Preliminary Results of Initial Testing for Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the Emergency Department

Introduction: On March 10, 2020, the World Health Organization declared a global pandemic due to widespread infection of the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). We report the preliminary results of a targeted program of COVID-19 infection testing in the ED in the first 10 days of its initiation at our institution.Methods: We conducted a review of prospectively collected data on all ED patients who had targeted testing for acute COVID-19 infection at two EDs during the initial 10 days of testing (March 10-19, 2020). During this initial period with limited resources, testing was targeted toward high-risk patients per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. Data collected from patients who were tested included demographics, clinical characteristics, and test qualifying criteria. We present the data overall and by test results with descriptive statistics.Results: During the 10-day study period, the combined census of the study EDs was 2157 patient encounters. A total of 283 tests were ordered in the ED. The majority of patients were 18-64 years of age, male, non-Hispanic white, had an Emergency Severity Index score of three, did not have a fever, and were discharged from the ED. A total of 29 (10.2%) tested positive. Symptoms-based criteria most associated with COVID-19 were the most common criteria identified for testing (90.6%). All other criteria were reported in 5.51–43.0% of persons being tested. Having contact with a person under investigation was significantly more common in those who tested positive compared to those who tested negative (63% vs 24.5%, respectively). The majority of patients in both results groups had at least two qualifying criteria for testing (75.2%).Conclusion: In this review of prospectively collected data on all ED patients who had targeted testing for acute COVID-19 infection at two EDs in the first 10 days of testing, we found that 10.2% of those tested were identified as positive. The continued monitoring of testing and results will help providers understand how COVID-19 is progressing in the community

Targeted Needs Assessment of Off Service Residents in Emergency Medicine

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the needs of internal medicine residents rotating through the emergency department (ED).Methods: A survey was distributed to 100 internal medicine residents (post-graduate years 2 and 3) from two different residency programs before the start of their emergency medicine (EM) rotation. Residents ranked the level of importance and the level of preparedness for 23 different EM topics, using a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (least important/least prepared) to 4 (most important/most prepared). We calculated delta values (Δ) from the difference between importance and preparedness and undertook significance testing of this difference.Results: A total of 71 out of 100 surveys were completed properly and returned. Internal medicine residents felt most ill-prepared in the areas of orthopedics, environmental emergencies, otolaryngology, airway management, and ophthalmology. The largest perceived gaps between importance and preparedness lay within the areas of airway management ( Δ=1.30), ophthalmology ( Δ=1.10), environmental emergencies (Δ=0.96), and orthopedics ( Δ=0.96).Conclusion: Our data suggest that internal medicine residents are inadequately prepared for EM topics that they feel are important to their education, specifically airway management, ophthalmology, environmental emergencies and orthopedics. It is quite possible that other specialty residents are also poorly prepared for similar core EM topics. These data will hopefully guide future curricular change for off-service residents in the ED. [West J Emerg Med. 2010;11(5):470-473.

Targeted Needs Assessment of Off Service Residents in Emergency Medicine

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the needs of internal medicine residents rotating through the emergency department (ED).Methods: A survey was distributed to 100 internal medicine residents (post-graduate years 2 and 3) from two different residency programs before the start of their emergency medicine (EM) rotation. Residents ranked the level of importance and the level of preparedness for 23 different EM topics, using a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (least important/least prepared) to 4 (most important/most prepared). We calculated delta values (Δ) from the difference between importance and preparedness and undertook significance testing of this difference.Results: A total of 71 out of 100 surveys were completed properly and returned. Internal medicine residents felt most ill-prepared in the areas of orthopedics, environmental emergencies, otolaryngology, airway management, and ophthalmology. The largest perceived gaps between importance and preparedness lay within the areas of airway management ( Δ=1.30), ophthalmology ( Δ=1.10), environmental emergencies (Δ=0.96), and orthopedics ( Δ=0.96).Conclusion: Our data suggest that internal medicine residents are inadequately prepared for EM topics that they feel are important to their education, specifically airway management, ophthalmology, environmental emergencies and orthopedics. It is quite possible that other specialty residents are also poorly prepared for similar core EM topics. These data will hopefully guide future curricular change for off-service residents in the ED. [West J Emerg Med. 2010;11(5):470-473.

