Introduction: Since December 2019, more than 925,000 cases of COVID-19 have been reported worldwide, 8,251 cases in Portugal by the end of March. Previous studies related to the SARS pandemic showed a decrease up to 80% in the emergency care episodes. Hence, the objective of this study is to analyze the use of emergency services during the first pandemic month, compared to historical records. Methods: Data from emergency episodes in mainland Portugal, from January 2014 to March 2020, were downloaded from the National Health Service (NHS) Transparency Portal and the NHS monitoring website. The evolution of emergency services from March to September 2020 was forecasted based on historical data from January 2014 to February 2020. Information for March 2020 was forecasted globally, by the Regional Health Administration (RHA) and Manchester Triage System (MTS). Results: Compared with forecasted values, there was a 48% reduction in the number of emergency episodes in March 2020. In the analysis by the RHA, Alentejo had the smallest decrease in the number of episodes; interestingly, Alentejo is also the area with fewer CO-VID-19 cases in mainland Portugal. In the analysis by the MTS, the episodes classified as yellow showed the highest reduction (50%). For episodes classified as urgent, there is a difference of about 144,000 episodes during March 2020. Discussion: The results of this preliminary study are aligned with the evidence produced for previous pandemics. Data about the use of emergency services, demographic and clinical characteristics of the episodes would be relevant to analyze this reduction. Conclusion: There was a significant drop in the number of emergency service use in March 2020, and although the causes of this reduction are not determined, the association between the beginning of the pandemic and the reduction of demand is evident. Understanding this phenomenon is crucial to plan interventions to avoid unnecessary morbidities or deaths, caused by a delayed visit to the emergency department.

No abstract

PurposeCurrent in-hospital management of exacerbations of COPD is suboptimal, and patient outcomes are poor. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether implementation of a care pathway (CP) for COPD improves the 6 months readmission rate. Secondary outcomes were the 30 days readmission rate, mortality, length of stay and adherence to guidelines.Patients and methodsAn international cluster randomized controlled trial was performed in Belgium, Italy and Portugal. General hospitals were randomly assigned to an intervention group where a CP was implemented or a control group where usual care was provided. The targeted population included patients with COPD exacerbation.ResultsTwenty-two hospitals were included, whereof 11 hospitals (n=174 patients) were randomized to the intervention group and 11 hospitals (n=168 patients) to the control group. The CP had no impact on the 6 months readmission rate. However, the 30 days readmission rate was significantly lower in the intervention group (9.7%; 15/155) compared to the control group (15.3%; 22/144) (odds ratio =0.427; 95% confidence interval 0.222–0.822; P=0.040). Performance on process indicators was significantly higher in the intervention group for 2 of 24 main indicators (8.3%).ConclusionThe implementation of this in-hospital CP for COPD exacerbation has no impact on the 6 months readmission rate, but it significantly reduces the 30 days readmission rate.

Guideline adherence rates for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation are low. The aim of this study is to perform an importance-performance analysis as an approach for prioritisation of interventions by linking guidelines adherence rates to expert consensus rates for the in-hospital management of COPD exacerbation. We illustrate the relevance of such approach by describing variation in guideline adherence across indicators and hospitals. A secondary data analysis of patients with an acute COPD exacerbation admitted to Belgian, Italian and Portuguese hospitals was performed. Twenty-one process indicators were used to describe adherence to guidelines from patient record reviews. Expert consensus on the importance for follow-up of these 21 indicators was derived from a previous Delphi study. Three of the twenty-one indicators had high level of expert consensus and a high level of adherence. Eleven of the twenty-one indicators had high level of expert consensus but a low level of adherence. For none of the 378 patients included in this study were all process indicators adhered to, patients received 41.0% of the recommended care on average, and only 34.1% of the patients received 50% or more of the care they should receive. There was also a large variation within and between hospitals regarding the care received. This study confirms the findings of previous studies, indicating that COPD exacerbations are largely undertreated. Importance-performance analysis provides a decision-making tool for prioritising indicators. All hospitals in this study would benefit from having in place a quality framework for systematic follow-up of these indicators.

The aim of this paper was to perform a systematic overview of secondary literature studies on care pathways (CPs) for hip fracture (HF). The online databases MEDLINE-PubMed, Ovid-EMBASE, CINAHL-EBSCO-host, and The Cochrane Library were searched. A total of six papers, corresponding to six secondary studies, were included but only four secondary studies were HF-specific and thus assessed. Secondary studies were evaluated for patients' clinical outcomes. There were wide differences among the studies that assessed the effects of CPs on HF patients, with some contrasting clinical outcomes reported. Secondary studies that were non-specific for CPs and included other multidisciplinary care approaches as well showed, in some cases, a shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) compared to usual care; studies that focused on promoting early mobilization showed better outcomes of mortality, morbidity, function, or service utilization; CPs mainly based on intensive occupational therapy and/or physical therapy exercises improved functional recovery and reduced LOS, with patients also discharged to a more favorable discharge destination; CPs principally focused on early mobilization improved functional recovery. A secondary study specifically designed for CPs showed lower odds of experiencing common complications of hospitalization after HF. In conclusion, although our overview suggests that CPs can reduce significantly LOS and can have a positive impact on different outcomes, data are insufficient for formal recommendations. To properly understand the effects of CPs for HF, a systematic review is needed of primary studies that specifically examined CPs for HF.