what are the guidelines for triaging patients infected with coronavirus?

Coronavirus disease 2019 has caused a global pandemic. The majority of patients will experience mild disease, but others will develop a severe respiratory infection that requires hospitalisation. This is causing a significant strain on health services. Patients are presenting at emergency departments with symptoms of dyspnoea, dry cough and fever with varying severity. The appropriate triaging of patients will assist in preventing health services becoming overwhelmed during the pandemic. This is assisted through clinical assessment and various imaging and laboratory investigations, including chest X-ray, blood analysis and identification of viral infection with SARS-CoV-2. Here, a succinct triaging pathway that aims to be fast, reliable and affordable is presented. The hope is that such a pathway will assist health services in appropriately combating the pandemic.

Simple, fast and affordable triaging pathway for COVID-19.

Simple, fast and affordable triaging pathway for COVID-19

In the end of 2019, the epidemic of a new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) occurred in Wuhan and spread rapidly. Changsha, a city located south to the epicenter, was soon impacted. To control the transmission of the coronavirus and avoid nosocomial infection, triage procedures based on epidemiology were implemented in a local hospital of the city. This retrospective study analyzed the data collected during the triage period and found that COVID-19 patients were enriched seven folds into the Section A designated for rapid detection and quarantine. On the other side, roughly triple amounts of visits were received at the Section B for patients without obvious epidemiological history. Eight COVID-19 cases were spotted out of 247 suspected patients. More than 50% of the suspected patients were submitted to multiple rounds of nucleic acid analysis for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the 239 patients who were diagnosed as negative of the virus infection,188 were successfully revisited and none was reported as a COVID-19 case. Of the eight COVID-19 patients, three were confirmed only after multiple rounds of nucleic acid analysis. Besides comorbidities, delayed sharing of epidemiological history added another layer of complexity to the diagnosis in practice. While SARS-CoV-2 epidemic is being alerted in many countries, our report will be helpful to other colleagues in rapid identification of COVID-19 cases and controlling the transmission of the disease.

Triaging patients in the outbreak of the 2019 novel coronavirus

In this Commentary, we would like to comment on the article titled “A rapid advice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infected pneumonia (standard version)” as a featured article in Military Medical Research. In the guideline, except for “confirmed cases”, “suspected cases”, “close contact” and “suspicious exposure” were defined by clinical perspective based on epidemiological risk, clinical symptoms and auxiliary examination. Combined with our experience, we introduced a simple scoring proposal additionally based on not only CT imaging as strongly recommended by the guideline but also blood routine test, especially for primary screening of such patients in the out-patient department.

Primary stratification and identification of suspected Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from clinical perspective by a simple scoring proposal

In this Commentary, we would like to comment on the article titled "A rapid advice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infected pneumonia (standard version)" as a featured article in Military Medical Research. In the guideline, except for "confirmed cases", "suspected cases", "close contact" and "suspicious exposure" were defined by clinical perspective based on epidemiological risk, clinical symptoms and auxiliary examination. Combined with our experience, we introduced a simple scoring proposal additionally based on not only CT imaging as strongly recommended by the guideline but also blood routine test, especially for primary screening of such patients in the out-patient department.

A global health emergency has been declared by the World Health Organization as the 2019-nCoV outbreak spreads across the world, with confirmed patients in Canada. Patients infected with 2019-nCoV are at risk for developing respiratory failure and requiring admission to critical care units. While providing optimal treatment for these patients, careful execution of infection control measures is necessary to prevent nosocomial transmission to other patients and to healthcare workers providing care. Although the exact mechanisms of transmission are currently unclear, human-to-human transmission can occur, and the risk of airborne spread during aerosol-generating medical procedures remains a concern in specific circumstances. This paper summarizes important considerations regarding patient screening, environmental controls, personal protective equipment, resuscitation measures (including intubation), and critical care unit operations planning as we prepare for the possibility of new imported cases or local outbreaks of 2019-nCoV. Although understanding of the 2019-nCoV virus is evolving, lessons learned from prior infectious disease challenges such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome will hopefully improve our state of readiness regardless of the number of cases we eventually manage in Canada.

Practical recommendations for critical care and anesthesiology teams caring for novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) patients

OBJECTIVE: To prevent and control public health emergencies, we set up a prescreening and triage workflow and analyzed the effects on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: In accordance with the requirements of the level 1 emergency response of public health emergencies in Shaanxi Province, China, a triage process for COVID-19 was established to guide patients through a 4-level triage process during their hospital visits. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was based on positive COVID-19 nucleic acid testing according to the unified triage standards of the Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia (Trial version 4),4 issued by the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China. RESULTS: The screened rate of suspected COVID-19 was 1.63% (4 of 246) in the general fever outpatient clinic and 8.28% (13 of 157) in the COVID-19 outpatient clinic, and they showed a significant difference (P = .00). CONCLUSIONS: The triage procedure effectively screened the patients and identified the high-risk population.

The role of triage in the prevention and control of COVID-19

OBJECTIVE: To prevent and control public health emergencies, we set up a prescreening and triage workflow and analyzed the effects on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: In accordance with the requirements of the level 1 emergency response of public health emergencies in Shaanxi Province, China, a triage process for COVID-19 was established to guide patients through a 4-level triage process during their hospital visits. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was based on positive COVID-19 nucleic acid testing according to the unified triage standards of the Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia (Trial version 4),(4) issued by the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China. RESULTS: The screened rate of suspected COVID-19 was 1.63% (4 of 246) in the general fever outpatient clinic and 8.28% (13 of 157) in the COVID-19 outpatient clinic, and they showed a significant difference (P = .00). CONCLUSIONS: The triage procedure effectively screened the patients and identified the high-risk population.

OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 patients are currently overwhelming the world's healthcare systems. This article provides practical guidance to front-line physicians forced to make critical rationing decisions. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Medline search for scientific literature, reviews, and guidance documents related to epidemic ICU triage including from professional bodies. STUDY SELECTION: Clinical studies, reviews, and guidelines were selected and reviewed by all authors and discussed by internet conference and email. DATA EXTRACTION: References and data were based on relevance and author consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: We review key challenges of resource-driven triage and data from affected ICUs. We recommend that once available resources are maximally extended, triage is justified utilizing a strategy that provides the greatest good for the greatest number of patients. A triage algorithm based on clinical estimations of the incremental survival benefit (saving the most life-years) provided by ICU care is proposed. "First come, first served" is used to choose between individuals with equal priorities and benefits. The algorithm provides practical guidance, is easy to follow, rapidly implementable and flexible. It has four prioritization categories: performance score, ASA score, number of organ failures, and predicted survival. Individual units can readily adapt the algorithm to meet local requirements for the evolving pandemic. Although the algorithm improves consistency and provides practical and psychologic support to those performing triage, the final decision remains a clinical one. Depending on country and operational circumstances, triage decisions may be made by a triage team or individual doctors. However, an experienced critical care specialist physician should be ultimately responsible for the triage decision. Cautious discharge criteria are proposed acknowledging the difficulties to facilitate the admission of queuing patients. CONCLUSIONS: Individual institutions may use this guidance to develop prospective protocols that assist the implementation of triage decisions to ensure fairness, enhance consistency, and decrease provider moral distress.

Adult ICU Triage During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: Who Will Live and Who Will Die? Recommendations to Improve Survival

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic presents a significant infection prevention and control challenge. The admission of large numbers of patients with suspected COVID-19 disease risks overwhelming the capacity to protect other patients from exposure. The delay between clinical suspicion and confirmatory testing adds to the complexity of the problem. METHODS: We implemented a triage tool aimed at minimising hospital acquired COVID-19 particularly to patients at risk of severe disease. Patients were allocated to triage categories defined by likelihood of COVID-19 and risk of a poor outcome. Category A (low-likelihood; high-risk), B (high-likelihood; high-risk), C (high-likelihood; low-risk) and D (low-likelihood; low-risk). This determined the order of priority for isolation in single-occupancy rooms with Category A the highest. Patients in other groups were cohorted when isolation capacity was limited with additional interventions to reduce transmission. RESULTS: 93 patients were evaluated with 79 (85%) receiving a COVID-19 diagnosis during their admission. Of those without a COVID-19 diagnosis: 10 were initially triaged to Category A; 0 to B; 1 to C and 4 to D. All high risk patients requiring isolation were, therefore, admitted to single-occupancy rooms and protected from exposure. 28 (30%) suspected COVID-19 patients were evaluated to be low risk (groups C & D) and eligible for cohorting. No symptomatic hospital acquired infections were detected in the cohorted patients. DISCUSSION: Application of a clinical triage tool to guide isolation and cohorting decisions may reduce the risk of hospital acquired transmission of COVID-19 especially to individuals at the greatest of risk of severe disease.

A Novel Cohorting and Isolation Strategy for Suspected COVID-19 Cases during a Pandemic

OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 patients are currently overwhelming the world’s healthcare systems. This article provides practical guidance to front-line physicians forced to make critical rationing decisions. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Medline search for scientific literature, reviews, and guidance documents related to epidemic ICU triage including from professional bodies. STUDY SELECTION: Clinical studies, reviews, and guidelines were selected and reviewed by all authors and discussed by internet conference and email. DATA EXTRACTION: References and data were based on relevance and author consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: We review key challenges of resource-driven triage and data from affected ICUs. We recommend that once available resources are maximally extended, triage is justified utilizing a strategy that provides the greatest good for the greatest number of patients. A triage algorithm based on clinical estimations of the incremental survival benefit (saving the most life-years) provided by ICU care is proposed. “First come, first served” is used to choose between individuals with equal priorities and benefits. The algorithm provides practical guidance, is easy to follow, rapidly implementable and flexible. It has four prioritization categories: performance score, ASA score, number of organ failures, and predicted survival. Individual units can readily adapt the algorithm to meet local requirements for the evolving pandemic. Although the algorithm improves consistency and provides practical and psychologic support to those performing triage, the final decision remains a clinical one. Depending on country and operational circumstances, triage decisions may be made by a triage team or individual doctors. However, an experienced critical care specialist physician should be ultimately responsible for the triage decision. Cautious discharge criteria are proposed acknowledging the difficulties to facilitate the admission of queuing patients. CONCLUSIONS: Individual institutions may use this guidance to develop prospective protocols that assist the implementation of triage decisions to ensure fairness, enhance consistency, and decrease provider moral distress.

BACKGROUND: The emerging infection of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in late December, 2019 in Wuhan, China, has caused an extreme health concern, with many patients having progressed to acute respiratory disease or other complications in a short period. Meanwhile, the risk factors associated with the disease progression still remain elusive. METHODS: A cohort of 17 patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infections who were admitted to the Ninth Hospital of Nanchang between January 28 and February 6, 2020, were enrolled in this study. All the patients received standardized treatment. The disease progression was evaluated every 7 days after admission. The clinical, radiologic, and laboratory characteristics were retrospectively analyzed, and the factors associated with the disease progression were screened by binary logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 11 women (64.7%) and 6 men (35.3%) between the ages of 18 to 70 years old. All patients had a reported history of contact with infection-confirmed patients. Fever (11/64.7%) and cough (8/47.1%) were the most common symptoms, whereas dyspnea (2/11.8%) and fatigue (3/17.6%) were rare, and there was no patient with diarrhea symptoms. There were 5 patients with aggravated disease at the first disease progression evaluation, and no patient received mechanical ventilation, transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU), or progressed to acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock, refractory metabolic acidosis, coagulation dysfunction, or death. Based on the disease progression, patients were divided into the non-aggravation group (12 cases) and the aggravation group (5 cases). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to their clinical characteristics. Chest computed tomography (CT) on admission revealed there were 8 patients (47.1%) with invasive lesions found bilaterally on the lungs on multiple lobes, 4 patients (23.5%) with invasive lesions on 1 lobe, and 5 patients (29.4%) with normal chest CT. The aggravation group had1 patient (20.0%) with invasive lesions on one lobe, 3 (60.0%) with invasive lesions on multiple lobes, bilaterally, and 1 (20.0%) with normal chest CT; meanwhile, the nonaggravation group had 3 patients (25.0%) with invasive lesions on one lobe, 5 (41.7%) with invasive lesions on multiple lobes, bilaterally, and 4 (33.3%) with normal chest CT. No significant difference was found between the 2 groups. In the aggravation group, the total lymphocyte counts significantly decreased in comparison to that in the non-aggravation group. Further analysis showed that the CD4+ T cell count but not the CD8+ T cell count of the aggravation group was significantly lower than that of the non-aggravation group. Correlation analysis indicated total lymphocyte count was positively correlated with CD4+ T cell count, and no significant differences were found between the 2 groups in other laboratory measurements, including those of white blood cell (WBC) count, C-reactive protein (CRP), albumin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and D-dimer. Finally, a binary logistic regression model was used to identify the factors associated with the disease progression. It was found that total lymphocyte count was a risk factor associated with disease progression in patients infected with 2019-nCoV. CONCLUSIONS: A higher cell count of total lymphocytes may indicate a better outcome of the disease, and immune response may be a vital factor for directing disease progression in the early stage of 2019-nCoV infection.

Risk factors associated with disease progression in a cohort of patients infected with the 2019 novel coronavirus

INTRODUCTION Data about optimal initial assessment in patients with suspicion for COVID19-infection or already confirmed infection are sparse. Especially, in preparation for expected mass casualty incident it is necessary to distinguish early and efficiently between outpatient and inpatient treatment including the need for intensive care therapy. METHODS We present a model for a safe and efficient triage, which is established and used in the university hospital of Essen, Germany. It is intended for a non-disaster situation. This model is a combination of clinical assessment by using vital parameters and Manchester triage scale (MTS). Possible additional parameters are POCT (point-of-care-testing) values, electrocardiogram, CT pulmonary angiography, SARS-Cov2-PCR as well as detailed diagnostic of laboratory values. The model was validated by 100 consecutive patients. We demonstrate three patients to illustrate this model. RESULTS During the first two weeks after implementing this model in our normal operation at the emergency department, we had an efficient selectivity between need for inpatient and outpatient treatment. 16 patients were classified as "inpatients" according to initial assessment. Among 84 patients who were initially classified as "outpatients", 7 patients returned to our emergency department within 14 days. Three of these patients returned due to complaints other than COVID19. One female patient had to be admitted due to progressive dyspnea. CONCLUSIONS This introduced triage-model seems to be an efficient concept. Adjustment might be necessary after further experience and after a growing number of patients.

