Cargando…

Poor performance of quick-SOFA (qSOFA) score in predicting severe sepsis and mortality – a prospective study of patients admitted with infection to the emergency department

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the clinical usefulness of qSOFA as a risk stratification tool for patients admitted with infection compared to traditional SIRS criteria or our triage system; the Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System (RETTS). METHODS: The study was an observational cohort stu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Askim, Åsa, Moser, Florentin, Gustad, Lise T., Stene, Helga, Gundersen, Maren, Åsvold, Bjørn Olav, Dale, Jostein, Bjørnsen, Lars Petter, Damås, Jan Kristian, Solligård, Erik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5466747/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28599661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0399-4
_version_ 1783243151870263296
author Askim, Åsa
Moser, Florentin
Gustad, Lise T.
Stene, Helga
Gundersen, Maren
Åsvold, Bjørn Olav
Dale, Jostein
Bjørnsen, Lars Petter
Damås, Jan Kristian
Solligård, Erik
author_facet Askim, Åsa
Moser, Florentin
Gustad, Lise T.
Stene, Helga
Gundersen, Maren
Åsvold, Bjørn Olav
Dale, Jostein
Bjørnsen, Lars Petter
Damås, Jan Kristian
Solligård, Erik
author_sort Askim, Åsa
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the clinical usefulness of qSOFA as a risk stratification tool for patients admitted with infection compared to traditional SIRS criteria or our triage system; the Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System (RETTS). METHODS: The study was an observational cohort study performed at one Emergency Department (ED) in an urban university teaching hospital in Norway, with approximately 20,000 visits per year. All patients >16 years presenting with symptoms or clinical signs suggesting an infection (n = 1535) were prospectively included in the study from January 1 to December 31, 2012. At arrival in the ED, vital signs were recorded and all patients were triaged according to RETTS vital signs, presenting infection, and sepsis symptoms. These admission data were also used to calculate qSOFA and SIRS. Treatment outcome was later retrieved from the patients’ electronic records (EPR) and mortality data from the Norwegian population registry. RESULTS: Of the 1535 admitted patients, 108 (7.0%) fulfilled the Sepsis2 criteria for severe sepsis. The qSOFA score ≥2 identified only 33 (sensitivity 0.32, specificity 0.98) of the patients with severe sepsis, whilst the RETTS-alert ≥ orange identified 92 patients (sensitivity 0.85, specificity 0.55). Twenty-six patients died within 7 days of admission; four (15.4%) of them had a qSOFA ≥2, and 16 (61.5%) had RETTS ≥ orange alert. Of the 68 patients that died within 30 days, only eight (11.9%) scored ≥2 on the qSOFA, and 45 (66.1%) had a RETTS ≥ orange alert. DISCUSSION: In order to achieve timely treatment for sepsis, a sensitive screening tool is more important than a specific one. Our study is the fourth study were qSOFA finds few of the sepsis cases in prehospital or at arrival to the ED. We add information on the RETTS triage system, the two highest acuity levels together had a high sensitivity (85%) for identifying sepsis at arrival to the ED - and thus, RETTS should not be replaced by qSOFA as a screening and trigger tool for sepsis at arrival. CONCLUSION: In this observational cohort study, qSOFA failed to identify two thirds of the patients admitted to an ED with severe sepsis. Further, qSOFA failed to be a risk stratification tool as the sensitivity to predict 7-day and 30-day mortality was low. The sensitivity was poorer than the other warning scores already in use at the study site, RETTS-triage and the SIRS criteria. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13049-017-0399-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5466747
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54667472017-06-14 Poor performance of quick-SOFA (qSOFA) score in predicting severe sepsis and mortality – a prospective study of patients admitted with infection to the emergency department Askim, Åsa Moser, Florentin Gustad, Lise T. Stene, Helga Gundersen, Maren Åsvold, Bjørn Olav Dale, Jostein Bjørnsen, Lars Petter Damås, Jan Kristian Solligård, Erik Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Original Research BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the clinical usefulness of qSOFA as a risk stratification tool for patients admitted with infection compared to traditional SIRS criteria or our triage system; the Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System (RETTS). METHODS: The study was an observational cohort study performed at one Emergency Department (ED) in an urban university teaching hospital in Norway, with approximately 20,000 visits per year. All patients >16 years presenting with symptoms or clinical signs suggesting an infection (n = 1535) were prospectively included in the study from January 1 to December 31, 2012. At arrival in the ED, vital signs were recorded and all patients were triaged according to RETTS vital signs, presenting infection, and sepsis