periods. In the PERC period, the diagnosis of PE was excluded with no further testing if all 8 items of the PERC rule were negative.Main outcomes and measures: The primary end point was the occurrence of a thromboembolic event during the 3-month follow-up period that was not initially diagnosed. The noninferiority margin was set at 1.5%. Secondary end points included the rate of computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA), median length of stay in the emergency department, and rate of hospital admission.Results: Among 1916 patients who were cluster-randomized (mean age 44 years, 980 [51%] women), 962 were assigned to the PERC group and 954 were assigned to the control group. A total of 1749 patients completed the trial. A PE was diagnosed at initial presentation in 26 patients in the control group (2.7%) vs 14 (1.5%) in the PERC group (difference, 1.3% [95% CI, -0.1% to 2.7%]; P = .052). One PE (0.1%) was diagnosed during follow-up in the PERC group vs none in the control group (difference, 0.1% [95% CI, -∞ to 0.8%]). The proportion of patients undergoing CTPA in the PERC group vs control group was 13% vs 23% (difference, -10% [95% CI, -13% to -6%]; P < .001). In the PERC group, rates were significantly reduced for the median length of emergency department stay (mean reduction, 36 minutes [95% CI, 4 to 68]) and hospital admission (difference, 3.3% [95% CI, 0.1% to 6.6%]).Conclusions and relevance: Among very low-risk patients with suspected PE, randomization to a PERC strategy vs conventional strategy did not result in an inferior rate of thromboembolic events over 3 months. These findings support the safety of PERC for very low-risk patients presenting to the emergency department.Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02375919

Early variation of quick sequential organ failure assessment score to predict in-hospital mortality in emergency department patients with suspected infection.

BACKGROUND: The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score showed good prognostic performance in patients with suspicion of infection in the emergency department (ED). However, previous studies only assessed the performance of individual values of qSOFA during the ED stay. As this score may vary over short timeframes, the optimal time of measurement, and the prognostic value of its variation are unclear. The objective of the present study was to prospectively assess the prognostic value of the change in qSOFA over the first 3 h (ΔqSOFA = qSOFA at 3 h-qSOFA at inclusion). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is an international prospective cohort study conducted in 17 EDs in France, Belgium, and Spain. From November 2016 to March 2017, patients with a suspected infection and a qSOFA score of 2 or higher were included and followed up until death or hospital discharge. qSOFA was measured at inclusion, 1 h and 3 h. Primary end point was in-hospital mortality, truncated at 28 days. RESULTS: Of 534 recruited patients, 512 were included in the analysis. The qSOFA was improved at 3 h (ΔqSOFA < 0) in 287 (55%) patients. Overall in-hospital mortality was 27%: 44% when ΔqSOFA greater than 0, 36% when ΔqSOFA = 0, and 18% when ΔqSOFA less than 0. A positive ΔqSOFA was independently associated with reduced in-hospital mortality (adjusted hazard ratio of 0.48, 95% confidence interval: 0.34-0.68). After modeling qSOFA kinetics in the first 3 h, there was a significant difference in adjusted slopes between patients who died and those who survived (0.15, 95% confidence interval: 0.09-0.22, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients with suspected infection presenting to the ED with a qSOFA of 2 or higher, the early change in qSOFA is a strong independent predictor of mortality

Hospital vulnerability to spread of respiratory infections: close contact data collection and mathematical modelling

Abstract The transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 within hospitals can exceed that in the general community because of more frequent close proximity interactions. However, epidemic risk across wards is still poorly described. We measured CPIs directly using wearable sensors given to all those present in a clinical ward over a 36-hour period, across 15 wards in three hospitals in spring 2020. Data were collected from 2114 participants. These data were combined with a simple transmission model describing the arrival of a single index case to the ward to estimate the risk of an outbreak. Estimated epidemic risk ranged four-fold, from 0.12 secondary infections per day in an adult emergency to 0.49 per day in general paediatrics. The risk presented by an index case in a patient varied twenty-fold across wards. Using simulation, we assessed the potential impact on outbreak risk of targeting the most connected individuals for prevention. We found that targeting those with the highest cumulative contact hours was most impactful (20% reduction for 5% of the population targeted), and on average resources were better spent targeting patients. This study reveals patterns of interactions between individuals in hospital during a pandemic and opens new routes for research into airborne nosocomial risk

Assessing respiratory epidemic potential in French hospitals through collection of close contact data (April–June 2020)

Abstract The transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 within hospitals can exceed that in the general community because of more frequent close proximity interactions (CPIs). However, epidemic risk across wards is still poorly described. We measured CPIs directly using wearable sensors given to all present in a clinical ward over a 36-h period, across 15 wards in three hospitals in April-June 2020. Data were collected from 2114 participants and combined with a simple transmission model describing the arrival of a single index case to the ward to estimate the risk of an outbreak. Estimated epidemic risk ranged four-fold, from 0.12 secondary infections per day in an adult emergency to 0.49 per day in general paediatrics. The risk presented by an index case in a patient varied 20-fold across wards. Using simulation, we assessed the potential impact on outbreak risk of targeting the most connected individuals for prevention. We found that targeting those with the highest cumulative contact hours was most impactful (20% reduction for 5% of the population targeted), and on average resources were better spent targeting patients. This study reveals patterns of interactions between individuals in hospital during a pandemic and opens new routes for research into airborne nosocomial risk