Multimedialna platforma wiedzy medycznej Internetowa Księgarnia Medyczna Kalendarium Konferencji
Medical Research Journal
MENU
Shortcuts Submit an article Author Guidelines Reviewers 2023 Focus and Scope

open access

Vol 7, No 4 (2022)
Original article
Published online: 2022-12-14
View PDF Download PDF file
Get Citation

Differences in symptoms and utility of MEWS score in geriatric patients with COVID-19

Julia Gólska1, Krzysztof Białkowski1, Tomasz Kłosiewicz2
DOI: 10.5603/MRJ.a2022.0052
·
Medical Research Journal 2022;7(4):301-306.
Affiliations
  1. Students’ Scientific Circle of Emergency Medicine, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland
  2. Department of Medical Rescue, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland

open access

Vol 7, No 4 (2022)
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Published online: 2022-12-14

Abstract

Introduction: Rational resource management was key to avoiding overcrowding in Coronavirus Infectious Disease 2019 (COVID-19) dedicated wards. The study aimed to identify specific symptoms for aged patients with COVID-19 and assess the utility of the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) as a tool that may support decisions within an emergency department (ED).

Material and methods: This was a retrospective analysis of medical records. ED patients with positive antigen tests for COVID-19 infection were identified. Patients’ history, length of stay (LOS) and vital signs were collected. MEWS score was calculated. Age groups were divided as follows: non-geriatric (NG) — aged under 60; geriatric groups (G): G1 — aged 60–74; G2 — aged 75–89; G3 — aged 90 and over.

Results: There were 777 individuals (261 NG and 510 G patients). Symptoms related to pain as well as anosmia and ageusia occurred more often in NG patients. The longest LOS was in G2 — 182 [101–295] minutes. A significantly shorter LOS (51 [24–156] minutes) was recorded in NG (NG vs. G1 p < 0.0001; NG vs. G2 p < 0.0001; NG vs. G3 p = 0.0007). Admission rate was as follow: NG: 17.24%, G1: 50.97%, G2: 61.43%, G3: 54.17. Accuracy parameters for MEWS score (NG vs G, [%]) were as follow: sensitivity (93.18 vs. 91.04), specificity (13.04 vs. 11.79), positive predictive value (18.55 vs. 52.88), negative predictive value (90.00 vs. 54.76).

Conclusions: Geriatric patients spent more time in ED and were admitted more often. Seniors were less likely to experience pain. MEWS is not a valuable tool for supporting decisions concerning the admission or discharge of geriatric patients with COVID-19.

Abstract

Introduction: Rational resource management was key to avoiding overcrowding in Coronavirus Infectious Disease 2019 (COVID-19) dedicated wards. The study aimed to identify specific symptoms for aged patients with COVID-19 and assess the utility of the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) as a tool that may support decisions within an emergency department (ED).

Material and methods: This was a retrospective analysis of medical records. ED patients with positive antigen tests for COVID-19 infection were identified. Patients’ history, length of stay (LOS) and vital signs were collected. MEWS score was calculated. Age groups were divided as follows: non-geriatric (NG) — aged under 60; geriatric groups (G): G1 — aged 60–74; G2 — aged 75–89; G3 — aged 90 and over.

Results: There were 777 individuals (261 NG and 510 G patients). Symptoms related to pain as well as anosmia and ageusia occurred more often in NG patients. The longest LOS was in G2 — 182 [101–295] minutes. A significantly shorter LOS (51 [24–156] minutes) was recorded in NG (NG vs. G1 p < 0.0001; NG vs. G2 p < 0.0001; NG vs. G3 p = 0.0007). Admission rate was as follow: NG: 17.24%, G1: 50.97%, G2: 61.43%, G3: 54.17. Accuracy parameters for MEWS score (NG vs G, [%]) were as follow: sensitivity (93.18 vs. 91.04), specificity (13.04 vs. 11.79), positive predictive value (18.55 vs. 52.88), negative predictive value (90.00 vs. 54.76).

Conclusions: Geriatric patients spent more time in ED and were admitted more often. Seniors were less likely to experience pain. MEWS is not a valuable tool for supporting decisions concerning the admission or discharge of geriatric patients with COVID-19.

Full Text:

View PDF Download PDF file
Get Citation

Keywords

emergency department; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; organization and administration; patient care management

About this article
Title

Differences in symptoms and utility of MEWS score in geriatric patients with COVID-19

Journal

Medical Research Journal

Issue

Vol 7, No 4 (2022)

Article type

Original article

Pages

301-306

Published online

2022-12-14

Page views

3248

Article views/downloads

261

DOI

10.5603/MRJ.a2022.0052

Bibliographic record

Medical Research Journal 2022;7(4):301-306.