Preliminary Results of Initial Testing for Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the Emergency Department.

IntroductionOn March 10, 2020, the World Health Organization declared a global pandemic due to widespread infection of the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). We report the preliminary results of a targeted program of COVID-19 infection testing in the ED in the first 10 days of its initiation at our institution.MethodsWe conducted a review of prospectively collected data on all ED patients who had targeted testing for acute COVID-19 infection at two EDs during the initial 10 days of testing (March 10-19, 2020). During this initial period with limited resources, testing was targeted toward high-risk patients per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. Data collected from patients who were tested included demographics, clinical characteristics, and test qualifying criteria. We present the data overall and by test results with descriptive statistics.ResultsDuring the 10-day study period, the combined census of the study EDs was 2157 patient encounters. A total of 283 tests were ordered in the ED. The majority of patients were 18-64 years of age, male, non-Hispanic white, had an Emergency Severity Index score of three, did not have a fever, and were discharged from the ED. A total of 29 (10.2%) tested positive. Symptoms-based criteria most associated with COVID-19 were the most common criteria identified for testing (90.6%). All other criteria were reported in 5.51-43.0% of persons being tested. Having contact with a person under investigation was significantly more common in those who tested positive compared to those who tested negative (63% vs 24.5%, respectively). The majority of patients in both results groups had at least two qualifying criteria for testing (75.2%).ConclusionIn this review of prospectively collected data on all ED patients who had targeted testing for acute COVID-19 infection at two EDs in the first 10 days of testing, we found that 10.2% of those tested were identified as positive. The continued monitoring of testing and results will help providers understand how COVID-19 is progressing in the community

Preliminary Results of Initial Testing for Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the Emergency Department

Introduction: On March 10, 2020, the World Health Organization declared a global pandemic due to widespread infection of the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). We report the preliminary results of a targeted program of COVID-19 infection testing in the ED in the first 10 days of its initiation at our institution.Methods: We conducted a review of prospectively collected data on all ED patients who had targeted testing for acute COVID-19 infection at two EDs during the initial 10 days of testing (March 10-19, 2020). During this initial period with limited resources, testing was targeted toward high-risk patients per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. Data collected from patients who were tested included demographics, clinical characteristics, and test qualifying criteria. We present the data overall and by test results with descriptive statistics.Results: During the 10-day study period, the combined census of the study EDs was 2157 patient encounters. A total of 283 tests were ordered in the ED. The majority of patients were 18-64 years of age, male, non-Hispanic white, had an Emergency Severity Index score of three, did not have a fever, and were discharged from the ED. A total of 29 (10.2%) tested positive. Symptoms-based criteria most associated with COVID-19 were the most common criteria identified for testing (90.6%). All other criteria were reported in 5.51–43.0% of persons being tested. Having contact with a person under investigation was significantly more common in those who tested positive compared to those who tested negative (63% vs 24.5%, respectively). The majority of patients in both results groups had at least two qualifying criteria for testing (75.2%).Conclusion: In this review of prospectively collected data on all ED patients who had targeted testing for acute COVID-19 infection at two EDs in the first 10 days of testing, we found that 10.2% of those tested were identified as positive. The continued monitoring of testing and results will help providers understand how COVID-19 is progressing in the community

Cardiac Tamponade After COVID-19 Vaccination.

BackgroundAcute pericarditis is a diffuse inflammation of the pericardial sac with many well-defined etiologies. Acute pericarditis as a vaccine-related adverse event is a rare entity, and the association between pericarditis and the immunogenic response to Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines is still being fully characterized.Case reportA previously healthy 18-year-old man presented with fever, pleuritic chest pain, and shortness of breath 3 weeks after receiving the first dose of a COVID-19 mRNA-based vaccine. The patient was found to have a large pericardial effusion with early tamponade physiology requiring pericardiocentesis. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: As COVID-19 vaccination becomes more prevalent globally, physicians should be aware of pericarditis as a rare but potentially serious adverse reaction. Although a direct causal link cannot be demonstrated, we present this case to increase awareness among emergency physicians of pericarditis as a rare, but potentially serious adverse event associated with COVID-19 vaccination