symptoms. These admission data were also used to calculate qSOFA and SIRS. Treatment outcome was later retrieved from the patients’ electronic records (EPR) and mortality data from the Norwegian population registry. RESULTS: Of the 1535 admitted patients, 108 (7.0%) fulfilled the Sepsis2 criteria for severe sepsis. The qSOFA score ≥2 identified only 33 (sensitivity 0.32, specificity 0.98) of the patients with severe sepsis, whilst the RETTS-alert ≥ orange identified 92 patients (sensitivity 0.85, specificity 0.55). Twenty-six patients died within 7 days of admission; four (15.4%) of them had a qSOFA ≥2, and 16 (61.5%) had RETTS ≥ orange alert. Of the 68 patients that died within 30 days, only eight (11.9%) scored ≥2 on the qSOFA, and 45 (66.1%) had a RETTS ≥ orange alert. DISCUSSION: In order to achieve timely treatment for sepsis, a sensitive screening tool is more important than a specific one. Our study is the fourth study were qSOFA finds few of the sepsis cases in prehospital or at arrival to the ED. We add information on the RETTS triage system, the two highest acuity levels together had a high sensitivity (85%) for identifying sepsis at arrival to the ED - and thus, RETTS should not be replaced by qSOFA as a screening and trigger tool for sepsis at arrival. CONCLUSION: In this observational cohort study, qSOFA failed to identify two thirds of the patients admitted to an ED with severe sepsis. Further, qSOFA failed to be a risk stratification tool as the sensitivity to predict 7-day and 30-day mortality was low. The sensitivity was poorer than the other warning scores already in use at the study site, RETTS-triage and the SIRS criteria. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13049-017-0399-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5466747/ /pubmed/28599661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0399-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Original Research
Askim, Åsa
Moser, Florentin
Gustad, Lise T.
Stene, Helga
Gundersen, Maren
Åsvold, Bjørn Olav
Dale, Jostein
Bjørnsen, Lars Petter
Damås, Jan Kristian
Solligård, Erik
Poor performance of quick-SOFA (qSOFA) score in predicting severe sepsis and mortality – a prospective study of patients admitted with infection to the emergency department
title Poor performance of quick-SOFA (qSOFA) score in predicting severe sepsis and mortality – a prospective study of patients admitted with infection to the emergency department
title_full Poor performance of quick-SOFA (qSOFA) score in predicting severe sepsis and mortality – a prospective study of patients admitted with infection to the emergency department
title_fullStr Poor performance of quick-SOFA (qSOFA) score in predicting severe sepsis and mortality – a prospective study of patients admitted with infection to the emergency department
title_full_unstemmed Poor performance of quick-SOFA (qSOFA) score in predicting severe sepsis and mortality – a prospective study of patients admitted with infection to the emergency department
title_short Poor performance of quick-SOFA (qSOFA) score in predicting severe sepsis and mortality – a prospective study of patients admitted with infection to the emergency department
title_sort poor performance of quick-sofa (qsofa) score in predicting severe sepsis and mortality – a prospective study of patients admitted with infection to the emergency department
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5466747/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28599661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0399-4
work_keys_str_mv AT askimasa poorperformanceofquicksofaqsofascoreinpredictingseveresepsisandmortalityaprospectivestudyofpatientsadmittedwithinfectiontotheemergencydepartment
AT moserflorentin poorperformanceofquicksofaqsofascoreinpredictingseveresepsisandmortalityaprospectivestudyofpatientsadmittedwithinfectiontotheemergencydepartment
AT gustadliset poorperformanceofquicksofaqsofascoreinpredictingseveresepsisandmortalityaprospectivestudyofpatientsadmittedwithinfectiontotheemergencydepartment
AT stenehelga poorperformanceofquicksofaqsofascoreinpredictingseveresepsisandmortalityaprospectivestudyofpatientsadmittedwithinfectiontotheemergencydepartment
AT gundersenmaren poorperformanceofquicksofaqsofascoreinpredictingseveresepsisandmortalityaprospectivestudyofpatientsadmittedwithinfectiontotheemergencydepartment
AT asvoldbjørnolav poorperformanceofquicksofaqsofascoreinpredictingseveresepsisandmortalityaprospectivestudyofpatientsadmittedwithinfectiontotheemergencydepartment
AT dalejostein poorperformanceofquicksofaqsofascoreinpredictingseveresepsisandmortalityaprospectivestudyofpatientsadmittedwithinfectiontotheemergencydepartment
AT bjørnsenlarspetter poorperformanceofquicksofaqsofascoreinpredictingseveresepsisandmortalityaprospectivestudyofpatientsadmittedwithinfectiontotheemergencydepartment
AT damasjankristian poorperformanceofquicksofaqsofascoreinpredictingseveresepsisandmortalityaprospectivestudyofpatientsadmittedwithinfectiontotheemergencydepartment
AT solligarderik poorperformanceofquicksofaqsofascoreinpredictingseveresepsisandmortalityaprospectivestudyofpatientsadmittedwithinfectiontotheemergencydepartment