Search

Objective: To evaluate the association between COVID-19 incidence among high-school athletes participating in different indoor winter sports and attending schools with in-person versus virtual instructional delivery., Design: Cross-sectional survey., Setting: US high schools., Participants: High-school athletic directors., Independent Variables: Indoor winter sports, school instructional delivery method, and state COVID-19 incidence., Main Outcome Measures: Surveys were distributed to high-school athletic directors throughout the United States regarding sport reinitiation and COVID-19 cases in winter 2020 to 2021. Separate mixed effects Poisson regression models were developed to evaluate the associations between reported COVID-19 incidence and (1) different sports and (2) school instructional delivery method, while adjusting for the background, state COVID-19 incidence., Results: Four hundred thirty schools had restarted fall sports, representing 31 274 athletes on 1404 teams from 14 states. One thousand four hundred sixty cases of COVID-19 were reported, representing a case rate of 4668 cases per 100 000 athletes and an incidence rate of 58.7 cases per 100 000 player-days. Reported COVID-19 incidence was greatest among girls' hockey (82.1 cases per 100 000 player-days (95% CI, 56.8-115) and boys' hockey [76.7 (61.8-94.2)] and lowest among swimming [39.0 (31.1-48.2)] and gymnastics [28.5 (13.1-54.2)]. No difference in reported COVID-19 incidence was identified among athletes attending schools with virtual versus in-person instruction [incidence rate ratio = 0.86 (0.52-1.4)]., Conclusions: In this nationwide survey of US high-school athletic directors regarding indoor winter sports, reported COVID-19 incidence was lower in noncontact sports but unrelated to school instructional delivery method. This information may help guide decision-making regarding high-school sport participation during the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: T. McGuine serves on the Sports Medicine Advisory Council of the National Federation of State High School Associations. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: The objectives of this study were to describe the reach and adoption of Geriatric Emergency Department Accreditation (GEDA) program and care processes instituted at accredited geriatric emergency departments (EDs)., Methods: We analyzed a cross-section of a cohort of US EDs that received GEDA from May 2018 to March 2021. We obtained data from the American College of Emergency Physicians and publicly available sources. Data included GEDA level, geographic location, urban/rural designation, and care processes instituted. Frequencies and proportions and median and interquartile ranges were used to summarize categorical and continuous data, respectively., Results: Over the study period, 225 US geriatric ED accreditations were issued and included in our analysis-14 Level 1, 21 Level 2, and 190 Level 3 geriatric EDs; 5 geriatric EDs reapplied and received higher-level accreditation after initial accreditation at a lower level. Only 9 geriatric EDs were in rural regions. There was significant heterogeneity in protocols enacted at geriatric EDs; minimizing urinary catheter use and fall prevention were the most common., Conclusion: There has been rapid growth in geriatric EDs, driven by Level 3 accreditation. Most geriatric EDs are in urban areas, indicating the potential need for expansion beyond these areas. Future research evaluating the impact of GEDA on health care utilization and patient-oriented outcomes is needed., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Context: During the fall of 2020, some high schools across the United States allowed their students to participate in interscholastic sports while others cancelled or postponed their sport programs due to concerns regarding COVID-19 transmission. What effect this has had on the physical and mental health of adolescents is unknown., Objective: To identify the effect of playing a sport during the COVID-19 pandemic on the health of student-athletes., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: Sample recruited via email., Patients or Other Participants: A total of 559 Wisconsin high school athletes (age = 15.7 ± 1.2 years, female = 43.6%, male = 56.4%) from 44 high schools completed an online survey in October 2020. A total of 171 (30.6%) athletes played (PLY) a fall sport, while 388 (69.4%) did not play (DNP)., Main Outcome Measure(s): Demographic data included sex, grade, and sport(s) played. Assessments were the General Anxiety Disorder-7 Item for anxiety, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Item for depression, the Hospital for Special Surgery Pediatric Functional Activity Brief Scale for physical activity, and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0 for quality of life. Univariable comparisons between the 2 groups were made via t tests or χ2 tests. Means for each continuous outcome measure were compared between groups using analysis-of-variance models that controlled for age, sex, teaching method (virtual, hybrid, or in person), and the percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch., Results: The PLY group participants were less likely to report moderate to severe symptoms of anxiety (PLY = 6.6%, DNP = 44.1%, P < .001) and depression (PLY = 18.2%, DNP = 40.4%, P < .001). They also demonstrated higher (better) Pediatric Functional Activity Brief Scale scores (PLY = 23.2 [95% CI = 22.0, 24.5], DNP = 16.4 [95% CI = 15.0, 17.8], P < .001) and higher (better) Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory total scores (PLY = 88.4 [95% CI = 85.9, 90.9], DNP = 79.6 [95% CI = 76.8, 82.4], P < .001)., Conclusions: Adolescents who played a sport during the COVID-19 pandemic described fewer symptoms of anxiety and depression and had better physical activity and quality-of-life scores compared with adolescent athletes who did not play a sport., (© by the National Athletic Trainers' Association, Inc.)

Background/objective: Emergency department (ED) visits have declined while excess mortality, not attributable to COVID-19, has grown. It is not known whether older adults are accessing emergency care differently from their younger counterparts. Our objective was to determine patterns of ED visit counts for emergent conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic for older adults., Design: Retrospective, observational study., Setting: Observational analysis of ED sites enrolled in a national clinical quality registry., Participants: One hundred and sixty-four ED sites in 33 states from January 1, 2019 to November 15, 2020., Main Outcome and Measures: We measured daily ED visit counts for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, sepsis, fall, and hip fracture, as well as deaths in the ED, by age categories. We estimated Poisson regression models comparing early and post-early pandemic periods (defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) to the pre-pandemic period. We report incident rate ratios to summarize changes in visit incidence., Results: For AMI, stroke, and sepsis, the older (75-84) and oldest old (85+ years) had the greatest decline in visit counts initially and the smallest recovery in the post-early pandemic periods. For falls, visits declined early and partially recovered uniformly across age categories. In contrast, hip fractures exhibited less change in visit rates across time periods. Deaths in the ED increased during the early pandemic period, but then fell and were persistently lower than baseline, especially for the older (75-84) and oldest old (85+ years)., Conclusions: The decline in ED visits for emergent conditions among older adults has been more pronounced and persistent than for younger patients, with fewer deaths in the ED. This is concerning given the greater prevalence and risk of poor outcomes for emergent conditions in this age group that are amenable to time-sensitive ED diagnosis and treatment, and may in part explain excess mortality during the COVID-19 era among older adults., (© 2021 The American Geriatrics Society.)

BACKGROUND Older adults who are discharged following emergency department evaluation are at increased risk for functional decline and health care utilization, and are likely to benefit from close follow-up and additional care services. Understanding factors associated with a return emergency department visit within 30 days among older fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries discharged to the community may assist in identifying patients at greatest need for interventions. METHOD Predictors from Medicare data and public sources were evaluated in a retrospective data analysis of North and South Carolina residents (2011-2012) aged ≥ 65 years using Cox regression proportion hazards ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for time-to-30-day return events. RESULTS 30-day return rates varied markedly among the 167 emergency department facilities studied (18%-39%). Predictors of 30-day return included: age (85+ versus 65-74; HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.22-1.27); male sex (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.14-1.10); non-white race (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05-1.09); Medicaid eligibility (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.18-1.22); Charlson Score (3+ vs. 0; HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.30-1.36); and prior emergency department encounter (3+ vs. 0; HR, 2.35; 95% CI 2.30-2.41). LIMITATIONS This study was limited to Medicare beneficiaries in North Carolina and South Carolina, 2011-2012. Administrative claims data are limited to information required for financial reimbursement. Because we limited our study to older fee-for-service patients, our findings may not be generalizable to managed care patients and other age groups. Patients transferred to another emergency department or facility were not included in the analysis. CONCLUSION Factors predicting 30-day return to the emergency department or hospitalization suggest the potential for care transition improvement efforts to better meet patient needs, thereby potentially improving post-emergency department outcomes., (©2019 by the North Carolina Institute of Medicine and The Duke Endowment. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Lack of access to medical information for nursing home residents during emergency department (ED) evaluation is a barrier to quality care. We hypothesized that the quantity of information available in the ED differs based on the funding source of the resident's nursing home., Design: Cross-sectional observational study., Setting: Single academic ED., Participants: Participants were 128 skilled nursing facility (SNF) residents age 65 or older from 12 SNFs., Measurements: Emergency physicians documented knowledge of 9 essential information items. SNFs were categorized as accepting or not accepting Medicaid., Results: Questionnaires were completed for 128 patients, of whom 95 (74%) were from 1 of 8 Medicaid-funded SNFs and 33 (26%) were from 1 of 4 SNFs not accepting Medicaid. Patients from SNFs accepting Medicaid were younger (79 versus 87, P < .001) and less frequently white (62% versus 97%, P < .001). The mean number of 9 possible information items available was lower for patients from SNFs that accept Medicaid (7.13 versus 8.15, P < .001). Emergency providers also reported lower satisfaction regarding access to information for residents from SNFs that accept Medicaid (P < .05). The association between residence in an SNF that accepts Medicaid and lower ED information scores remained after linear regression with clustering by SNF controlling for age, gender, and race. The most common source of information for residents from both types of SNFs was transfer papers from the SNF., Conclusion: Less information is available to ED providers for patients from SNFs that accept Medicaid than for residents from SNFs that do not accept Medicaid. Further study is needed to examine this information gap., (Copyright © 2012 American Medical Directors Association, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)