Novel Use of Home Pulse Oximetry Monitoring in COVID-19 Patients Discharged From the Emergency Department Identifies Need for Hospitalization

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to evaluate patient-reported oxygen saturation (SpO2 ) using pulse oximetry as a home monitoring tool for patients with initially nonsevere COVID-19 to identify need for hospitalization. METHODS: Patients were enrolled at the emergency department (ED) and outpatient testing centers. Each patient was given a home pulse oximeter and instructed to record their SpO2 every 8 hours. Patients were instructed to return to the ED for sustained home SpO2 \u3c 92% or if they felt they needed emergent medical attention. Relative risk was used to assess the relation between hospitalization and home SpO2 \u3c 92% in COVID-19-positive patients. RESULTS: We enrolled 209 patients with suspected COVID-19, of whom 77 patients tested positive for COVID-19 and were included. Subsequent hospitalization occurred in 22 of 77 (29%) patients. Resting home SpO2 \u3c 92% was associated with an increased likelihood of hospitalization compared to SpO2 ≥ 92% (relative risk = 7.0, 95% confidence interval = 3.4 to 14.5, p \u3c 0.0001). Home SpO2 \u3c 92% was also associated with increased risk of intensive care unit admission, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and septic shock. In our cohort, 50% of patients who ended up hospitalized only returned to the ED for incidental finding of low home SpO2 without worsening of symptoms. One-third (33%) of nonhospitalized patients stated that they would have returned to the ED if they did not have a pulse oximeter to reassure them at home. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that home pulse oximetry monitoring identifies need for hospitalization in initially nonsevere COVID-19 patients when a cutoff of SpO2 92% is used. Half of patients who ended up hospitalized had SpO2 \u3c 92% without worsening symptoms. Home SpO2 monitoring also reduces unnecessary ED revisits

Novel Use of Home Pulse Oximetry Monitoring in COVID‐19 Patients Discharged From the Emergency Department Identifies Need for Hospitalization

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to evaluate patient-reported oxygen saturation (SpO2 ) using pulse oximetry as a home monitoring tool for patients with initially nonsevere COVID-19 to identify need for hospitalization. METHODS: Patients were enrolled at the emergency department (ED) and outpatient testing centers. Each patient was given a home pulse oximeter and instructed to record their SpO2 every 8 hours. Patients were instructed to return to the ED for sustained home SpO2 \u3c 92% or if they felt they needed emergent medical attention. Relative risk was used to assess the relation between hospitalization and home SpO2 \u3c 92% in COVID-19-positive patients. RESULTS: We enrolled 209 patients with suspected COVID-19, of whom 77 patients tested positive for COVID-19 and were included. Subsequent hospitalization occurred in 22 of 77 (29%) patients. Resting home SpO2 \u3c 92% was associated with an increased likelihood of hospitalization compared to SpO2 ≥ 92% (relative risk = 7.0, 95% confidence interval = 3.4 to 14.5, p \u3c 0.0001). Home SpO2 \u3c 92% was also associated with increased risk of intensive care unit admission, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and septic shock. In our cohort, 50% of patients who ended up hospitalized only returned to the ED for incidental finding of low home SpO2 without worsening of symptoms. One-third (33%) of nonhospitalized patients stated that they would have returned to the ED if they did not have a pulse oximeter to reassure them at home. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that home pulse oximetry monitoring identifies need for hospitalization in initially nonsevere COVID-19 patients when a cutoff of SpO2 92% is used. Half of patients who ended up hospitalized had SpO2 \u3c 92% without worsening symptoms. Home SpO2 monitoring also reduces unnecessary ED revisits

An overview of recent findings of the Stanley Foundation Bipolar Network (Part I)

Aim and Methods: Selected recent findings of the Stanley Foundation Bipolar Network are briefly reviewed and their clinical implications discussed. Results: Daily prospective ratings on the NIMH-LCM indicate a high degree of residual depressive morbidity (three times that of hypomania or mania) despite active psychopharmacological treatment with a variety of modalities including mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and benzodiazepines, as well as antipsychotics as necessary. The rates of switching into brief to full hypomania or mania during the use of antidepressants is described, and new data suggesting the potential utility of continuing antidepressants in the small group of patients showing an initial acute and persistent response is noted. Bipolar patients with a history of major environmental adversities in childhood have a more severe course of illness and an increased incidence of suicide attempts compared with those without. Preliminary open data suggest useful antidepressant effects of the atypical antipsychotic quetiapine, while a double-blind randomized controlled study failed to show efficacy of omega-3 fatty acids (6 g of eicosapentaenoic acid compared with placebo for 4 months) in the treatment of either acute depression or rapid cycling. The high prevalence of overweight and increased incidence of antithyroid antibodies in patients with bipolar illness is highlighted. Conclusions: Together, these findings suggest a very high degree of comorbidity and treatment resistance in outpatients with bipolar illness treated in academic settings and the need to develop not only new treatment approaches, but also much earlier illness recognition, diagnosis, and intervention in an attempt to reverse or prevent this illness burden