[COVID-19 Triage: Who is an inpatient? The Essen triage model].

In December 2019, a new type viral pneumonia cases occurred in Wuhan, Hubei Province; and then named "2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)" by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 12 January 2020. For it is a never been experienced respiratory disease before and with infection ability widely and quickly, it attracted the world's attention but without treatment and control manual. For the request from frontline clinicians and public health professionals of 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia management, an evidence-based guideline urgently needs to be developed. Therefore, we drafted this guideline according to the rapid advice guidelines methodology and general rules of WHO guideline development; we also added the first-hand management data of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University. This guideline includes the guideline methodology, epidemiological characteristics, disease screening and population prevention, diagnosis, treatment and control (including traditional Chinese Medicine), nosocomial infection prevention and control, and disease nursing of the 2019-nCoV. Moreover, we also provide a whole process of a successful treatment case of the severe 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia and experience and lessons of hospital rescue for 2019-nCoV infections. This rapid advice guideline is suitable for the first frontline doctors and nurses, managers of hospitals and healthcare sections, community residents, public health persons, relevant researchers, and all person who are interested in the 2019-nCoV.

A rapid advice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infected pneumonia (standard version)

Triage of patients with COVID-19.

Triage of patients with COVID-19

Abstract Background Coronavirus OC43 infection causes severe pneumonia in patients presenting with comorbidities, but clinical signs alone do not allow for viral identification. Objectives To analyze acute manifestations of Coronavirus OC43 infections and outcomes of patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Patients and methods Retrospective and monocentric study performed during a Coronavirus OC43 outbreak. We used multiplex PCR to detect an OC43 outbreak in Reunion Island during the 2016 Southern Hemisphere's winter: seven admissions to the ICU. Results Mean age of patients was 71 [67;76] years, SAPS II was 42 [28;53], pneumonia severity index 159 [139;182] vs 73 [40.5;107] for patients in medical wards, and 43% required mechanical ventilation. Comorbidities were diabetes mellitus (87%), chronic respiratory failure (57%), and chronic renal failure (29%). One patient died from Haemophilus influenzae co-infection. Conclusion As for MERS Co-V infections, underlying comorbidities impacted the clinical outcomes of OC43 infections.

Intensive care admission for Coronavirus OC43 respiratory tract infections

INTRODUCTION: Data about optimal initial assessment in patients with suspicion for COVID19-infection or already confirmed infection are sparse. Especially, in preparation for expected mass casualty incident it is necessary to distinguish early and efficiently between outpatient and inpatient treatment including the need for intensive care therapy. METHODS: We present a model for a safe and efficient triage, which is established and used in the university hospital of Essen, Germany. It is intended for a non-disaster situation. This model is a combination of clinical assessment by using vital parameters and Manchester triage scale (MTS). Possible additional parameters are POCT (point-of-care-testing) values, electrocardiogram, CT pulmonary angiography, SARS-Cov2-PCR as well as detailed diagnostic of laboratory values. The model was validated by 100 consecutive patients. We demonstrate three patients to illustrate this model. RESULTS: During the first two weeks after implementing this model in our normal operation at the emergency department, we had an efficient selectivity between need for inpatient and outpatient treatment. 16 patients were classified as "inpatients" according to initial assessment. Among 84 patients who were initially classified as "outpatients", 7 patients returned to our emergency department within 14 days. Three of these patients returned due to complaints other than COVID19. One female patient had to be admitted due to progressive dyspnea. CONCLUSIONS: This introduced triage-model seems to be an efficient concept. Adjustment might be necessary after further experience and after a growing number of patients.

COVID-19-Triage: Wer bleibt stationär? Das Modell Essen./ [COVID-19 Triage: Who is an inpatient? The Essen triage model]

Objectives: To report our experiences screening and managing patients with suspected or confirmed novel coronavirus (COVID-19) disease using a hospital-specific protocol. Design: Longitudinal cohort study. Setting: A 1,200 bed tertiary care teaching hospital in Chengdu, Sichuan, China. Participants: 802 adults presenting to hospital with concerns of having COVID-19, 1,246 inpatients and 2,531 hospital visitors. Interventions: Screening and management of patients using a hospital-specific protocol, which included fever triage, monitoring visitors and patients, emergency response, personnel training for healthcare team members, health education for patients and family, medical materials management, disinfection and wastes disposal protocols. Results: Between 23 January and 28 February 2020, 73 people were identified as having fever plus respiratory signs with/without a history of exposure and were tested for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by our hospital lab using RT PCR. Forty-five of these 73 people were subsequently excluded based on one negative RT PCR result plus positive results to quick screening tests for flu or other respiratory viruses. The remaining 28 people received a second RT PCR test 24 h later. Three people were confirmed positive for COVID-19 based on two consecutive positive RT PCR tests whilst 25 people were excluded based on two consecutive negative tests. The three COVID-19 confirmed cases received non-critical care. There were no new infections of medical staff or new infections of other hospital inpatients. Conclusions: All three cases were detected as a result of vigilant monitoring of hospital visitors. Whilst screening out-patients presenting to a fever clinic remains important, monitoring visitors must not be overlooked.

Screening and managing of suspected or confirmed novel coronavirus (COVID-19) patients: experiences from a tertiary hospital outside Hubei province

BACKGROUND The emerging infection of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in late December, 2019 in Wuhan, China, has caused an extreme health concern, with many patients having progressed to acute respiratory disease or other complications in a short period. Meanwhile, the risk factors associated with the disease progression still remain elusive. METHODS A cohort of 17 patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infections who were admitted to the Ninth Hospital of Nanchang between January 28 and February 6, 2020, were enrolled in this study. All the patients received standardized treatment. The disease progression was evaluated every 7 days after admission. The clinical, radiologic, and laboratory characteristics were retrospectively analyzed, and the factors associated with the disease progression were screened by binary logistic regression analysis. RESULTS The cohort comprised 11 women (64.7%) and 6 men (35.3%) between the ages of 18 to 70 years old. All patients had a reported history of contact with infection-confirmed patients. Fever (11/64.7%) and cough (8/47.1%) were the most common symptoms, whereas dyspnea (2/11.8%) and fatigue (3/17.6%) were rare, and there was no patient with diarrhea symptoms. There were 5 patients with aggravated disease at the first disease progression evaluation, and no patient received mechanical ventilation, transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU), or progressed to acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock, refractory metabolic acidosis, coagulation dysfunction, or death. Based on the disease progression, patients were divided into the non-aggravation group (12 cases) and the aggravation group (5 cases). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to their clinical characteristics. Chest computed tomography (CT) on admission revealed there were 8 patients (47.1%) with invasive lesions found bilaterally on the lungs on multiple lobes, 4 patients (23.5%) with invasive lesions on 1 lobe, and 5 patients (29.4%) with normal chest CT. The aggravation group had1 patient (20.0%) with invasive lesions on one lobe, 3 (60.0%) with invasive lesions on multiple lobes, bilaterally, and 1 (20.0%) with normal chest CT; meanwhile, the nonaggravation group had 3 patients (25.0%) with invasive lesions on one lobe, 5 (41.7%) with invasive lesions on multiple lobes, bilaterally, and 4 (33.3%) with normal chest CT. No significant difference was found between the 2 groups. In the aggravation group, the total lymphocyte counts significantly decreased in comparison to that in the non-aggravation group. Further analysis showed that the CD4+ T cell count but not the CD8+ T cell count of the aggravation group was significantly lower than that of the non-aggravation group. Correlation analysis indicated total lymphocyte count was positively correlated with CD4+ T cell count, and no significant differences were found between the 2 groups in other laboratory measurements, including those of white blood cell (WBC) count, C-reactive protein (CRP), albumin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and D-dimer. Finally, a binary logistic regression model was used to identify the factors associated with the disease progression. It was found that total lymphocyte count was a risk factor associated with disease progression in patients infected with 2019-nCoV. CONCLUSIONS A higher cell count of total lymphocytes may indicate a better outcome of the disease, and immune response may be a vital factor for directing disease progression in the early stage of 2019-nCoV infection.

Risk factors associated with disease progression in a cohort of patients infected with the 2019 novel coronavirus.

In December 2019, a new type viral pneumonia cases occurred in Wuhan, Hubei Province; and then named “2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)” by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 12 January 2020. For it is a never been experienced respiratory disease before and with infection ability widely and quickly, it attracted the world’s attention but without treatment and control manual. For the request from frontline clinicians and public health professionals of 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia management, an evidence-based guideline urgently needs to be developed. Therefore, we drafted this guideline according to the rapid advice guidelines methodology and general rules of WHO guideline development; we also added the first-hand management data of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University. This guideline includes the guideline methodology, epidemiological characteristics, disease screening and population prevention, diagnosis, treatment and control (including traditional Chinese Medicine), nosocomial infection prevention and control, and disease nursing of the 2019-nCoV. Moreover, we also provide a whole process of a successful treatment case of the severe 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia and experience and lessons of hospital rescue for 2019-nCoV infections. This rapid advice guideline is suitable for the first frontline doctors and nurses, managers of hospitals and healthcare sections, community residents, public health persons, relevant researchers, and all person who are interested in the 2019-nCoV.

OBJECTIVES Since the beginning of the novel coronavirus outbreak, different strategies have been explored to stem the spread of the disease and appropriately manage patient flow. Triage, an effective solution proposed in disaster medicine, also works well to manage Emergency Department (ED) flow. The aim of this study was to describe the role of an ED Triage Center for patients with suspected novel coronavirus disease (Covid-19) and characterize the patient flow. Methods. In March 2020, we established a Covid-19 triage center close to the Liège University EDs. From March 2 to March 23, we planned to analyze the specific flow of patients admitted to this triage zone and their characteristics in terms of inner specificities, work-up and management. During this period, all patients presented to the ED with symptoms suggestive of Covid-19 were included in the study. RESULTS A total amount of 1071 patients presented to the triage center during the study period. 41.50% of the patients presented with flu-like symptoms. In 82.00% of the cases, no risk factor of virus transmission was found. The SARS-Cov2 positive patients represented 29.26% of the screened patients. 83.00% of patients were discharged home while 17.00% were admitted to the hospital. CONCLUSION Our experience suggests that triage centers for the assessment and management of Covid-19 suspected patients is an essential key strategy to prevent the spread of the disease among non-symptomatic patients who present to the EDs for care. This allows for a disease-centered work-up and safer diversion of Covid-19 patients to specific hospital units.

Immersion in an emergency department triage center during the Covid-19 outbreak: first report of the Liège University hospital experience.

OBJECTIVES: Since the beginning of the novel coronavirus outbreak, different strategies have been explored to stem the spread of the disease and appropriately manage patient flow. Triage, an effective solution proposed in disaster medicine, also works well to manage Emergency Department (ED) flow. The aim of this study was to describe the role of an ED Triage Center for patients with suspected novel coronavirus disease (Covid-19) and characterize the patient flow. METHODS: In March 2020, we established a Covid-19 triage center close to the Liège University EDs. From March 2 to March 23, we planned to analyze the specific flow of patients admitted to this triage zone and their characteristics in terms of inner specificities, work-up and management. During this period, all patients presented to the ED with symptoms suggestive of Covid-19 were included in the study. RESULTS: A total amount of 1071 patients presented to the triage center during the study period. 41.50% of the patients presented with flu-like symptoms. In 82.00% of the cases, no risk factor of virus transmission was found. The SARS-Cov2 positive patients represented 29.26% of the screened patients. 83.00% of patients were discharged home while 17.00% were admitted to the hospital. CONCLUSION: Our experience suggests that triage centers for the assessment and management of Covid-19 suspected patients is an essential key strategy to prevent the spread of the disease among non-symptomatic patients who present to the EDs for care. This allows for a disease-centered work-up and safer diversion of Covid-19 patients to specific hospital units.

Immersion in an emergency department triage center during the Covid-19 outbreak: first report of the Liège University hospital experience

Objectives The novel coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, spreads rapidly across the world. The exponential increase in the number of cases has resulted in overcrowding of emergency departments (ED). Detection of SARS-CoV-2 is based on an RT-PCR of nasopharyngeal swab material. However, RT-PCR testing is time-consuming and many hospitals deal with a shortage of testing materials. Therefore, we aimed to develop an algorithm to rapidly evaluate an individual's risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection at the ED. Methods In this multicenter retrospective study, routine laboratory parameters (C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, absolute neutrophil and lymphocyte counts), demographic data and the chest X-ray/CT result from 967 patients entering the ED with respiratory symptoms were collected. Using these parameters, an easy-to-use point-based algorithm, called the corona-score, was developed to discriminate between patients that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR and those testing negative. Computational sampling was used to optimize the corona-score. Validation of the model was performed using data from 592 patients. Results The corona-score model yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.91 in the validation population. Patients testing negative for SARS-CoV-2 showed a median corona-score of 3 vs. 11 (scale 0-14) in patients testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (p<0.001). Using cut-off values of 4 and 11 the model has a sensitivity and specificity of 96 and 95%, respectively. Conclusions The corona-score effectively predicts SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR outcome based on routine parameters. This algorithm provides the means for medical professionals to rapidly evaluate SARS-CoV-2 infection status of patients presenting at the ED with respiratory symptoms.

