Abstract
Introduction The case fatality rate from COVID-19 differs markedly around the world. There are likely a number of factors one can attribute to such disparity, not least of which is differing healthcare models and approaches. Here, we examine the COVID-19 related health advice issued by six different countries, specifically examining the patient-led triage pathways in each country.
Methods A simulation study was conducted on current, nationwide, patient-led triage systems from three countries with low case fatality rates (Singapore, Norway and Japan) and two countries with high case fatality rates (the USA and the UK). 36 case scenarios were designed to imitate common presentations of COVID-19 with varying degrees of severity. These scenarios were then fed into each country’s patient-led triage system. The advice for each scenario was recorded and then compared.
Results Patient-led triage systems from Singapore, Japan and Norway maintained a low threshold for advising clinical contact for patients with possible COVID-19 (88 to 100% of cases were referred). Patient-led triage systems from the USA and the UK maintained high thresholds for advising contact with either call centre support or clinical contact (28 and 33% of cases were referred, respectively), and triaged the majority of cases home with no further healthcare input. There was a strong inverse correlation between percentage of cases referred and the nation’s case fatality rate (Pearson’s Correlation = -0.642, p = 0.01).
Conclusion In this simulation study, countries with low case fatality rates - Singapore, Norway and Japan -, performed well, successfully identifying severe COVID-19 and triaging such cases to medical care. The USA triage system (CDC’s ‘Coronavirus Self-Checker’) and the UK’s triage system (NHS ‘111’ online) performed poorly, failing to identify Severe COVID-19 infection and sepsis in the case simulations, and triaging the majority of cases to self-care with no further healthcare input. Such poorly performing triage systems are likely to be contributing to the high case fatality rates in the US and the UK.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data is available to reuse and adapt with citation.