Videolaryngoscopy (VL) is a promising tool to provide a safe airway during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and to ensure early reoxygenation. Using data from the German Resuscitation Registry, we investigated the outcome of non-traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients treated with VL versus direct laryngoscopy (DL) for airway management. We analysed retrospective data of 14,387 patients from 1 January 2018 until 31 December 2021 (VL group, n = 2201; DL group, n = 12186). Primary endpoint was discharge with cerebral performance categories one and two (CPC1/2). Secondary endpoints were the rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), hospital admission, hospital admission with ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 30-day survival/ hospital discharge and airway management complications. We used multivariate binary logistic regression analysis to identify the effects on outcome of known influencing variables and of VL vs DL. The multivariate regression model revealed that VL was an independent predictor of CPC1/2 survival (OR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.12-1.61, p = 0.002) and of hospital discharge/30-day survival (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.08-1.47, p = 0,004). VL for endotracheal intubation (ETI) at OHCA was associated with better neurological outcome in patients with ROSC. Therefore, the use of VL for OHCA offers a promising perspective. Further prospective studies are required.

Background: COVID-19 pandemia is a major challenge to worldwide health care systems. Whereas the majority of disease presents with mild symptoms that can be treated as outpatients, severely ill COVID-19 patients and patients presenting with similar symptoms cross their ways in the emergency department. Especially, the variety of symptoms is challenging with primary triage. Are there parameters to distinguish between proven COVID-19 and without before? How can a safe and efficient management of these inpatients be achieved? Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 314 consecutive inpatient patients who presented with possible symptoms of COVID-19 in a German emergency department between March and April 2020 and were tested with a SARS-Cov-2 nasopharyngeal swab. Clinical parameters, Manchester Triage System categories, and lab results were compared between patients with positive and negative test results for SARS-Cov-2. Furthermore, we present the existing COVID-19 workflow model of the university hospital in Essen which proved to be efficient during pandemia. Results: Forty-three of the 314 patients (13.7%) were tested positive for COVID-19 by SARS-Cov-2 nasopharyngeal swab. We did not find any laboratory parameter to distinguish safely between patients with COVID-19 and those with similar symptoms. Dysgeusia was the only clinical symptom that was significantly more frequent among COVID-19 patients. Conclusion: Dysgeusia seems to be a typical symptom for COVID-19, which occurred in 14% of our COVID-19 patients. However, no valid parameters could be found to distinguish clinically between COVID-19 and other diseases with similar symptoms. Therefore, early testing, a strict isolation policy, and proper personal protection are crucial to maintain workflow and safety of patients and ED staff for the months to come. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials registry, DRKS00021675

Problem: Regarding transmissible viral diseases such as those caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus, one of the key challenges is isolation management until final diagnosis. This study investigates the influence of SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care (POC) PCR on workflow and efficiency in an emergency department (ED) of a tertiary university hospital. Method: An analysis of 17,875 ED patients receiving either SARS-CoV-2 POC PCR (rapid PCR, 11,686 patients) or conventional laboratory SARS-CoV-2 PCR (conventional PCR, 6,189 patients) was performed. The pathways for both groups were mapped and compared, and process times from admission to diagnosis were measured. Effects on resource management within the ED were quantified. Direct costs due to isolation, loss of capacities, and revenues were calculated for inpatients. Results: The mean time from admission to result was 1.62 h with rapid PCR and 16.08 h with conventional PCR (p < 0.01), reducing the isolation time by 14.46 h. In the first 2 h after testing, test results were available for > 75% of the rapid PCR group and none of the conventional PCR group. Ninety percent of the results were available within 3 h for the rapid PCR and within 21 h for the conventional PCR group. For the conventional PCR group, an increase in direct costs of €35.74 and lost revenues of €421.06 for each inpatient case was detected. Conclusion: Rapid PCR significantly reduces the time-to-results and time for isolation relative to conventional PCR. Although testing costs for rapid PCR are higher, it benefits workflow, reduces total costs, and frees up ward capacity.

Background: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic remains a major challenge for worldwide health care systems and in particular emergency medicine. An early and safe triage in the emergency department (ED) is especially crucial for proper therapy. Clinical symptoms of COVID-19 comprise those of many common diseases; thus, differential diagnosis remains challenging. Method: We performed a retrospective study of 314 ED patients presenting with conceivable COVID-19 symptoms during the first wave in Germany. All were tested for COVID-19 with SARS-Cov-2-nasopharyngeal swabs. Forty-seven patients were positive. We analyzed the 267 COVID-19 negative patients for their main diagnosis and compared COVID-19 patients with COVID-19 negative respiratory infections for differences in laboratory parameters, symptoms, and vital signs. Results: Among the 267 COVID-19 negative patients, 42.7% had respiratory, 14.2% had other infectious, and 11.2% had cardiovascular diseases. Further, 9.0% and 6.7% had oncological and gastroenterological diagnoses, respectively. Compared to COVID-19 negative airway infections, COVID-19 patients showed less dyspnea (OR 0.440; p = 0.024) but more dysgeusia (OR 7.631; p = 0.005). Their hospital stay was significantly longer (9.0 vs. 5.6 days; p = 0.014), and their mortality significantly higher (OR 3.979; p = 0.014). Conclusion: For many common ED diagnoses, COVID-19 should be considered a differential diagnosis. COVID-19 cannot be distinguished from COVID-19 negative respiratory infections by clinical signs, symptoms, or laboratory results. When hospitalization is necessary, the clinical course of COVID-19 airway infections seems to be more severe compared to other respiratory infections. Trial registration: German Clinical Trial Registry DRKS, DRKS-ID of the study: DRKS00021675 date of registration: May 8th, 2020, retrospectively registered.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a seasonal virus known to cause significant morbidity in pediatric patients; however, morbidity in adult patients has not been well investigated. We aimed to characterize adult patients with RSV infection in the emergency department (ED) and their clinical course. During the winter term 2022/23, all adult ED patients were screened for RSV, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2, and influenza infection using point-of-care polymerase chain reaction tests. All symptomatic RSV+ patients were further characterized based on their clinical presentation and course. A group comparison between RSV+ inpatients and RSV+ outpatients was conducted. The potential risk factors for inpatient treatment were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analyses. Of the 135 symptomatic RSV+ patients, 51.9% (70/135) were inpatients. Their length of stay were 9.4 (±10.4) days. Inpatients had a significantly higher mean age, lower oxygen saturation, higher leukocyte count, and higher C-reactive protein levels than outpatients. Among the preconditions, pulmonary diseases, tumors, and immunosuppression were significantly more frequent in the inpatient group. Thirty percent (21/70) of the inpatients required ICU treatment, 11% (8/70) required mechanical ventilation, and 9% (6/70) died. Malaise (P = .021, odds ratio 8.390) and detection of pulmonary infiltrations (P < .001, odds ratio 12.563) were the only independent predictors of inpatient treatment in the multivariate analysis. Our data show that RSV is a medically relevant pathogen among adult ED patients, often requiring inpatient treatment. In particular, elderly patients with some medical preconditions seem to be more prone to a severe course of infection requiring inpatient treatment. Lower respiratory tract involvement, proven by pulmonary infiltrates, seems to be crucial for a more severe disease course.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a major challenge for global healthcare systems. Early and safe triage in the emergency department (ED) is crucial for proper therapy. However, differential diagnosis remains challenging. Rapid antigen testing (RAT) may help to improve early triage and patient safety. We performed a retrospective study of 234 consecutive patients with suspected COVID-19 who presented to our ED in November 2020. All underwent SARS-CoV-2-nasopharyngeal swab testing using both RAT and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The inpatient treatment was established according to an empirically developed triage algorithm. The accuracy of the suggested algorithm was analyzed based on the rate of outpatients returning within 7 days and inpatients staying for less than 48 hours. COVID-19 inpatients and outpatients were compared for symptoms, vital signs, and C-reactive protein levels. Of the 221 included patients with suspected COVID-19 infection, the diagnosis could be confirmed in 120 patients (54.3%) by a positive RT-PCR result, whereas only 72% of those had a positive antigen test. Of the 56 COVID-19 outpatients, three returned within 7 days with the need for hospital treatment due to clinical deterioration. Among the 64 COVID-19 inpatients, 4 were discharged within 48 hours, whereas 60 stayed longer (mean duration 10.2 days). The suggested triage algorithm was safe and efficient in the first 234 consecutive patients. RAT can confirm a diagnosis in 72% of PCR proven COVID-19 patients and allows early cohort isolation as an important way to save hospital capacity.