Rapid identification of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients at the emergency department using routine testing

Rapid identification of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients at the emergency department using routine testing.

The coronavirus epidemic that is spreading around our world poses a number of challenges for healthcare workers. The virus is spread by droplet infection and has a high virulence, so any intervention that generates airway aerosol formation potentially endangers the health of those involved in care. Severe forms of coronavirus infection are associated with progressive respiratory failure, for the treatment of which early endotracheal intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation are essential. There is an increased risk of airway aerosol formation during intubation, resulting in a high risk of infection for care personnel. In addition to the above, difficult airway insurance is relatively common in these patients. The aim of our article is to provide a practice-oriented overview of the specialties of airway insurance in patients infected with coronavirus, with particular reference to aspects of infection control and patient safety. Orv Hetil. 2020; 161 (17): 696-703.

[Respiratory insurance in coronavirus-infected patients].

Since December 2019, China has been experiencing an outbreak of new infectious disease caused by 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). The clinical features include fever, coughing, shortness of breath, and inflammatory pulmonary infiltration revealed by X ray. China rapidly identified 2019-nCoV-related pneumonia a statutory infectious disease. To standardize the diagnosis and treatment of this new infectious disease, operational guidelines for the diagnosis and management of 2019-nCoV infection is accomplished by Peking Union Medical College Hospital.

[Diagnosis and clinical management of 2019 novel coronavirus infection: an operational recommendation of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (V2.0)].

First reported in China, the 2019 novel coronavirus has been spreading across the globe. Till 26 March, 2020, 416,686 cases have been diagnosed and 18,589 have died the world over. The coronavirus disease mainly starts with a respiratory illness and about 5-16% require intensive care management for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and multi-organ dysfunction. Children account for about 1-2% of the total cases, and 6% of these fall under severe or critical category requiring pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) care. Diagnosis involves a combination of clinical and epidemiological features with laboratory confirmation. Preparedness strategies for managing this pandemic are the need of the hour, and involve setting up cohort ICUs with isolation rooms. Re-allocation of resources in managing this crisis involves careful planning, halting elective surgeries and training of healthcare workers. Strict adherence to infection control like personal protective equipment and disinfection is the key to contain the disease transmission. Although many therapies have been tried in various regions, there is a lack of strong evidence to recommend anti-virals or immunomodulatory drugs.

Novel Coronavirus 2019 (2019-nCoV) Infection: Part I - Preparedness and Management in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit in Resource-limited Settings

[Diagnosis and clinical management of 2019 novel coronavirus infection: an operational recommendation of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (V2.0)]

Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) originated in the Wuhan, Hubei Province, China in November 2019 and has since been declared a pandemic by the WHO. COVID-19 is an acute infectious disease, primarily affecting the respiratory system. Currently, real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) performed on respiratory specimens is considered the reference by which to diagnose COVID-19. However, the limitations of RT-PCR, specifically, the fact that it is time-consuming and inadequate for the assessment of disease severity, have affected the process of epidemiological disease containment and has taken a toll on the healthcare management chain. As the risk of infection for other patients and personnel must be kept to a minimum, the indications for imaging have to be carefully considered. Imaging is primarily performed in patients with a negative RT-PCR, but a high clinical suspicion of COVID-19, or, in patients with diagnosed COVID-19 who are suffering from moderate to severe symptoms. In this article, we review the typical imaging findings in COVID-19, the differential diagnoses, and common complications.

Imaging in corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-A scoping review

Background: The novel coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, spreads rapidly across the world. The exponential increase in the number of cases has resulted in overcrowding of emergency departments (ED). Detection of SARS-CoV-2 is based on an RT-PCR of nasopharyngeal swab material. However, RT-PCR testing is time-consuming and many hospitals deal with a shortage of testing materials. Therefore, we aimed to develop an algorithm to rapidly evaluate an individual′s risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection at the ED. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective study, routine laboratory parameters (C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, absolute neutrophil and lymphocyte counts), demographic data and the chest X-ray/CT result from 967 patients entering the ED with respiratory symptoms were gathered. Using these parameters, an easy-to-use point-based algorithm, called the corona-score, was developed to discriminate between patients that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR and those testing negative. Computational sampling was used to optimize the corona-score. Validation of the model was performed using data from 592 patients. Results: The corona-score model yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.91 in the validation population. Patients testing negative for SARS-CoV-2 showed a median corona-score of 3 versus 11 (scale 0-14) in patients testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (p<0.001). Using cut-off values of 4 and 11 the model has a sensitivity and specificity of 96% and 95%, respectively. Conclusion: The corona-score effectively predicts SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR outcome based on routine parameters. This algorithm provides the means for medical professionals to rapidly evaluate SARS-CoV-2 infection status of patients presenting at the ED with respiratory symptoms.

Directives concrètes à l'intention des équipes de soins intensifs et d'anesthésiologie prenant soin de patients atteints du coronavirus 2019-nCoV./ Practical recommendations for critical care and anesthesiology teams caring for novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) patients

Since December 2019, the outbreak of novel coronavirus disease 2019 became a major epidemic threat in China and later spread worldwide. During the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak in mainland China, the Chinese Obstetricians and Gynecologists Association distributed guidelines regarding the care of gynecologic patients. These guidelines were developed by the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the Peking Union Medical College Hospital and represent an effort to integrate infection control strategy and promote professionalism in medical practice. The guidelines represent collaboration with experts from 31 provinces and autonomous regions of mainland China over 2 weeks' time. With the implementation of these guidelines, no nosocomial infections of coronavirus disease 2019 have been identified at the Peking Union Medical College Hospital. We think these guidelines might be helpful to departments of obstetrics and gynecology internationally during these unprecedented times. In our guidelines, we describe basic infection precaution principles, an epidemiologic screening tool, prioritization of surgical procedures, and operating room requirements. Using these principles, we then review the management of gynecologic patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic in the outpatient and operative and nonoperative inpatient settings and in clinical trials.

Management of gynecology patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: Chinese expert consensus

A recent epidemic of pneumonia cases in Wuhan China was caused by a novel coronavirus with strong infectivity, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). The article provides the pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) methods in the principle of 4S (simple, safe, satisfy, save) for patients with pneumonia caused by the novel coronavirus, shows how to establish a ventilative and convectional PR environment to prevent the spread of virus through droplets, how to guide the patients to carry out PR, how to carry out respiratory muscle training, effective cough, expectoration, sneeze, general exercise, digestive function rehabilitation and psychological rehabilitation, and how to clean and disinfect the PR environment.

[Pulmonary rehabilitation guidelines in the principle of 4S for patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)]

OBJECTIVES: Spain has been one of the countries most severely affected by the coronavirus disease 2019. This study aims to describe a series of children admitted to a PICU due to coronavirus disease 2019 infection. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Tertiary hospital in Madrid, Spain. PATIENTS: Children admitted to the PICU with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) infection, from March 1, 2020, to April 15, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Observational study. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Epidemiologic data, previous clinical characteristics, support therapy needed, imaging tests, laboratory observations on admission, and pharmacologic therapy. Eleven children were admitted to the PICU, with suspected coronavirus disease 2019; the polymerase chain reaction test was positive in seven. The median age was 100.7 months (range, 0.5-162). Five were admitted from the emergency department and two from the ward. The Pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 3 (range, 0-9), and Pediatric Risk of Mortality II score was 4 (range, 0-16). All children were previously healthy except one (allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation). Respiratory symptoms and fever were prevalent. A chest radiograph led to a pneumonia diagnosis. Not all patients presented with lymphopenia on admission. D-Dimer and ferritin were elevated. All patients needed oxygen therapy through a nasal cannula; five patients received high-flow nasal cannula therapy, which was later substituted with noninvasive ventilation in four. Mechanical ventilation was necessary in two patients on the first day of PICU admission. Two children required mechanical ventilation and inotropic support. Tocilizumab was applied in two intubated children. Also, four children received heparin. No patients died. CONCLUSIONS: On the whole, the children were previously healthy and are more than 1 year old. Respiratory symptoms were the leading cause of PICU admission, making respiratory support the principal therapy. Patients requiring mechanical ventilation showed deterioration on the first day of admission. These children seemed to require close monitoring, and multicenter studies are necessary.

Children in Critical Care Due to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection: Experience in a Spanish Hospital

Imaging in corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19)—A scoping review

[Pulmonary rehabilitation guidelines in the principle of 4S for patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)].

BACKGROUND: The rapid spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is affecting many countries. While healthcare systems need to cope with the need to treat a large number of people with different degrees of respiratory failure, actions to preserve aliquots of the healthcare system to guarantee treatment to patients are mandatory. METHODS: In order to protect the Fondazione IRCCS-Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano from the spread of COVID-19, a number of to-hospital and within-hospital filters were applied. Among others, a triage process to detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positivity in patients with cancer was developed consisting of high-resolution low-dose computed tomography (CT) scan followed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nose-throat swabs whenever CT was suggestive of lung infection. To serve symptomatic patients who were already admitted to the hospital or in need of hospitalization while waiting for RT-PCR laboratory confirmation of infection, a COVID-19 surveillance zone was set up. RESULTS: A total of 301 patients were screened between March 6 and April 3, 2020. Of these, 47 were hospitalized, 53 needed a differential diagnosis to continue with their cancer treatment, and 201 were about to undergo surgery. RT-PCR was positive in 13 of 40 hospitalized patients (32%), 14 of 52 day hospital patients (27%), and 6 of 201 surgical patients (3%). CONCLUSION: Applying filters to protect our comprehensive cancer center from COVID-19 spread contributed to guaranteeing cancer care during the COVID-19 crisis in Milan. A surveillance area and surgical triage allowed us to protect the hospital from as many as 33 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Response of a comprehensive cancer center to the COVID-19 pandemic: the experience of the Fondazione IRCCS-Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano

IMPORTANCE: Recent reports identify that among hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients, 30% require ICU care. Understanding ICU resource needs remains an essential component of meeting current and projected needs of critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients. OBJECTIVES: This study queried U.S. ICU clinician perspectives on challenging aspects of care in managing coronavirus disease 2019 patients, current and anticipated resource demands, and personal stress. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using a descriptive survey methodology, an anonymous web-based survey was administered from April 7, 2020, to April 22, 2020 (email and newsletter) to query members of U.S. national critical care organizations. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Through a 16-item descriptive questionnaire, ICU clinician perceptions were assessed regarding current and emerging critical ICU needs in managing the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infected patients, resource levels, concerns about being exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and perceived level of personal stress. A total of 9,120 ICU clinicians responded to the survey, representing all 50 U.S. states, with 4,106 (56.9%) working in states with 20,000 or more coronavirus disease 2019 cases. The 7,317 respondents who indicated their profession included ICU nurses (n = 6,731, 91.3%), advanced practice providers (nurse practitioners and physician assistants; n = 334, 4.5%), physicians (n = 212, 2.9%), respiratory therapists (n = 31, 0.4%), and pharmacists (n = 30, 0.4%). A majority (n = 6,510, 88%) reported having cared for a patient with presumed or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. The most critical ICU needs identified were personal protective equipment, specifically N95 respirator availability, and ICU staffing. Minimizing healthcare worker virus exposure during care was believed to be the most challenging aspect of coronavirus disease 2019 patient care (n = 2,323, 30.9%). Nurses report a high level of concern about exposing family members to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (median score of 10 on 0-10 scale). Similarly, the level of concern reached the maximum score of 10 in ICU clinicians who had provided care to coronavirus disease 2019 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This national ICU clinician survey identifies continued concerns regarding personal protective equipment supplies with the chief issue being N95 respirator availability. As the pandemic continues, ICU clinicians anticipate a number of limited resources that may impact ICU care including personnel, capacity, and surge potential, as well as staff and subsequent family members exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. These persistent concerns greatly magnify personal stress, offering a therapeutic target for professional organization and facility intervention efforts.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic Measures: Reports From a National Survey of 9,120 ICU Clinicians

2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) is an emerging infectious disease closely related to MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV that was first reported in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China in December 2019. As of January 2020, cases of 2019-nCoV are continuing to be reported in other Eastern Asian countries as well as in the United States, Europe, Australia, and numerous other countries. An unusually high volume of domestic and international travel corresponding to the beginning of the 2020 Chinese New Year complicated initial identification and containment of infected persons. Due to the rapidly rising number of cases and reported deaths, all countries should be considered at risk of imported 2019-nCoV. Therefore, it is essential for prehospital, clinic, and emergency department personnel to be able to rapidly assess 2019-nCoV risk and take immediate actions if indicated. The Identify-Isolate-Inform (3I) Tool, originally conceived for the initial detection and management of Ebola virus and later adjusted for other infectious agents, can be adapted for any emerging infectious disease. This paper reports a modification of the 3I Tool for use in the initial detection and management of patients under investigation for 2019-nCoV. After initial assessment for symptoms and epidemiological risk factors, including travel to affected areas and exposure to confirmed 2019-nCoV patients within 14 days, patients are classified in a risk-stratified system. Upon confirmation of a suspected 2019-nCoV case, affected persons must immediately be placed in airborne infection isolation and the appropriate public health agencies notified. This modified 3I Tool will assist emergency and primary care clinicians, as well as out-of-hospital providers, in effectively managing persons with suspected or confirmed 2019-nCoV.

2019-nCoV: The Identify-Isolate-Inform (3I) Tool Applied to a Novel Emerging Coronavirus

The new coronavirus pneumonia has been listed as one of the Class B infectious disease but is managed as Class A infectious disease. To prevent and control its spread in hospitals, the outpatient department is the first key gate. Based on the relevant diagnosis and treatment strategies of the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China, combined with the actual situation of the hospital's epidemic prevention and control work, this article formulated comprehensive prevention and control strategies from the perspective of the patients and staffs. From the aspects of organization and leadership, medical epidemic prevention, pre-screening and screening, process formulation, admission management, cleaning and disinfection, epidemic report, prevention and control supervision, personnel and material deployment, patient education, comprehensive management, personnel management and psychological support and so on, advice and guidance on prevention and control of this infectious disease in outpatient department of hospital were provided.