Keywords

emergency department
SARS-CoV-2
COVID-19
organization and administration
patient care management

Authors

Julia Gólska
Krzysztof Białkowski
Tomasz Kłosiewicz

References (23)
  1. World Health Organization. Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19); World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland. 2020.
  2. Liu K, Chen Y, Lin R, et al. Clinical features of COVID-19 in elderly patients: A comparison with young and middle-aged patients. J Infect. 2020; 80(6): e14–e18.
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. Li JY, You Z, Wang Q, et al. The epidemic of 2019-novel-coronavirus (2019-nCoV) pneumonia and insights for emerging infectious diseases in the future. Microbes Infect. 2020; 22(2): 80–85.
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. Vakili S, Savardashtaki A, Jamalnia S, et al. Laboratory Findings of COVID-19 Infection are Conflicting in Different Age Groups and Pregnant Women: A Literature Review. Arch Med Res. 2020; 51(7): 603–607.
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. Aygun H, Eraybar S. The role of emergency department triage early warning score (TREWS) and modified early warning score (MEWS) to predict in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients. Ir J Med Sci. 2022; 191(3): 997–1003.
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. Bradley P, Frost F, Tharmaratnam K, et al. NW Collaborative Organisation for Respiratory Research. Utility of established prognostic scores in COVID-19 hospital admissions: multicentre prospective evaluation of CURB-65, NEWS2 and qSOFA. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2020; 7(1).
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. Anurag A, Preetam M. Validation of PSI/PORT, CURB-65 and SCAP scoring system in COVID-19 pneumonia for prediction of disease severity and 14-day mortality. Clin Respir J. 2021; 15(5): 467–471.
    CrossRefPubMed
  8. Gandini O, Lubrano C. Use of rapid ferritin test to predict clinical deterioration in at home COVID-19 patients. J Infect. 2021; 82(3): e11–e13.
    CrossRefPubMed
  9. Wang L, Lv Q, Zhang X, et al. The utility of MEWS for predicting the mortality in the elderly adults with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study with comparison to other predictive clinical scores. PeerJ. 2020; 8: e10018.
    CrossRefPubMed
  10. Çalıca Utku A, Budak G, Karabay O, et al. Main symptoms in patients presenting in the COVID-19 period. Scott Med J. 2020; 65(4): 127–132.
    CrossRefPubMed
  11. Guan WJ, Ni ZY, Hu Yu, et al. China Medical Treatment Expert Group for Covid-19. Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382(18): 1708–1720.
    CrossRefPubMed
  12. Grant MC, Geoghegan L, Arbyn M, et al. The prevalence of symptoms in 24,410 adults infected by the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19): A systematic review and meta-analysis of 148 studies from 9 countries. PLoS One. 2020; 15(6): e0234765.
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. Dyussenbayev A. Age Periods Of Human Life. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal. 2017; 4(6).
    CrossRef
  14. Flisiak R, Horban A, Jaroszewicz J, et al. Management of SARS-CoV-2 infection: recommendations of the Polish Association of Epidemiologists and Infectiologists as of March 31, 2020. Pol Arch Intern Med. 2020; 130(4): 352–357.
    CrossRefPubMed
  15. Vaira LA, Salzano G, Deiana G, et al. Anosmia and Ageusia: Common Findings in COVID-19 Patients. Laryngoscope. 2020; 130(7): 1787.
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. Sampaio Rocha-Filho PA, Voss L. Persistent Headache and Persistent Anosmia Associated With COVID-19. Headache. 2020; 60(8): 1797–1799.
    CrossRefPubMed
  17. Kennedy M, Helfand BKI, Gou RY, et al. Delirium in Older Patients With COVID-19 Presenting to the Emergency Department. JAMA Netw Open. 2020; 3(11): e2029540.
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. Rebora P, Rozzini R, Bianchetti A, et al. CoViD-19 Lombardia Team. Delirium in Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Multicenter Study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2021; 69(2): 293–299.
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. Kłosiewicz T, Szkudlarek W, Węglewska M, et al. Dynamics of the Third Wave of COVID-19 from the Perspective of the Emergency Department in a Large Regional Hospital-Single Center Observational Study. Healthcare (Basel). 2021; 10(1).
    CrossRefPubMed
  20. Barnett WR, Radhakrishnan M, Macko J, et al. Initial MEWS score to predict ICU admission or transfer of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A retrospective study. J Infect. 2021; 82(2): 282–327.
    CrossRefPubMed
  21. Covino M, Sandroni C, Santoro M, et al. Predicting intensive care unit admission and death for COVID-19 patients in the emergency department using early warning scores. Resuscitation. 2020; 156: 84–91.
    CrossRefPubMed
  22. Gul MH, Htun ZM, Inayat A. Role of fever and ambient temperature in COVID-19. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2021; 15(2): 171–173.
    CrossRefPubMed
  23. Flisiak R, Horban A, Jaroszewicz J, et al. Zalecenia dotyczące postępowania w zakażeniach SARS-CoV-2 Polskiego Towarzystwa Epidemiologów i Lekarzy Chorób Zakaźnych z 23 lutego 2022 roku. Med. Prakt. 2022; 3: 49–77.

Regulations

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By VM Media Group sp. z o.o., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl