Universal SARS-CoV-2 Testing of Emergency Department Admissions Increases Emergency Department Length of Stay

SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR as a universal screening on planned admission in asymptomatic patients

Universal screening for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on admission is reportedly beneficial in preventing nosocomial infections. However, some issues remain, including low positivity rate, cost, and time required for testing. We describe SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for universal screening in asymptomatic patients on planned admissions. In total, 14,574 patients were included between October 12, 2020, and June 23, 2022. The PCR-positive rate for the period was 0.44 % (64/14,574). The PCR positivity for the epidemic period by strain was 0.28 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.12-0.56 %), 0.16 % (95 % CI 0.05-0.37 %), 0.21 % (95 % CI 0.09-0.41 %), and 0.9 % (95 % CI 0.65-1.2 %) for the wild-type strain, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variants, respectively. The proportion of Ct values < 30 was higher in the first half of the epidemic (first vs. second, 29.4 % [95 % CI 16.9-44.8 %] vs. 16.7 % [95 % CI 6.0-28.5 %]), whereas that of Ct values ≥ 35 increased significantly in the second half (first vs. second, 32.4 % [95 % CI 19.3-47.8 %] vs. 70.0 % [95 % CI 53.5-83.4 %]). Of all positives, 50 % (32/64) had a coronavirus disease (COVID-19) history before PCR screening, with a median of 28 days (10-105) from COVID-19 onset or positive to PCR screening. PCR screening may help detect positives with high viral loads early in the epidemic for each mutant strain, with an increasing proportion of positives with low viral loads later in the epidemic. PCR testing may be unnecessary for recently diagnosed cases and patients in whom reinfection is unlikely.

Effects of Different SARS-CoV-2 Testing Strategies in the Emergency Department on Length of Stay and Clinical Outcomes: A Randomised Controlled Trial

The turn-around-time (TAT) of diagnostic and screening measures such as testing for SARS-CoV-2 can affect a patient's length of stay (LOS) in the hospital as well as the emergency department (ED). This, in turn, can affect clinical outcomes. Therefore, a reliable and time-efficient SARS-CoV-2 testing strategy is necessary, especially in the ED. In this randomised controlled trial, n = 598 ED patients presenting to one of three university hospital EDs in Berlin, Germany, and needing hospitalisation were randomly assigned to two intervention groups and one control group. Accordingly, different SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies were implemented: rapid antigen and point-of-care (POC) reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rtPCR) testing with the Roche cobas® Liat® (LIAT) (group one n = 198), POC rtPCR testing with the LIAT (group two n = 197), and central laboratory rtPCR testing (group three, control group n = 203). The median LOS in the hospital as an inpatient across the groups was 7 days. Patients' LOS in the ED of more than seven hours did not differ significantly, and furthermore, no significant differences were observed regarding clinical outcomes such as intensive care unit stay or death. The rapid and POC test strategies had a significantly (p < 0.01) shorter median TAT (group one 00:48 h, group two 00:21 h) than the regular central laboratory rtPCR test (group three 06:26 h). However, fast SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies did not reduce ED or inpatient LOS significantly in less urgent ED admissions. Testing strategies should be adjusted to the current circumstances including crowding, SARS-CoV-2 incidences, and patient cohort. This trial is registered with DRKS00023117.

Intensified screening for SARS-CoV-2 in 18 emergency departments in the Paris metropolitan area, France (DEPIST-COVID): A cluster-randomized, two-period, crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic infections account for a substantial portion of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmissions. The value of intensified screening strategies, especially in emergency departments (EDs), in reaching asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic patients and helping to improve detection and reduce transmission has not been documented. The objective of this study was to evaluate in EDs whether an intensified SARS-CoV-2 screening strategy combining nurse-driven screening for asymptomatic/paucisymptomatic patients with routine practice (intervention) could contribute to higher detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections compared to routine practice alone, including screening for symptomatic or hospitalized patients (control).

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We conducted a cluster-randomized, two-period, crossover trial from February 2021 to May 2021 in 18 EDs in the Paris metropolitan area, France. All adults visiting the EDs were eligible. At the start of the first period, 18 EDs were randomized to the intervention or control strategy by balanced block randomization with stratification, with the alternative condition being applied in the second period. During the control period, routine screening for SARS-CoV-2 included screening for symptomatic or hospitalized patients. During the intervention period, in addition to routine screening practice, a questionnaire about risk exposure and symptoms and a SARS-CoV-2 screening test were offered by nurses to all remaining asymptomatic/paucisymptomatic patients. The primary outcome was the proportion of newly diagnosed SARS-CoV-2-positive patients among all adults visiting the 18 EDs. Primary analysis was by intention-to-treat. The primary outcome was analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model (Poisson distribution) with the center and center by period as random effects and the strategy (intervention versus control) and period (modeled as a weekly categorical variable) as fixed effects with additional adjustment for community incidence. During the intervention and control periods, 69,248 patients and 69,104 patients, respectively, were included for a total of 138,352 patients. Patients had a median age of 45.0 years [31.0, 63.0], and women represented 45.7% of the patients. During the intervention period, 6,332 asymptomatic/paucisymptomatic patients completed the questionnaire; 4,283 were screened for SARS-CoV-2 by nurses, leading to 224 new SARS-CoV-2 diagnoses. A total of 1,859 patients versus 2,084 patients were newly diagnosed during the intervention and control periods, respectively (adjusted analysis: 26.7/1,000 versus 26.2/1,000, adjusted relative risk: 1.02 (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.94, 1.11]; p = 0.634)). The main limitation of this study is that it was conducted in a rapidly evolving epidemiological context.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study showed that intensified screening for SARS-CoV-2 in EDs was unlikely to identify a higher proportion of newly diagnosed patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04756609.

Choice Architecture to Assist Clinicians with Appropriate COVID-19 Test Ordering

BACKGROUND

Despite improving supplies, SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests remain limited during surges and more so given concerns around COVID-19/influenza co-occurrence. Matching clinical guidelines to available supplies ensures resources remain available to meet clinical needs. We report a change in clinician practice after an electronic health record (EHR) order redesign to impact emergency department (ED) testing patterns.

METHODS

We included all ED visits between December 1, 2021 and January 18, 2022 across a hospital system to assess the impact of EHR order changes on provider behavior 3 weeks before and after the change. The EHR order redesign included embedded symptom-based order guidance. Primary outcomes were the proportion of COVID-19 + flu/respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) testing performed on symptomatic, admitted, and discharged patients, and the proportion of COVID-19 + flu testing on symptomatic, discharged patients.

RESULTS

A total of 52 215 ED visits were included. For symptomatic, discharged patients, COVID-19 + flu/RSV testing decreased from 11.4 to 5.8 tests per 100 symptomatic visits, and the rate of COVID-19 + flu testing increased from 7.4 to 19.1 before and after the intervention, respectively. The rate of COVID-19 + flu/RSV testing increased from 5.7 to 13.1 tests per 100 symptomatic visits for symptomatic patients admitted to the hospital. All changes were significant (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

A simple EHR order redesign was associated with increased adherence to institutional guidelines for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza testing amidst supply chain limitations necessitating optimal allocation of scarce testing resources. With continually shifting resource availability, clinician education is not sufficient. Rather, system-based interventions embedded within exiting workflows can better align resources and serve testing needs of the community.

Universal admission laboratory screening for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) asymptomatic infection across a large health system

BACKGROUND

Admission laboratory screening for asymptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been utilized to mitigate healthcare-associated severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. An understanding of the impact of such testing across a variety of patient populations is needed.

METHODS

SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification admission testing results for all asymptomatic patients across 4 distinct inpatient facilities between April 20, 2020, and June 14, 2021, were analyzed. Positivity rates and the number needed to test (NNT) to identify 1 asymptomatic infected patient were calculated. Admission results were compared to COVID-19 community incidence rates for the system's surrounding metropolitan service area. Using a national survey of hospital epidemiologists, a clinically meaningful NNT of 1:100 was identified.

RESULTS

In total, 51,187 tests were collected (positivity rate, 1.8%). During periods of high transmission, the NNT met the clinically relevant threshold in all populations. The NNT approached or met the threshold for most locations during periods of lower transmission. For all transmission levels, the NNT for fully vaccinated patients did not meet the threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing an asymptomatic patient admission testing program can provide clinically relevant data based on the NNT, even during periods of lower transmission and among different patient populations. Limiting admission testing to non-fully vaccinated patients during periods of lower transmission may be a strategy to address resource concerns around this practice. Although the impact of such testing on healthcare-associated COVID-19 among patients and healthcare workers could not be clearly determined, these data provide important information as facilities weigh the costs and benefits of such testing.