Prevention and control strategies of new coronavirus pneumonia in general hospitals/ 重庆医学

OBJECTIVE During an influenza or COVID-19 pandemic that results in acute respiratory distress, available ventilators will not meet demand. In 2007, the NYS Task Force on Life and the Law and Department of Health released draft Guidelines for ethical allocation of ventilators for adults. In 2015, updated guidelines were released to ensure that: (1) revisions reflect the public's values and (2) the triage protocol is substantiated by evidence-based clinical data. We summarize the development and content of the 2015 Guidelines compared to the 2007 version, emphasizing new/revised aspects of the ethical considerations and clinical protocol. METHODS We compared the 2007 and 2015 guidelines, with particular emphasis on the ethical issues and clinical protocols. RESULTS The 2015 Guidelines retained much of the ethical and clinical framework of the 2007 draft. The triage protocol was revised using evidence-based clinical data. Patients with the highest likelihood of short-term survival with ventilator therapy have priority access. Protocol consists of exclusion criteria, the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, and periodic clinical assessments. Guidance is provided on secondary triage criteria. Other forms of medical intervention/palliative care and review of triage decisions are discussed. CONCLUSIONS The 2015 Guidelines reflect advances in medicine and societal values and provide an evidenced-based framework to save the most lives. The framework could be adapted in other emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, that require ventilators.

Clinical and Ethical Considerations in Allocation of Ventilators in an Influenza Pandemic or Other Public Health Disaster: A Comparison of the 2007 and 2015 New York State Ventilator Allocation Guidelines.

INTRODUCTION Efficient identification and isolation of patients with communicable diseases limits exposure to health care workers, other patients, and visitors. In August 2014, our team developed and implemented an algorithm to triage suspected cases of Ebola virus disease in a midwestern United States emergency department and outpatient clinics based on patient travel history and symptoms. Here, we present the lessons learned and modifications to update the tool. METHODS Two strategies were developed and utilized to properly identify, isolate, and inform on patients with suspected highly hazardous communicable diseases: 1) a robust electronic symptom and travel screen with decision support tools in the electronic medical record, and 2) the availability of workflow protocols for Ebola virus disease, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) once a person under investigation is identified. After action reports provided opportunities to modify the algorithm and improve the identification and isolation processes. RESULTS Since our screening and travel electronic medical record inception 5 years ago, modifications changed iteratively to further enhance the screening process. Since 2018, staff have identified 5 patients at risk for MERS; in all cases, identification occurred during the check-in process. Exposure investigations in the emergency department decreased significantly after algorithm implementation in January 2019, from 30 in 2018 to 0 in 2019. DISCUSSION Although highly hazardous communicable diseases like Ebola virus disease and MERS are of concern due to their mortality rates and limited treatment options, these same concepts may be applied to the early identification and isolation of patients suspected of having more common communicable diseases like measles and influenza, emphasizing the importance of protocol-based screening in the healthcare environment.

Can You Catch It? Lessons Learned and Modification of ED Triage Symptom- and Travel-Screening Strategy

INTRODUCTION: Rapid worldwide spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in a global pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This review article provides emergency physicians with an overview of the most current understanding of COVID-19 and recommendations on the evaluation and management of patients with suspected COVID-19. DISCUSSION: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for causing COVID-19, is primarily transmitted from person-to-person through close contact (approximately 6 ft) by respiratory droplets. Symptoms of COVID-19 are similar to other viral upper respiratory illnesses. Three major trajectories include mild disease with upper respiratory symptoms, non-severe pneumonia, and severe pneumonia complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Emergency physicians should focus on identifying patients at risk, isolating suspected patients, and informing hospital infection prevention and public health authorities. Patients with suspected COVID-19 should be asked to wear a facemask. Respiratory etiquette, hand washing, and personal protective equipment are recommended for all healthcare personnel caring for suspected cases. Disposition depends on patient symptoms, hemodynamic status, and patient ability to self-quarantine. CONCLUSION: This narrative review provides clinicians with an updated approach to the evaluation and management of patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected COVID-19.

Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19): A primer for emergency physicians

Background: Since December 2019, a number of patients infected with COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) have been identified in Wuhan, Hubei, China. As the epidemic has spread, similar cases have also been found in other parts of mainland China and abroad. The main reason for this spread is the highly contagious nature of the virus and the fact that children can also become infected during its incubation period. This has made the virus a substantial challenge for the outpatient triage staff of children's hospitals outside the epidemic area of the Hubei Province. It is very important for the preview and triage personnel to accurately grasp the epidemiology of the virus and identify children's symptoms in the fever clinic. Methods: We performed an analysis of our early preview and triage of suspected COVID-19 in 36 children presenting at fever clinics. Two specialists either excluded suspected cases or referred cases to the isolation ward for new nucleic acid testing. Results: All 14 children who were transferred to the isolation ward had a fever, and 71.43% of them had a cough. Their nucleic acid testing results were negative. The suspected cases and excluded suspected cases had similar epidemiology history as well as complete blood count results. With reference to the diagnostic criteria in existing pediatric guidelines, we have further improved the triage screening questionnaire for children with fever in our hospital. Conclusions: According to the situation in our city and hospital, an evaluation questionnaire that is suitable for use with children in our hospital has been formulated to achieve the goals of early detection, isolation, diagnosis, and treatment. We provided an important basis for the next step in developing accurate preview and triage screening standards and appropriate guidelines for pediatric patients.

Analysis and suggestions for the preview and triage screening of children with suspected COVID-19 outside the epidemic area of Hubei Province

Recent reports identify that among hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients, 30% require ICU care. Understanding ICU resource needs remains an essential component of meeting current and projected needs of critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients. OBJECTIVES: This study queried U.S. ICU clinician perspectives on challenging aspects of care in managing coronavirus disease 2019 patients, current and anticipated resource demands, and personal stress. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using a descriptive survey methodology, an anonymous web-based survey was administered from April 7, 2020, to April 22, 2020 (email and newsletter) to query members of U.S. national critical care organizations. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Through a 16-item descriptive questionnaire, ICU clinician perceptions were assessed regarding current and emerging critical ICU needs in managing the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infected patients, resource levels, concerns about being exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and perceived level of personal stress. A total of 9,120 ICU clinicians responded to the survey, representing all 50 U.S. states, with 4,106 (56.9%) working in states with 20,000 or more coronavirus disease 2019 cases. The 7,317 respondents who indicated their profession included ICU nurses (n = 6,731, 91.3%), advanced practice providers (nurse practitioners and physician assistants; n = 334, 4.5%), physicians (n = 212, 2.9%), respiratory therapists (n = 31, 0.4%), and pharmacists (n = 30, 0.4%). A majority (n = 6,510, 88%) reported having cared for a patient with presumed or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. The most critical ICU needs identified were personal protective equipment, specifically N95 respirator availability, and ICU staffing. Minimizing healthcare worker virus exposure during care was believed to be the most challenging aspect of coronavirus disease 2019 patient care (n = 2,323, 30.9%). Nurses report a high level of concern about exposing family members to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (median score of 10 on 0–10 scale). Similarly, the level of concern reached the maximum score of 10 in ICU clinicians who had provided care to coronavirus disease 2019 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This national ICU clinician survey identifies continued concerns regarding personal protective equipment supplies with the chief issue being N95 respirator availability. As the pandemic continues, ICU clinicians anticipate a number of limited resources that may impact ICU care including personnel, capacity, and surge potential, as well as staff and subsequent family members exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. These persistent concerns greatly magnify personal stress, offering a therapeutic target for professional organization and facility intervention efforts.

Objective@#To study the clinical characteristics of 2019 coronavirus (2019-nCoV) pneumonia patients and make a feasible screening process in fever clinic.@*Methods@#Epidemiologic features, clinical presentation, laboratory findings and image features of the screened patients were retrospectively collected and analyzed.@*Results@#Totally, 46 patients were screened, 9 of them were laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection, and others were defined as laboratory-excluded patients. Laboratory-confirmed patients had higher frequency of travelling or residence in Wuhan within two weeks of onset (P<0.05), but there were no differences on age, sex, other epidemiologic features and comorbidities between the two groups (P>0.05). The most common feature of the laboratory-confirmed patients was fever (100%), but the symptoms showed no differences between the two groups (P>0.05). Laboratory-confirmed patients had lower white blood cell count than the laboratory-excluded patients (P<0.05), and all of them had pneumonia in chest CT scan. None of the patients with normal chest CT had positive 2019-nCoV nucleic acid test.@*Conclusions@#No specific symptom was helpful in the diagnosis of 2019-nCoV infection. However, patients without chest CT scan changes had a very low risk of 2019-nCoV infection despite of the epidemiologic history and fever. We recommended a screening procedure that might be helpful to reduce the rate of miss diagnosis and improve screening efficiency.

Clinical features of 2019 novel coronavirus infection patients and a feasible screening procedure/ 中华急诊医学杂志

Psychiatric patients are at high risk for contracting COVID-19, and inpatient psychiatric units face substantial risks of institutional outbreaks. Here, the authors describe an algorithm for testing and triage in a large psychiatric facility designed to prevent local COVID-19 transmission. The algorithm is based on expert opinion and clinical experience between March and April of 2020, during which the institution cared for 47 COVID-19 positive psychiatric inpatients. The implementation of the algorithm is designed to mitigate COVID-19 transmission, preserve the safest and least restrictive treatment environment for psychiatric inpatients, and provide a model adaptable to other institutional settings.

A COVID-19 testing and triage algorithm for psychiatric units: One hospital's response to the New York region's pandemic

Coronavirus is an enveloped virus with positive-sense single-stranded RNA. Coronavirus infection in humans mainly affects the upper respiratory tract and to a lesser extent the gastrointestinal tract. Clinical symptoms of coronavirus infections can range from relatively mild (similar to the common cold) to severe (bronchitis, pneumonia, and renal involvement). The disease caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was called Covid-19 by the World Health Organization in February 2020. Face-to-face communication and consistent exposure to body fluids such as blood and saliva predispose dental care workers at serious risk for 2019-nCoV infection. As demonstrated by the recent coronavirus outbreak, information is not enough. During dental practice, blood and saliva can be scattered. Accordingly, dental practice can be a potential risk for dental staff, and there is a high risk of cross-infection. This article addresses all information collected to date on the virus, in accordance with the guidelines of international health care institutions, and provides a comprehensive protocol for managing possible exposure to patients or those suspected of having coronavirus.

Being a front-line dentist during the Covid-19 pandemic: a literature review

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus has serially overtaken our metropolitan hospitals. At peak, patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome may outnumber mechanical ventilators. In our Miami Hospital System, COVID‐19 cases have multiplied for 4 weeks and elective surgery has been suspended. METHODS: An Otolaryngologic Triage Committee was created to appropriately allocate resources to patients. Hospital ethicists provided support. Our tumor conference screened patients for nonsurgical options. Patients were tested twice for coronavirus before performing urgent contaminated operations. N95 masks and protective equipment were conserved when possible. Patients with low‐grade cancers were advised to delay surgery, and other difficult decisions were made. RESULTS: Hundreds of surgeries were canceled. Sixty‐five cases screened over 3 weeks are tabulated. Physicians and patients expressed discomfort regarding perceived deviations from standards, but risk of COVID‐19 exposure tempered these discussions. CONCLUSIONS: We describe the use of actively managed surgical triage to fairly balance our patient's health with public health concerns.

Ethical surgical triage of patients with head and neck cancer during the COVID‐19 pandemic

The rapid emergence of COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) has necessitated the implementation of diverse pandemic control strategies throughout the world. In order to effectively control the spread of this disease, it is essential that it be diagnosed at an early stage so that patients can be reliably quarantined such that disease spread will be slowed. At present, the diagnosis of this infectious form of coronavirus pneumonia is largely dependent upon a combination of laboratory testing and imaging analyses of variable diagnostic efficacy. In the present report, we reviewed prior literature pertaining to the diagnosis of different forms of pneumonia caused by coronaviruses (SARS, MERS, and SARS-CoV-2) and assessed two different potential diagnostic approaches. We ultimately found that computed tomography (CT) was associated with a higher rate of diagnostic accuracy than was a real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)-based approach (P = 0.0041), and chest radiography (P = 0.0100). Even so, it is important that clinicians utilize a combination of laboratory and radiological testing where possible in order to ensure that this virus is reliably and quickly detected such that it may be treated and patients may be isolated in a timely fashion, thereby effectively curbing the further progression of this pandemic. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The Diagnosis of SARS-CoV2 Pneumonia: A Review of Laboratory and Radiological Testing Results

At the end of January 2020, a novel betacoronavirus, known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, progressively spread in Italy. Patients with cancer are considered more prone to infections because of the immunosuppressive status due to both malignancy and anticancer treatments. From the first Italian government restrictions (23rd February), Modena Cancer Center adopted practical health vigilance recommendations to minimise the risk of exposure to the virus without overlooking cancer management. From 23rd February to 31st March 2020, 1257 patients on active anticancer treatment for oncological or haematological malignancies attended our institution. All the staff activities were rescheduled following our practical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) guideline. During this period, we have tallied 9 cases of COVID-19 infection (0.71%) in patients with cancer and 3 cases (1.66%) in health workers. The mortality rate of our patients with cancer was 22%, consistent with the data reported in the literature. In conclusion, following our practical health vigilance recommendations, physicians should be confident in maintaining life-saving anticancer treatment without exceedingly increasing the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection. The high rate of mortality suggested that all patients on active anticancer treatment with flu-like symptoms have to be carefully screened for COVID-19 infection.

