Aim
To assess whether the application of a non‐invasive tool, such as ratio of oxygen saturation (ROX) index, during triage can identify patients with COVID‐19 at high risk of developing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
Design
A multi‐centre, observational, retrospective study.
Methods
Only COVID‐19 positive patients who required an emergency department evaluation for dyspnoea were considered. The primary objective of the study was to compare the ROX value obtained during triage with the medical diagnosis of ARDS and intubation in 72 h of the triage evaluation. The ROX index value was also compared with objective outcomes, such as the pressure of arterial O2 (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio and the lung parenchyma volume involved in COVID‐19‐related inflammatory processes, based on 3D reconstructions of chest computed tomography (CT).
Results
During the study period, from 20 March 2020 until 31 May 2020, a total of 273 patients with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection were enrolled. The predictive ability of ROX for the risk of developing ARDS in 72 h after triage evaluation was associated with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) of 0.845 (0.797–0.892, p < 0.001), whereas the AUROC value was 0.727 (0.634–0.821, p < 0.001) for the risk of intubation. ROX values were strongly correlated with PaO2/FiO2 values (r = 0.650, p < 0.001), decreased ROX values were associated with increased percentages of lung involvement based on 3D CT reconstruction (r = −0.371, p < 0.001).
Conclusion
The ROX index showed a good ability to identify triage patients at high evolutionary risk. Correlations with objective but more invasive indicators (PaO2/FiO2 and CT) confirmed the important role of ROX in identifying COVID‐19 patients with extensive pathological processes.
Impact
During the difficult triage evaluation of COVID‐19 patients, the ROX index can help the nurse to identify the real severity of the patient. The triage systems could integrate the ROX in the rapid patient assessment to stratify patients more accurately.
Background: Infections in emergency departments (EDs) are insidious clinical conditions characterised by high rates of hospitalisation and mortality in the short-to-medium term. The serum albumin, recently demonstrated as a prognostic biomarker in septic patients in intensive care units, could be an early marker of severity upon arrival of infected patients in the ED. Aim: To confirm the possible prognostic role of the albumin concentration recorded upon arrival of patients with infection. Methods: A prospective single-centre study was performed in the ED of the General Hospital of Merano, Italy, between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2021. All enrolled patients with infection were tested for serum albumin concentration. The primary outcome measure was 30-day mortality. The predictive role of albumin was assessed by logistic regression and decision tree analysis adjusted for Charlson comorbidity index, national early warning score, and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score. Results: 962 patients with confirmed infection were enrolled. The median SOFA score was 1 (0–3) and the mean serum albumin level was 3.7 g/dL (SD 0.6). Moreover, 8.9% (86/962) of patients died within 30 days. Albumin was an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality with an adjusted hazard ratio of 3.767 (95% CI 2.192–6.437), p < 0.001. Decision tree analysis indicated that at low SOFA scores, albumin had a good predictive ability, indicating a progressive mortality risk reduction in concentrations above 2.75 g/dL (5.2%) and 3.52 g/dL (2%). Conclusions: Serum albumin levels at ED admission are predictive of 30-day mortality in infected patients, showing better predictive abilities in patients with low-to-medium SOFA scores.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.