Background Most data on the clinical presentation, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 have been presented as case series without comparison to patients with other acute respiratory illnesses. Methods We examined emergency department patients between February 3 and March 31, 2020 with an acute respiratory illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2. We determined COVID-19 status by PCR and metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS). We compared clinical presentation, diagnostics, treatment, and outcomes. Findings Among 316 patients, 33 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; 31 without COVID-19 tested positive for another respiratory virus. Among patients with additional viral testing (27/33), no SARS-CoV-2 co-infections were identified. Compared to those who tested negative, patients with COVID-19 reported longer symptoms duration (median 7d vs. 3d, p < 0.001). Patients with COVID-19 were more often hospitalized (79% vs. 56%, p = 0.014). When hospitalized, patients with COVID-19 had longer hospitalizations (median 10.7d vs. 4.7d, p < 0.001) and more often developed ARDS (23% vs. 3%, p < 0.001). Most comorbidities, medications, symptoms, vital signs, laboratories, treatments, and outcomes did not differ by COVID-19 status. Interpretation While we found differences in clinical features of COVID-19 compared to other acute respiratory illnesses, there was significant overlap in presentation and comorbidities. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be admitted to the hospital, have longer hospitalizations and develop ARDS, and were unlikely to have co-existent viral infections. Funding National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Heart Lung Blood Institute, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

1

BackgroundPlasmodium vivax, the most geographically distributed cause of malaria, accounts for more than 70% of cases in the Americas. In Colombia, P. vivax was responsible for 67.3% of cases in the last five years. Despite vivax malaria impact worldwide, historically it has been neglected and considered to be a benign disease. In the last decade medical literature reports have emerged countering this benign outlook. This study pretends to describe the clinical and paraclinical profile of severe vivax malaria cases hospitalized in Tumaco, Cali, Buenaventura between 2009 and 2013, to contribute to the knowledge regarding the behaviour and clinical expression of this disease.MethodsThis is a descriptive, retrospective case-series study of 16 severe malaria vivax cases, hospitalized between 2009 and 2013, in Colombian municipalities of Tumaco, Buenaventura and Cali. Severe malaria vivax cases were defined using criteria adapted from the national guidelines. Descriptive analyses of reason for consultation, signs and symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, paraclinical characteristics, complications, and time hospitalized, were conducted.ResultsSixteen cases of severe P. vivax were analysed. Fever, chills and headache were shown to be the main admission symptoms. Elevation of total bilirubin levels in 18.75%, and severe thrombocytopaenia in 25% of cases were the main complications presented during hospitalization. All cases responded to treatment, there were no deaths.ConclusionsThe following questions derived from this study could be the basis for future research: 1) Does the time to consultation have an impact on the number of days hospitalized and how cases progress during hospitalization, 2) Are the severity criteria in WHO guidelines sensitive enough to be used in clinical practice compared to national guidelines, and 3) How does malnutrition contribute to anaemia in malaria-endemic regions.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis progresses rapidly and is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Bedside risk stratification scores can quickly identify patients at greatest risk of poor outcomes; however, there is lack of consensus on the best scale to use. OBJECTIVE: To compare the ability of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), the National Early Warning System (NEWS2), and the Shock Index—which does not require mental status assessment—to predict poor outcomes among patients with suspected sepsis during triage. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study of adults presenting to an academic emergency department (ED) from June 2012 to December 2018 who had blood cultures and intravenous antibiotics within 24 hours. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Clinical data were collected from the electronic health record. Patients were considered positive at qSOFA ≥2, Shock Index >0.7, or NEWS2 ≥5 scores. We calculated test characteristics and area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUROCs) to predict in-hospital mortality and ED-to-intensive care unit (ICU) admission. RESULTS: We included 23,837 ED patients; 1,921(8.1%) were qSOFA-positive, 4,273 (17.9%) Shock Index-positive, and 11,832 (49.6%) NEWS2-positive. There were 1,427 (6.0%) deaths and 3,149 (13.2%) ED-to-ICU admissions in the sample. NEWS2 had the highest sensitivity for in-hospital mortality (76.0%) and ED-to-ICU admission (78.9%). qSOFA had the highest specificity for in-hospital mortality (93.4%) and ED-to-ICU admission (95.2%). Shock Index exhibited the highest AUROC for in-hospital mortality (0.648; 95 CI, 0.635-0.662) and ED-to-ICU admission (0.680; 95% CI, 0.617-0.689). Test characteristics were similar among those with sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Institution priorities should drive score selection, balancing sensitivity and specificity. In our study, qSOFA was highly specific and NEWS2 was the most sensitive for ruling out patients at high risk. Performance of the Shock Index fell between qSOFA and NEWS2 and could be considered because it is easy to implement.

No abstract