Cancer treatment during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: Do not postpone, do it!

During the first two decades of the 21st century, there have been three coronavirus infection outbreaks raising global health concerns by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and the SARS-CoV-2. Although the reported imaging findings of coronavirus infection are variable and non-specific, the most common initial chest radiograph (CXR) and CT findings are ground-glass opacities and consolidation with peripheral predominance and eventually spread to involve both lungs as the disease progresses. These findings can be explained by the immune pathogenesis of coronavirus infection causing diffuse alveolar damage. Although it is insensitive in mild or early coronavirus infection, the CXR remains as the first-line and the most commonly used imaging modality. That is because it is rapid and easily accessible and helpful for monitoring patient progress during treatment. CT is more sensitive to detect early parenchymal lung abnormalities and disease progression, and can provide an alternative diagnosis. In this pictorial review, various coronavirus infection cases are presented to provide imaging spectrums of coronavirus infection and present differences in imaging among them or from other viral infections, and to discuss the role of imaging in viral infection outbreaks.

Imaging findings in coronavirus infections: SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2

The 2019 novel coronavirus infection has brought a great challenge in prevention and control of the national epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China. During the fight against the epidemic of COVID-19, properly carrying out pre-examination and triage for patients with skin lesions and fever has been a practical problem encountered in hospitals for skin diseases as well as clinics of dermatology in general hospitals. Considering that certain skin diseases may have symptom of fever, and some of the carriers of 2019 novel coronavirus and patients with COVID-19 at their early stage may do not present any symptoms of COVID-19, to properly deal with the visitors to clinics of dermatology, the Chinese Society of Dermatology organized experts to formulate the principles and procedures for pre-examination and triage of visitors to clinics of dermatology during the epidemic of COVID-19.

Consensus on Pre-examination and Triage in Clinic of Dermatology During Outbreak of COVID-19 From Chinese Experts(#)

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has resulted in diversion of healthcare resources to the management of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus. Elective interventions and surgical procedures in most countries have been postponed and operating room resources have been diverted to manage the pandemic. The Venous and Lymphatic Triage and Acuity Scale (VELTAS) was developed to provide an international standard to rationalise and harmonise the management of patients with venous and lymphatic disorders or vascular anomalies. Triage urgency was determined based on clinical assessment of urgency with which a patient would require medical treatment or surgical intervention. Clinical conditions were classified into six categories of: 1) Venous thromboembolism (VTE), 2) Chronic Venous Disease (CVD), 3) Vascular anomalies, 4) Venous trauma 5) Venous compression and 6) Lymphatic disease. Triage urgency was categorised into four groups and individual conditions were allocated to each class of triage. These included 1) Medical Emergencies (requiring immediate attendance), example massive pulmonary embolism; 2) Urgent (to be seen as soon as possible), example deep vein thrombosis ; 3) Semi-urgent (to be attended to within 30-90 days), example highly symptomatic CVD, and 4) Discretionary/Non-urgent- (to be seen within 6-12 months), example chronic lymphoedema. VELTAS aims to standardise the triage of patients with venous and lymphatic disease or vascular anomalies by providing an international consensus-based classification of clinical categories and triage urgency. The scale may be used during pandemics such as the current COVID-19 crisis but may also be used as a general framework to classify urgency of the listed conditions.

Triage of Patients with Venous and Lymphatic Diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic- the Venous and Lymphatic Triage and Acuity Scale (VELTAS)

Coronavirus infection is a transmissible disease. It was first described in China in December, 2019. It has been said to have a person-to-person transmission after prolonged and unprotected exposure. Patients with a potential SARS-CoV-2 exposure present with symptoms of low-grade pyrexia, dry cough, or shortness of breath. People with these symptoms should contact health-care providers before seeking medical intervention so that appropriate preventive actions may be implemented. Health-care facilities should rapidly isolate suspected individuals and notify local health departments for support involved in performing laboratory tests and efforts in containment. The present article describes the nature of virus, method of detection, and its mode of transmission.

Coronavirus: An emergency for healthcare professionals

A rapid advice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infected pneumonia (standard version)

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus has serially overtaken our metropolitan hospitals. At peak, patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome may outnumber mechanical ventilators. In our Miami Hospital System, COVID-19 cases have multiplied for 4 weeks and elective surgery has been suspended. METHODS: An Otolaryngologic Triage Committee was created to appropriately allocate resources to patients. Hospital ethicists provided support. Our tumor conference screened patients for nonsurgical options. Patients were tested twice for coronavirus before performing urgent contaminated operations. N95 masks and protective equipment were conserved when possible. Patients with low-grade cancers were advised to delay surgery, and other difficult decisions were made. RESULTS: Hundreds of surgeries were canceled. Sixty-five cases screened over 3 weeks are tabulated. Physicians and patients expressed discomfort regarding perceived deviations from standards, but risk of COVID-19 exposure tempered these discussions. CONCLUSIONS: We describe the use of actively managed surgical triage to fairly balance our patient's health with public health concerns.

Ethical surgical triage of patients with head and neck cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract Purpose An ongoing pandemic of COVID-19 that started in Hubei, China has resulted in massive strain on the healthcare infrastructure in Lombardy, Italy. The management of these patients is still evolving. Materials and methods This is a single-center observational cohort study of critically ill patients infected with COVID-19. Bedside clinicians abstracted daily patient data on history, treatment, and short-term course. We describe management and a proposed severity scale for treatment used in this hospital. Results 44 patients were enrolled; with incomplete information on 11. Of the 33 studied patients, 91% were male, median age 64; 88% were overweight or obese. 45% were hypertensive, 12% had been taking an ACE-inhibitor. Noninvasive ventilation was performed on 39% of patients for part or all or their ICU stay with no provider infection. Most patients received antibiotics for pneumonia. Patients also received lopinivir/ritonavir (82%), hydroxychloroquine (79%), and tocilizumab (12%) according to this treatment algorithm. Nine of 10 patients survived their ICU course and were transferred to the floor, with one dying in the ICU. Conclusions ICU patients with COVID-19 frequently have hypertension. Many could be managed with noninvasive ventilation, despite the risk of aerosolization. The use of a severity scale augmented clinician management.

Clinical presentation and initial management critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in Brescia, Italy

The COVID-19 pandemic presents clinicians a unique set of challenges in managing breast cancer (BC) patients. As hospital resources and staff become more limited during the COVID-19 pandemic, it becomes critically important to define which BC patients require more urgent care and which patients can wait for treatment until the pandemic is over. In this Special Communication, we use expert opinion of representatives from multiple cancer care organizations to categorize BC patients into priority levels (A, B, C) for urgency of care across all specialties. Additionally, we provide treatment recommendations for each of these patient scenarios. Priority A patients have conditions that are immediately life threatening or symptomatic requiring urgent treatment. Priority B patients have conditions that do not require immediate treatment but should start treatment before the pandemic is over. Priority C patients have conditions that can be safely deferred until the pandemic is over. The implementation of these recommendations for patient triage, which are based on the highest level available evidence, must be adapted to current availability of hospital resources and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in each region of the country. Additionally, the risk of disease progression and worse outcomes for patients need to be weighed against the risk of patient and staff exposure to SARS CoV-2 (virus associated with the COVID-19 pandemic). Physicians should use these recommendations to prioritize care for their BC patients and adapt treatment recommendations to the local context at their hospital.

Recommendations for prioritization, treatment, and triage of breast cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. the COVID-19 pandemic breast cancer consortium

Public health emergencies have the potential to place enormous strain on health systems. The current pandemic of the novel 2019 coronavirus disease has required hospitals in numerous countries to expand their surge capacity to meet the needs of patients with critical illness. When even surge capacity is exceeded, however, principles of critical care triage may be needed as a means to allocate scarce resources, such as mechanical ventilators or key medications. The goal of a triage system is to direct limited resources towards patients most likely to benefit from them. Implementing a triage system requires careful coordination between clinicians, health systems, local and regional governments, and the public, with a goal of transparency to maintain trust. We discuss the principles of tertiary triage and methods for implementing such a system, emphasizing that these systems should serve only as a last resort. Even under triage, we must uphold our obligation to care for all patients as best possible under difficult circumstances.

Triage of Scarce Critical Care Resources in COVID-19 An Implementation Guide for Regional Allocation: An Expert Panel Report of the Task Force for Mass Critical Care and the American College of Chest Physicians

The rapid emergence of COVID‐19 (coronavirus disease 2019) has necessitated the implementation of diverse pandemic control strategies throughout the world. In order to effectively control the spread of this disease, it is essential that it be diagnosed at an early stage so that patients can be reliably quarantined such that disease spread will be slowed. At present, the diagnosis of this infectious form of coronavirus pneumonia is largely dependent upon a combination of laboratory testing and imaging analyses of variable diagnostic efficacy. In the present report, we reviewed prior literature pertaining to the diagnosis of different forms of pneumonia caused by coronaviruses (SARS, MERS, and SARS‐CoV‐2) and assessed two different potential diagnostic approaches. We ultimately found that computed tomography (CT) was associated with a higher rate of diagnostic accuracy than was a real‐time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)‐based approach (P = 0.0041), and chest radiography (P = 0.0100). Even so, it is important that clinicians utilize a combination of laboratory and radiological testing where possible in order to ensure that this virus is reliably and quickly detected such that it may be treated and patients may be isolated in a timely fashion, thereby effectively curbing the further progression of this pandemic. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The Diagnosis of SARS‐CoV2 Pneumonia: A Review of Laboratory and Radiological Testing Results

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization has highlighted the need for improved surveillance and understanding of the health burden imposed by non-influenza RNA respiratory viruses. Human coronaviruses (CoVs) are a major cause of respiratory and gastrointestinal tract infections with associated morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVES: The objective of our study was to characterize the epidemiology of CoVs in our tertiary care centre, and identify clinical correlates of disease severity. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was performed of 226 patients admitted with confirmed CoV respiratory tract infection between 2010 and 2016. Variables consistent with a severe disease burden were evaluated including symptoms, length of stay, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality. RESULTS: CoVs represented 11.3% of all positive respiratory virus samples and OC43 was the most commonly identified CoV. The majority of infections were community-associated while 21.6% were considered nosocomial. The average length of stay was 11.8 days with 17.3% of patients requiring ICU admission and an all-cause mortality of 7%. In a multivariate model, female gender and smoking were associated with increased likelihood of admission to ICU or death. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the significant burden of CoVs and justifies the need for surveillance in the acute care setting.

Severity of coronavirus respiratory tract infections in adults admitted to acute care in Toronto, Ontario

BACKGROUND At present, the severity of patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been a focal point. METHODS To assess the factors associated with severity and prognosis of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, we retrospectively investigated the clinical, imaging, and laboratory characteristics of confirmed 280 cases of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) from January 20 to February 20, 2020. RESULTS The median age of patients in the mild group was 37.55 years old, while that in the severe group was 63.04 years old. The proportion of patients over 65 years old in the severe group was significantly higher than that of the mild group (59.04% vs. 10.15%, P < 0.05). 85.54% of severe patients had diabetes or cardiovascular diseases, which was significantly higher than that of the mild group (51.81% vs 7.11%, P = 0.025; 33.73% vs 3.05%, P = 0.042). Patients in the mild group experienced earlier initiation of antiviral treatment (1.19 ± 0.45 vs 2.65 ± 1.06 days in the severe group, P < 0.001). Our study showed that comorbidity, time from illness onset to antiviral, and age >=65 were three major risk factors for COVID-19 progression, while comorbidity and time from illness onset to antiviral were two major risk factors for COVID-19 recovery. CONCLUSIONS The elderly and patients with underlying diseases are more likely to experience a severe progression of COVID-19. It is recommended that timely antiviral treatment should be initiated to slow the disease progression and improve the prognosis.

Early antiviral treatment contributes to alleviate the severity and improve the prognosis of patients with novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19).

Objective@#To investigate the principles of differential diagnosis of pulmonary infiltrates in cancer patients during the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by analyzing one case of lymphoma who presented pulmonary ground-glass opacities (GGO) after courses of chemotherapy.@*Methods@#Baseline demographics and clinicopathological data of eligible patients were retrieved from medical records. Information of clinical manifestations, history of epidemiology, lab tests and chest CT scan images of visiting patients from February 13 to February 28 were collected. Literatures about pulmonary infiltrates in cancer patients were searched from databases including PUBMED, EMBASE and CNKI.@*Results@#Among the 139 cancer patients underwent chest CT scans before chemotherapy, pulmonary infiltrates were identified in eight patients (5.8%), five of whom were characterized as GGOs in lungs. 2019-nCoV nuclear acid testing was performed in three patients and the results were negative. One case was a 66-year-old man diagnosed as non-Hodgkin lymphoma and underwent CHOP chemotherapy regimen. His chest CT scan image displayed multiple GGOs in lungs and the complete blood count showed decreased lymphocytes. This patient denied any contact with confirmed/suspected cases of 2019-nCoV infection and without fever and other respiratory symptoms. Considering the negative result of nuclear acid testing, this patient was presumptively diagnosed as viral pneumonia and an experiential anti-infection treatment had been prescribed for him.@*Conclusions@#The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) complicates the clinical scenario of pulmonary infiltrates in cancer patients. The epidemic history, clinical manifestation, CT scan image and lab test should be combined consideration. The 2019-nCoV nuclear acid testing might be applicated in more selected patients. Active anti-infection treatment and surveillance of patient condition should be initiated if infectious disease is considered.

The differential diagnosis of pulmonary infiltrates in cancer patients during the outbreak of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease/ 中华肿瘤杂志

BACKGROUND: The outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has globally strained medical resources and caused significant mortality. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate machine-learning model based on clinical features for severity risk assessment and triage for COVID-19 patients at hospital admission. METHOD: 725 patients were used to train and validate the model including a retrospective cohort of 299 hospitalised COVID-19 patients at Wuhan, China, from December 23, 2019, to February 13, 2020, and five cohorts with 426 patients from eight centers in China, Italy, and Belgium, from February 20, 2020, to March 21, 2020. The main outcome was the onset of severe or critical illness during hospitalisation. Model performances were quantified using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and metrics derived from the confusion-matrix. RESULTS: The median age was 50.0â years and 137 (45.8%) were men in the retrospective cohort. The median age was 62.0â years and 236 (55.4%) were men in five cohorts. The model was prospectively validated on five cohorts yielding AUCs ranging from 0.84 to 0.89, with accuracies ranging from 74.4% to 87.5%, sensitivities ranging from 75.0% to 96.9%, and specificities ranging from 57.5% to 88.0%, all of which performed better than the pneumonia severity index. The cut-off values of the low, medium, and high-risk probabilities were 0.21 and 0.80. The online-calculators can be found at www.covid19risk.ai. CONCLUSION: The machine-learning model, nomogram, and online-calculator might be useful to access the onset of severe and critical illness among COVID-19 patients and triage at hospital admission.

Development of a Clinical Decision Support System for Severity Risk Prediction and Triage of COVID-19 Patients at Hospital Admission: an International Multicenter Study

Objective: To investigate the clinical characteristics of medical staff with novel coronavirus pneumonia(NCP). Methods: 30 patients infected with novel coronavirus referred to jianghan university hospital between January 11, 2020 and January 3, 2020 were studied. The data reviewed included those of clinical manifestations, laboratory investigation and Radiographic features. Results: The patients consisted of 10 men and 20 women, including 22 doctors and 8 nurses,aged 21~59 years(mean 35±8 years).They were divided to 26 common type and 4 severe cases, all of whom had close(within 1m) contact with patients infected of novel coronavirus pneumonia. The average contact times were 12 (7,16) and the average cumulative contact time was 2 (1.5,2.7) h.Clinical symptoms of these patients were fever in 23 patients (76.67%) , headache in 16 petients (53.33%) , fatigue or myalgia in 21patients (70%) , nausea, vomiting or diarrhea in 9 petients (30%) , cough in 25 petients (83.33%) , and dyspnea in 14 petients (46.67%) .Routine blood test revealed WBC<4.0×10(9)/L in 8 petients (26.67%) , (4-10) ×10(9)/L in 22 petients (73.33%) , and WBC>4.0×10(9)/L in 4 petients (13.33%) during the disease.Lymphocyte count<1.0×10(9)/L occurred in 12 petients (40%),abnormal liver function in 7 petients (23.33%) ,myocardial damage in 5 petients(16.67%), elevated D-dimer (>0.5mg/l) in 5 patients (16.67%). Compared with normal patients, the average exposure times, cumulative exposure time, BMI, Fever time, white blood cell count, liver enzyme, LDH, myoenzyme and D-dimer were significantly increased in severe patients, while the lymphocyte count and albumin levels in peripheral blood were significantly decreased.Chest CT mainly showed patchy shadows and interstitial changes.According to imaging examination, 11 patients (36.67%) showed Unilateral pneumonia and 19 patients (63.33%) showed bilateral pneumonia,4 patients (13.33%) showed bilateral multiple mottling and ground-glass opacity.Compared with the patients infected in the protected period, the proportion of severe infection and bilateral pneumonia were both increased in the patients infected in unprotected period. Conclusion: Medical staffs are at higher risk of infection.Infection rates are associated with contact time, the amount of suction virus. Severe patients had BMI increased, heating time prolonged, white blood cell count, lymphocyte count, D-dimer and albumin level significantly changed and were prone to be complicated with liver damage and myocardial damage.Strict protection measures is important to prevent infection for medical workers.

[Clinical characteristics of 30 medical workers infected with new coronavirus pneumonia].

Objective: To investigate the clinical characteristics of medical staff with novel coronavirus pneumonia(NCP). Methods: 30 patients infected with novel coronavirus referred to jianghan university hospital between January 11, 2020 and January 3, 2020 were studied. The data reviewed included those of clinical manifestations, laboratory investigation and Radiographic features. Results: The patients consisted of 10 men and 20 women, including 22 doctors and 8 nurses,aged 21~59 years(mean 35±8 years).They were divided to 26 common type and 4 severe cases, all of whom had close(within 1m) contact with patients infected of novel coronavirus pneumonia. The average contact times were 12 (7,16) and the average cumulative contact time was 2 (1.5,2.7) h.Clinical symptoms of these patients were fever in 23 patients (76.67%) , headache in 16 petients (53.33%) , fatigue or myalgia in 21patients (70%) , nausea, vomiting or diarrhea in 9 petients (30%) , cough in 25 petients (83.33%) , and dyspnea in 14 petients (46.67%) .Routine blood test revealed WBC <4.0×10(9)/L in 8 petients (26.67%) , (4-10) ×10(9)/L in 22 petients (73.33%) , and WBC>4.0×10(9)/L in 4 petients (13.33%) during the disease.Lymphocyte count <1.0×10(9)/L occurred in 12 petients (40%),abnormal liver function in 7 petients (23.33%) ,myocardial damage in 5 petients(16.67%), elevated D-dimer (>0.5mg/l) in 5 patients (16.67%). Compared with normal patients, the average exposure times, cumulative exposure time, BMI, Fever time, white blood cell count, liver enzyme, LDH, myoenzyme and D-dimer were significantly increased in severe patients, while the lymphocyte count and albumin levels in peripheral blood were significantly decreased.Chest CT mainly showed patchy shadows and interstitial changes.According to imaging examination, 11 patients (36.67%) showed Unilateral pneumonia and 19 patients (63.33%) showed bilateral pneumonia,4 patients (13.33%) showed bilateral multiple mottling and ground-glass opacity.Compared with the patients infected in the protected period, the proportion of severe infection and bilateral pneumonia were both increased in the patients infected in unprotected period. Conclusion: Medical staffs are at higher risk of infection.Infection rates are associated with contact time, the amount of suction virus. Severe patients had BMI increased, heating time prolonged , white blood cell count, lymphocyte count, D-dimer and albumin level significantly changed and were prone to be complicated with liver damage and myocardial damage.Strict protection measures is important to prevent infection for medical workers.

The outbreak of the new Coronavirus disease, COVID-19, has been involved in 77,262 cases in China as well as in 27 other countries as of February 24, 2020. Because the virus is novel to human beings, and there is no vaccine yet available, every individual is susceptible and can become infected. Healthcare workers are at high risk, and unfortunately, more than 3,000 healthcare workers in China have been infected. Anesthesiologists are among healthcare workers who are at an even higher risk of becoming infected because of their close contact with infected patients and high potential of exposure to respiratory droplets or aerosol from their patients' airways. In order to provide healthcare workers with updated recommendations on the management of patients in the perioperative setting as well as for emergency airway management outside of the operating room, the two largest anesthesia societies, the Chinese Society of Anesthesiology (CSA) and the Chinese Association of Anesthesiologists (CAA) have formed a task force to produce the recommendations. The task force hopes to help healthcare workers, particularly anesthesiologists, optimize the care of their patients and protect patients, healthcare workers, and the public from becoming infected. The recommendations were created mainly based on the practice and experience of anesthesiologists who provide care to patients in China. Therefore, adoption of these recommendations outside of China must be done with caution, and the local environment, culture, uniqueness of the healthcare system, and patients' needs should be considered. The task force will continuously update the recommendations and incorporate new information in future versions.

Perioperative Management of Patients Infected with the Novel Coronavirus: Recommendation from the Joint Task Force of the Chinese Society of Anesthesiology and the Chinese Association of Anesthesiologists

Reply: Triage Considerations for Patients Referred for Structural Heart Disease Intervention During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An ACC/SCAI Consensus Statement

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic placed urologic surgeons, and especially urologic oncologists, in an unprecedented situation. Providers and healthcare systems were forced to rapidly create triage schemas in order to preserve resources and reduce potential viral transmission while continuing to provide care for patients. We reviewed United States and international triage proposals from professional societies, peer-reviewed publications, and publicly available institutional guidelines to identify common themes and critical differences. To date, there are varying levels of agreement on the optimal triaging of urologic oncology cases. As the need to preserve resources and prevent viral transmission grows, prioritizing only high priority surgical cases is paramount. A similar approach to prioritization will also be needed as nonemergent cases are allowed to proceed in the coming weeks. While these decisions will often be made on a case-by-case basis, more nuanced surgeon-driven consensus guidelines are needed for the near future.

Urologic oncology surgery during COVID-19: a rapid review of current triage guidance documents

In December 2019, a series of patients with severe pneumonia were identified in Wuhan, Hubei province, China, who progressed to severe acute respiratory syndrome and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Subsequently, COVID-19 was attributed to a new betacoronavirus, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Approximately 20% of patients diagnosed as COVID-19 develop severe forms of the disease, including acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, severe acute respiratory syndrome, acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute renal failure and require intensive care. There is no randomized controlled clinical trial addressing potential therapies for patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection at the time of publishing these treatment recommendations. Therefore, these recommendations are based predominantly on the opinion of experts (level C of recommendation).

Intensive support recommendations for critically-ill patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection

During the first two decades of the 21st century, there have been three coronavirus infection outbreaks raising global health concerns by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and the SARS-CoV-2. Although the reported imaging findings of coronavirus infection are variable and nonspecific, the most common initial chest radiograph (CXR) and computed tomography (CT) findings are ground-glass opacities and consolidation with peripheral predominance and eventually spread to involve both lungs as the disease progresses. These findings can be explained by the immune pathogenesis of coronavirus infection causing diffuse alveolar damage. Although it is insensitive in mild or early coronavirus infection, the CXR remains as the first-line and the most commonly used imaging modality. That is because it is rapid and easily accessible and helpful for monitoring patient progress during treatment. CT is more sensitive to detect early parenchymal lung abnormalities and disease progression, and can provide an alternative diagnosis. In this pictorial review, various coronavirus infection cases are presented to provide imaging spectrums of coronavirus infection and present differences in imaging among them or from other viral infections, and to discuss the role of imaging in viral infection outbreaks.

Imaging findings in coronavirus infections: SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2.

Abstract The current climate is one of uncertainty and immeasurable tragedy for people afflicted by the pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 virus infection. As professionals, we have a duty of care towards all patients especially the vulnerable and those suffering with life-threatening illnesses such as oral cancer. We present a safe & objective triaging method for afflicted with this disease in the prevailing morbid situation.

Triaging algorithm for Head & Neck oncology follow-up patients in COVID-19 climate

BACKGROUND: Novel Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is spreading around the world. At the end of February, the outburst of the pandemic has hit hard on northern Italian's hospitals. As of today, no data have been published regarding the severity of respiratory failure of patients presenting to the Emergency Departments. Moreover, the outcome the patients forced to undergo Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) or Non-Invasive Positive Pressure Ventilation (NIPPV) due to lack of Intensive Care resources is unknown. “Papa Giovanni XXIII” hospital (HPG23) of Bergamo is one of the largest hospitals in the Country, with an Emergency Department (ED) managing over 100,000 patients per year. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study based on chart review of patients presenting to the Emergency Department of HPG23 from 29/02/2020 to 10/03/2020 with a clinical condition highly suspicious for COVID-19 infection. Registration of admission rates, severity of respiratory failure (ARDS classification), need of respiratory support, SARS-CoV-2 PCR test and outcome of patients treated with a ventilatory support were registered on 10th of May 2020. FINDINGS: From 29/02 to 10/03 611 patients with a suspected diagnosis of COVID-19 infection were evaluated in our ED; 320 (52%) met the criteria for hospital admission and 99 (31%) needed to be immediately started on ventilatory support (81% CPAP, 7% NIPPV, 12% Invasive Mechanical Ventilation). Eighty-five (86%) of the 99 patients needing a ventilatory support eventually had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by PCR test on nasal-pharyngeal swab. Their median PO2/FiO2 ratio was 128 (IQR 85–168), with 23 patients (29.5%) classified as severe ARDS. Mortality rate as of 10th of May was 76.5%, ranging from 44.4% within patients <60 years old to 85% within those older than 60 years (p = 0.001). NIPPV/CPAP failure occurred in 91.5% of patients. INTERPRETATION: The population of patients suspected for COVID-19 infection presenting at our ED showed a very high rate of severe respiratory failure, with urgent need of a large amount of intensive care resources. Mortality rates of critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19 (76.5%) are similar to previously reported studies with similar population. CPAP/NIPPV could be a valid strategy to treat severely hypoxic patients that cannot be intubated in the ED due to lack of intensive care resources. FUNDING: No funds were received for this research project.

Severity of respiratory failure and outcome of patients needing a ventilatory support in the Emergency Department during Italian novel coronavirus SARS-CoV2 outbreak: Preliminary data on the role of Helmet CPAP and Non-Invasive Positive Pressure Ventilation

BACKGROUND: The outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has globally strained medical resources and caused significant mortality. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate machine-learning model based on clinical features for severity risk assessment and triage for COVID-19 patients at hospital admission. METHOD: 725 patients were used to train and validate the model including a retrospective cohort of 299 hospitalised COVID-19 patients at Wuhan, China, from December 23, 2019, to February 13, 2020, and five cohorts with 426 patients from eight centers in China, Italy, and Belgium, from February 20, 2020, to March 21, 2020. The main outcome was the onset of severe or critical illness during hospitalisation. Model performances were quantified using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and metrics derived from the confusion-matrix. RESULTS: The median age was 50.0 years and 137 (45.8%) were men in the retrospective cohort. The median age was 62.0 years and 236 (55.4%) were men in five cohorts. The model was prospectively validated on five cohorts yielding AUCs ranging from 0.84 to 0.89, with accuracies ranging from 74.4% to 87.5%, sensitivities ranging from 75.0% to 96.9%, and specificities ranging from 57.5% to 88.0%, all of which performed better than the pneumonia severity index. The cut-off values of the low, medium, and high-risk probabilities were 0.21 and 0.80. The online-calculators can be found at www.covid19risk.ai. CONCLUSION: The machine-learning model, nomogram, and online-calculator might be useful to access the onset of severe and critical illness among COVID-19 patients and triage at hospital admission.

The SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2) was reported in Wuhan, Hubei Province, People's Republic of China, and, subsequently, in other provinces and regions across the People's Republic of China and >212 countries. COVID-19, the disease caused by this coronavirus, was declared a worldwide pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). The incidence of patients with fracture who are also positive for COVID-19 is on the rise. The diagnosis and management of such patients can be complicated as their clinical characteristics are heterogeneous. Furthermore, a surgical procedure can be particularly challenging given that the use of high-speed devices results in aerosol generation. In this study, we develop and propose globally applicable guidelines to fill this knowledge gap and we identify and propose the necessary protective strategies for medical personnel in an orthopaedic emergency department and in the inpatient wards. We also introduce diagnostic criteria, surgical complication management, and follow-up strategies for infected patients. These guidelines may be helpful to decrease the infection rate of orthopaedic trauma personnel and to provide diagnosis and treatment therapy for patients with fracture and COVID-19.

COVID-19 Orthopaedic Safe Care Toolset: Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Fracture and COVID-19.

When preparing for the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the coronavirus infection disease (COVID-19) questions arose regarding various aspects concerning the anaesthetist. When reviewing the literature it became obvious that keeping up-to-date with all relevant publications is almost impossible. We searched for and summarised clinically relevant topics that could help making clinical decisions. This is a subjective analysis of literature concerning specific topics raised in our daily practice (e.g., clinical features of COVID-19 patients; ventilation of the critically ill COVID-19 patient; diagnostic of infection with SARS-CoV-2; stability of the virus; Covid-19 in specific patient populations, e.g., paediatrics, immunosuppressed patients, patients with hypertension, diabetes mellitus, kidney or liver disease; co-medication with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); antiviral treatment) and we believe that these answers help colleagues in clinical decision-making. With ongoing treatment of severely ill COVID-19 patients other questions will come up. While respective guidelines on these topics will serve clinicians in clinical practice, regularly updating all guidelines concerning COVID-19 will be a necessary, although challenging task in the upcoming weeks and months. All recommendations during the current extremely rapid development of knowledge must be evaluated on a daily basis, as suggestions made today may be out-dated with the new evidence available tomorrow.

Update for Anaesthetists on Clinical Features of COVID-19 Patients and Relevant Management

PURPOSE: The purpose of our research is to evaluate the usefulness of chest X-ray for triaging patients with suspected COVID-19 infection. METHODS: IRB approval was obtained to allow a retrospective review of adult patients who presented to the Emergency Department with a complaint of fever, cough, dyspnea or hypoxia and had a chest X-ray between 12 March 2020 and 26 March 2020. The initial chest X-ray was graded on a scale of 0-3 with grade 0 representing no alveolar opacities, grade 1: < 1/3 alveolar opacities of the lung, Grade 2: 1/3 to 2/3 lung with alveolar opacities and grade 3: > 2/3 alveolar opacities of the lung. Past medical history of diabetes and hypertension, initial oxygen saturation, COVID-19 testing results, intubation, and outcome were also collected. RESULTS: Four hundred ten patient chest X-rays were reviewed. Oxygen saturation and X-ray grade were both significantly associated with the length of stay in hospital, the hazard ratio (HR) of discharge was 1.05 (95% CI [1.01, 1.09], p = 0.017) and 0.61 (95% CI [0.51, 0.73], p < 0.001), respectively. In addition, oxygen saturation and X-ray grade were significant predictors of intubation (odds ratio (OR) of intubation is 0.88 (95% CI [0.81, 0.96], p = 0.004) and 3.69 (95% CI [2.25, 6.07], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Initial chest X-ray is a useful tool for triaging those subjects who might have poor outcomes with suspected COVID-19 infection and benefit most from hospitalization.

The role of initial chest X-ray in triaging patients with suspected COVID-19 during the pandemic

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has strained health care resources around the world, causing many institutions to curtail or stop elective procedures. This has resulted in an inability to care for patients with valvular and structural heart disease in a timely fashion, potentially placing these patients at increased risk for adverse cardiovascular complications, including CHF and death. The effective triage of these patients has become challenging in the current environment as clinicians have had to weigh the risk of bringing susceptible patients into the hospital environment during the COVID-19 pandemic against the risk of delaying a needed procedure. In this document, the authors suggest guidelines for how to triage patients in need of structural heart disease interventions and provide a framework for how to decide when it may be appropriate to proceed with intervention despite the ongoing pandemic. In particular, the authors address the triage of patients in need of transcatheter aortic valve replacement and percutaneous mitral valve repair. The authors also address procedural issues and considerations for the function of structural heart disease teams during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Triage Considerations for Patients Referred for Structural Heart Disease Intervention During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An ACC/SCAI Position Statement

Aims To explore the epidemiological and clinical features of 2019 novel coronavirus(2019-nCoV)-infected patients with cardiac injury . Methods and results Data were collected from patients medical records, and we defined cardiac injury according to cardiac biomarker troponin I level > 0.03>ug/L. Among the 291 patients, 15 (5.2%) showed evidence of cardiac injury. Of 16 hospitalized patients with cardiac injury, the median age was 62 years, and 11/15 (73.3%) were men. Underlying cardiovascular diseases in some patients were hypertension (n=7, 46.6%), coronary heart disease (n=3, 20%) and diabetes (n=3, 20%). The most common symptoms at illness onset in patients with cardiac injury were fever (n=11, 73.3%), cough (n=7, 46.7%), headache or fatigue (n=5, 33.3%) and dyspnoea (n=4, 26.6%). These patients had higher systolic pressures, and lower lymphocyte counts and platelet counts, compared with patients without cardiac injury, respectively. Bilateral infiltrates on chest X-ray and elevated C-reactive protein occurred in all patients with cardiac injury. Compared with patients without cardiac injury, patients with cardiac injury were more likely to develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (73.3%), and receive mechanical ventilation (53.4%), continuous renal replacement therapy (33.3%), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (26.7%) and vasopressor therapy (26.7%) and be admitted to the intensive care unit (73.3%). One patient died during the study. Conclusion Cardiac injury is a common condition among patients infected with 2019-nCoV.Compared with patients without cardiac injury, the clinical outcomes of patients with cardiac injury are relatively worse. Keywords: 2019-nCoV, Cardiac injury, Clinical features

Clinical features and outcomes of 2019 novel coronavirus-infected patients with cardiac injury

Since December 2019, the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) has been reported in Wuhan, Hubei Province. Almost 70% of patients susceptible to 2019-nCoV are over age of 50 years, with extremely large proportion of critical illness and death of the elderly patients. Meanwhile, the elderly patients are at high risk of osteoporotic fractures especially osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF). During the prevention and control of COVID-19 epidemic, orthopedists are confronted with the following difficulties including how to screen and protect OVCF patients, how to accurately diagnose and assess the condition of OVCF patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19, and how to develop reasonable treatment plans and comprehensive protective measures in emergency and outpatient clinics. In order to standardize the diagnosis and treatment of patients with OVCF diagnosed with COVID-19, the authors jointly develop this expert consensus. The consensus systematically recommends the standardized emergency and outpatient screening and confirmation procedures for OVCF patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and protective measures for emergency and outpatient clinics. Moreover, the consensus describes the grading and classification of OVCF patients diagnosed with COVID-19 according to the severity of illness and recommends different treatment plans and corresponding protective measures based on the different types and epidemic prevention and control requirements.

Consensus on standardized diagnosis and treatment for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture patients during epidemic of corona virus disease 2019/ 中华创伤杂志

BACKGROUND The rapid spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is affecting many countries. While healthcare systems need to cope with the need to treat a large number of people with different degrees of respiratory failure, actions to preserve aliquots of the healthcare system to guarantee treatment to patients are mandatory. METHODS In order to protect the Fondazione IRCCS-Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano from the spread of COVID-19, a number of to-hospital and within-hospital filters were applied. Among others, a triage process to detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positivity in patients with cancer was developed consisting of high-resolution low-dose computed tomography (CT) scan followed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nose-throat swabs whenever CT was suggestive of lung infection. To serve symptomatic patients who were already admitted to the hospital or in need of hospitalization while waiting for RT-PCR laboratory confirmation of infection, a COVID-19 surveillance zone was set up. RESULTS A total of 301 patients were screened between March 6 and April 3, 2020. Of these, 47 were hospitalized, 53 needed a differential diagnosis to continue with their cancer treatment, and 201 were about to undergo surgery. RT-PCR was positive in 13 of 40 hospitalized patients (32%), 14 of 52 day hospital patients (27%), and 6 of 201 surgical patients (3%). CONCLUSION Applying filters to protect our comprehensive cancer center from COVID-19 spread contributed to guaranteeing cancer care during the COVID-19 crisis in Milan. A surveillance area and surgical triage allowed us to protect the hospital from as many as 33 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Response of a comprehensive cancer center to the COVID-19 pandemic: the experience of the Fondazione IRCCS-Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano.

Abstract Background The World Health Organization has highlighted the need for improved surveillance and understanding of the health burden imposed by non-influenza RNA respiratory viruses. Human coronaviruses (CoVs) are a major cause of respiratory and gastrointestinal tract infections with associated morbidity and mortality. Objectives The objective of our study was to characterize the epidemiology of CoVs in our tertiary care centre, and identify clinical correlates of disease severity. Study design A cross-sectional study was performed of 226 patients admitted with confirmed CoV respiratory tract infection between 2010 and 2016. Variables consistent with a severe disease burden were evaluated including symptoms, length of stay, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality. Results CoVs represented 11.3% of all positive respiratory virus samples and OC43 was the most commonly identified CoV. The majority of infections were community-associated while 21.6% were considered nosocomial. The average length of stay was 11.8 days with 17.3% of patients requiring ICU admission and an all-cause mortality of 7%. In a multivariate model, female gender and smoking were associated with increased likelihood of admission to ICU or death. Conclusion This study highlights the significant burden of CoVs and justifies the need for surveillance in the acute care setting.

Severity of coronavirus respiratory tract infections in adults admitted to acute care in Toronto, Ontario

Worst case scenarios for pandemic influenza planning in the US involve over 700,000 patients requiring mechanical ventilation. UK planning predicts a 231% occupancy of current level 3 (intensive care unit) bed capacity. Critical care planners need to recognise that mortality is likely to be high and the risk to healthcare workers significant. Contingency planning should, therefore, be multi-faceted, involving a robust health command structure, the facility to expand critical care provision in terms of space, equipment and staff and cohorting of affected patients in the early stages. It should also be recognised that despite this expansion of critical care, demand will exceed supply and a process for triage needs to be developed that is valid, reproducible, transparent and consistent with distributive justice. We advocate the development and validation of physiological scores for use as a triage tool, coupled with candid public discussion of the process.

Clinical review: Mass casualty triage – pandemic influenza and critical care

Coronavirus outbreak has affected thousands of people in at least 186 countries which has affected the cancer care delivery system apart from affecting the overall health system. Cancer patients are more susceptible to coronavirus infection than individuals without cancer as they are in an immunosuppressive state because of the malignancy and anticancer treatment. Oncologists should be more attentive to detect coronavirus infection early, as any type of advanced cancer is at much higher risk for unfavorable outcomes. Oncology communities must ensure that cancer patients should spend more time at home and less time out in the community. Oncologists and other health care professionals involved in cancer care have a critical opportunity to communicate to their patients to pass on right information regarding practice modifications in view of COVID-19 outbreaks. Countries must isolate, test, treat and trace to control the coronavirus pandemic. There is a paucity of information on novel coronavirus infection and its impact on cancer patients and cancer care providers. To date, there is no scientific guideline regarding management of cancer patients in a background of coronavirus outbreak..

Cancer Care Delivery Challenges Amidst Coronavirus Disease - 19 (COVID-19) Outbreak: Specific Precautions for Cancer Patients and Cancer Care Providers to Prevent Spread.

IMPORTANCE The outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has globally strained medical resources and caused significant mortality for severely and critically ill patients. However, the availability of validated nomograms and the machine-learning model to predict severity risk and triage of affected patients is limited. OBJECTIVE To develop and validate nomograms and machine-learning models for severity risk assessment and triage for COVID-19 patients at hospital admission. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A retrospective cohort of 299 consecutively hospitalized COVID-19 patients at The Central Hospital of Wuhan, China, from December 23, 2019, to February 13, 2020, was used to train and validate the models. Six cohorts with 426 patients from eight centers in China, Italy, and Belgium, from February 20, 2020, to March 21, 2020, were used to prospectively validate the models. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES The main outcome was the onset of severe or critical illness during hospitalization. Model performances were quantified using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS Of the 299 hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the retrospective cohort, the median age was 50 years ((interquartile range, 35.5-63.0; range, 20-94 years) and 137 (45.8%) were men. Of the 426 hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the prospective cohorts, the median age was 62.0 years ((interquartile range, 50.0-72.0; range, 19-94 years) and 236 (55.4%) were men. The model was prospectively validated on six cohorts yielding AUCs ranging from 0.816 to 0.976, with accuracies ranging from 70.8% to 93.8%, sensitivities ranging from 83.7% to 100%, and specificities ranging from 41.0% to 95.7%. The cut-off values of the low, medium, and high-risk probabilities were 0.072 and 0.244. The developed online calculators can be found at www.predict19risk.ai. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE The machine learning models, nomograms, and online calculators might be useful for the prediction of onset of severe and critical illness among COVID-19 patients and triage at hospital admission. Further prospective research and clinical feedback are necessary to evaluate the clinical usefulness of this model and to determine whether these models can help optimize medical resources and reduce mortality rates compared with current clinical practices.

Development of a Clinical Decision Support System for Severity Risk Prediction and Triage of COVID-19 Patients at Hospital Admission: an International Multicenter Study

In December 2019, several patients with pneumonia of an unknown cause were detected in Wuhan, China. On 7 January 2020, the causal organism was identified as a new coronavirus, later named as the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Genome sequencing found the genetic sequence of 2019-nCoV homologous to that of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus. As of 29 January 2020, the virus had been diagnosed in more than 7000 patients in China and 77 patients in other countries. It is reported that both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with 2019-nCoV can play a role in disease transmission via airborne and contact. This finding has caused a great concern about the prevention of illness spread. The clinical features of the infection are not specific and are often indistinguishable from those of other respiratory infections, making it difficult to diagnose. Given that the virus has a strong ability to spread between individuals, it is of top priority to identify potential or suspected patients as soon as possible-or the virus may cause a serious pandemic. Therefore, a precision medicine approach to managing this disease is urgently needed for detecting and controlling the spread of the virus. In this article, we present such an approach to managing 2019-nCoV-related pneumonia based on the unique traits of the virus recently revealed and on our experience with coronaviruses at West China Hospital in Chengdu, China.

A precision medicine approach to managing 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia

The outbreak of the new Coronavirus disease, COVID-19, has been involved in 77,262 cases in China as well as in 27 other countries as of February 24, 2020. Because the virus is novel to human beings, and there is no vaccine yet available, every individual is susceptible and can become infected. Healthcare workers are at high risk, and unfortunately, more than 3,000 healthcare workers in China have been infected. Anesthesiologists are among healthcare workers who are at an even higher risk of becoming infected because of their close contact with infected patients and high potential of exposure to respiratory droplets or aerosol from their patients’ airways. In order to provide healthcare workers with updated recommendations on the management of patients in the perioperative setting as well as for emergency airway management outside of the operating room, the two largest anesthesia societies, the Chinese Society of Anesthesiology (CSA) and the Chinese Association of Anesthesiologists (CAA) have formed a task force to produce the recommendations. The task force hopes to help healthcare workers, particularly anesthesiologists, optimize the care of their patients and protect patients, healthcare workers, and the public from becoming infected. The recommendations were created mainly based on the practice and experience of anesthesiologists who provide care to patients in China. Therefore, adoption of these recommendations outside of China must be done with caution, and the local environment, culture, uniqueness of the healthcare system, and patients’ needs should be considered. The task force will continuously update the recommendations and incorporate new information in future versions.

Perioperative Management of Patients Infected with the Novel Coronavirus: Recommendation from the Joint Task Force of the Chinese Society of Anesthesiology and the Chinese Association of Anesthesiologists

COVID-19 Orthopaedic Safe Care Toolset: Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Fracture and COVID-19

In the midst of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic, which causes coronavirus disease 2019, there is a recognized need to expand critical care services and beds beyond the traditional boundaries. There is considerable concern that widespread infection will result in a surge of critically ill patients that will overwhelm our present adult ICU capacity. In this setting, one proposal to add “surge capacity” has been the use of PICU beds and physicians to care for these critically ill adults. DESIGN: Narrative review/perspective. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENTS: Not applicable. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The virus’s high infectivity and prolonged asymptomatic shedding have resulted in an exponential growth in the number of cases in the United States within the past weeks with many (up to 6%) developing acute respiratory distress syndrome mandating critical care services. Coronavirus disease 2019 critical illness appears to be primarily occurring in adults. Although pediatric intensivists are well versed in the care of acute respiratory distress syndrome from viral pneumonia, the care of differing aged adult populations presents some unique challenges. In this statement, a team of adult and pediatric-trained critical care physicians provides guidance on common “adult” issues that may be encountered in the care of these patients and how they can best be managed in a PICU. CONCLUSIONS: This concise scientific statement includes references to the most recent and relevant guidelines and clinical trials that shape management decisions. The intention is to assist PICUs and intensivists in rapidly preparing for care of adult coronavirus disease 2019 patients should the need arise.

Caring for Critically Ill Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019 in a PICU: Recommendations by Dual Trained Intensivists*

PURPOSE: The purpose of our research is to evaluate the usefulness of chest X-ray for triaging patients with suspected COVID-19 infection. METHODS: IRB approval was obtained to allow a retrospective review of adult patients who presented to the Emergency Department with a complaint of fever, cough, dyspnea or hypoxia and had a chest X-ray between 12 March 2020 and 26 March 2020. The initial chest X-ray was graded on a scale of 0–3 with grade 0 representing no alveolar opacities, grade 1: < 1/3 alveolar opacities of the lung, Grade 2: 1/3 to 2/3 lung with alveolar opacities and grade 3: > 2/3 alveolar opacities of the lung. Past medical history of diabetes and hypertension, initial oxygen saturation, COVID-19 testing results, intubation, and outcome were also collected. RESULTS: Four hundred ten patient chest X-rays were reviewed. Oxygen saturation and X-ray grade were both significantly associated with the length of stay in hospital, the hazard ratio (HR) of discharge was 1.05 (95% CI [1.01, 1.09], p = 0.017) and 0.61 (95% CI [0.51, 0.73], p < 0.001), respectively. In addition, oxygen saturation and X-ray grade were significant predictors of intubation (odds ratio (OR) of intubation is 0.88 (95% CI [0.81, 0.96], p = 0.004) and 3.69 (95% CI [2.25, 6.07], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Initial chest X-ray is a useful tool for triaging those subjects who might have poor outcomes with suspected COVID-19 infection and benefit most from hospitalization.

Abstract On March 11, 2020, the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) as a pandemic. The spread and evolution of the pandemic is overwhelming the healthcare systems of dozens of countries and has led to a myriad of opinion papers, contingency plans, case series and emerging trials. Covering all this literature is complex. Briefly and synthetically, in line with the previous recommendations of the Working Groups, the Spanish Society of Intensive, Critical Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) has prepared this series of basic recommendations for patient care in the context of the pandemic.

Recommendations of the Working Groups from the Spanish Society of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) for the management of adult critically ill patients in the coronavirus disease (COVID-19)

Coronavirus (COVID-19) is an enveloped RNA virus that is diversely found in humans and wildlife. A total of six species have been identified to cause disease in humans. They are known to infect the neurological, respiratory, enteric, and hepatic systems. The past few decades have seen endemic outbreaks in the form of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome related coronavirus (SARS-CoV). Yet again, we see the emergence of another outbreak due to a new strain called the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The most recent outbreak initially presented as pneumonia of unknown etiology in a cluster of patients in Wuhan, China. The epicenter of infection was linked to seafood and exotic animal wholesale markets in the city. SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious and has resulted in a rapid pandemic of COVID-19. As the number of cases continues to rise, it is clear that these viruses pose a threat to public health. This review will introduce a general overview of coronavirus and describe the clinical features, evaluation, and treatment of COVID-19 patients. It will also provide a means to raise awareness among primary and secondary healthcare providers during the current pandemic. Furthermore, our review focuses on the most up-to-date clinical information for the effective management, prevention, and counseling of patients worldwide.

Coronavirus (COVID-19): A Review of Clinical Features, Diagnosis, and Treatment

The novel coronavirus (nCoV-2019) outbreak in Wuhan, China has spread rapidly nationwide, with some cases occurring in other parts of the world. Although most patients present with mild febrile illness with patchy pulmonary inflammation, a significant portion develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), with a current case fatality of 2.3-3%. Diagnosis is based on clinical history and laboratory and chest radiographic findings, but confirmation currently relies on nucleic acid-based assays. The latter are playing an important role in facilitating patient isolation, treatment and assessment of infectious activities. However, due to their limited capacity to handle an epidemic of the current scale and insufficient supply of assay kits, only a portion of suspected cases can be tested, leading to incompleteness and inaccuracy in updating new cases, as well as delayed diagnosis. Furthermore, there has not been enough time to assess specificity and sensitivity. Conventional serological assays, such as enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) for specific IgM and IgG antibodies, should offer a high-throughput alternative, which allows for uniform tests for all suspected patients, and can facilitate more complete identification of infected cases and avoidance of unnecessary cross infection among unselected patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Evolving status of the 2019 novel coronavirus infection: Proposal of conventional serologic assays for disease diagnosis and infection monitoring

BACKGROUND Pandemics and disasters can result in large numbers of critically ill or injured patients who may overwhelm available resources despite implementing surge-response strategies. If this occurs, critical care triage, which includes both prioritizing patients for care and rationing scarce resources, will be required. The suggestions in this chapter are important for all who are involved in large-scale pandemics or disasters with multiple critically ill or injured patients, including front-line clinicians, hospital administrators, and public health or government officials. METHODS The Triage topic panel reviewed previous task force suggestions and the literature to identify 17 key questions for which specific literature searches were then conducted to identify studies upon which evidence-based recommendations could be made. No studies of sufficient quality were identified. Therefore, the panel developed expert opinion-based suggestions using a modified Delphi process. Suggestions from the previous task force that were not being updated were also included for validation by the expert panel. RESULTS The suggestions from the task force outline the key principles upon which critical care triage should be based as well as a path for the development of the plans, processes, and infrastructure required. This article provides 11 suggestions regarding the principles upon which critical care triage should be based and policies to guide critical care triage. CONCLUSIONS Ethical and efficient critical care triage is a complex process that requires significant planning and preparation. At present, the prognostic tools required to produce an effective decision support system (triage protocol) as well as the infrastructure, processes, legal protections, and training are largely lacking in most jurisdictions. Therefore, critical care triage should be a last resort after mass critical care surge strategies.

Triage Care of the Critically Ill and Injured During Pandemics and Disasters: CHEST Consensus Statement

On 24 October 2012, a patient with acute respiratory distress syndrome of unknown origin and symptom onset on 5 October was transferred from Qatar to a specialist lung clinic in Germany. Late diagnosis on 20 November of an infection with the novel Coronavirus (NCoV) resulted in potential exposure of a considerable number of healthcare workers. Using a questionnaire we asked 123 identified contacts (120 hospital and three out-of-hospital contacts) about exposure to the patient. Eighty-five contacts provided blood for a serological test using a two-stage approach with an initial immunofluorescence assay as screening test, followed by recombinant immunofluorescence assays and a NCoV-specific serum neutralisation test. Of 123 identified contacts nine had performed aerosol-generating procedures within the third or fourth week of illness, using personal protective equipment rarely or never, and two of these developed acute respiratory illness. Serology was negative for all nine. Further 76 hospital contacts also tested negative, including two sera initially reactive in the screening test. The contact investigation ruled out transmission to contacts after illness day 20. Our two-stage approach for serological testing may be used as a template for similar situations.

Contact investigation of a case of human novel coronavirus infection treated in a German hospital, October-November 2012.

OBJECTIVE: In the midst of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic, which causes coronavirus disease 2019, there is a recognized need to expand critical care services and beds beyond the traditional boundaries. There is considerable concern that widespread infection will result in a surge of critically ill patients that will overwhelm our present adult ICU capacity. In this setting, one proposal to add "surge capacity" has been the use of PICU beds and physicians to care for these critically ill adults. DESIGN: Narrative review/perspective. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENTS: Not applicable. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The virus's high infectivity and prolonged asymptomatic shedding have resulted in an exponential growth in the number of cases in the United States within the past weeks with many (up to 6%) developing acute respiratory distress syndrome mandating critical care services. Coronavirus disease 2019 critical illness appears to be primarily occurring in adults. Although pediatric intensivists are well versed in the care of acute respiratory distress syndrome from viral pneumonia, the care of differing aged adult populations presents some unique challenges. In this statement, a team of adult and pediatric-trained critical care physicians provides guidance on common "adult" issues that may be encountered in the care of these patients and how they can best be managed in a PICU. CONCLUSIONS: This concise scientific statement includes references to the most recent and relevant guidelines and clinical trials that shape management decisions. The intention is to assist PICUs and intensivists in rapidly preparing for care of adult coronavirus disease 2019 patients should the need arise.

Caring for Critically Ill Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019 in a PICU: Recommendations by Dual Trained Intensivists

The novel coronavirus (CoV) pandemic is a serious threat for patients with cancer, who have an immunocompromised status and are considered at high risk of infections. Data on the novel CoV respiratory disease (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) in patients with cancer are still limited. Unlike other common viruses, CoVs have not been shown to cause a more severe disease in immunocompromised subjects. Along with direct viral pathogenicity, in some individuals, CoV infection triggers an uncontrolled aberrant inflammatory response, leading to lung tissue damage. In patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (e.g. immune checkpoint inhibitors), COVID-19 may therefore represent a serious threat. After a thorough review of the literature on CoV pathogenesis and cancer, we selected several shared features to define which patients can be considered at higher risk of COVID-19. We combined these clinical and laboratory variables, with the aim of developing a score to weight the risk of COVID-19 in patients with cancer.

Developing a risk assessment score for patients with cancer during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

In December 2019, a novel coronavirus causing severe acute respiratory disease occurred in Wuhan, China. It is an emerging infectious disease with widespread and rapid infectiousness. The World Health Organization declared the coronavirus outbreak to be a public health emergency of international concern on 31 January 2020. Severe COVID-19 patients should be managed and treated in a critical care unit. Performing a chest X-ray/CT can judge the severity of the disease. The management of COVID-19 patients includes epidemiological risk and patient isolation; treatment entails general supportive care, respiratory support, symptomatic treatment, nutritional support, psychological intervention, etc. The prognosis of the patients depends upon the severity of the disease, the patient's age, the underlying diseases of the patients, and the patient's overall medical condition. The management of COVID-19 should focus on early diagnosis, immediate isolation, general and optimized supportive care, and infection prevention and control.

The management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)