Cargando…

The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study

BACKGROUND: Sepsis recognition in older emergency department (ED) patients is difficult due to atypical symptom presentation. We therefore investigated whether the prognostic and discriminative performance of the five most commonly used disease severity scores were appropriate for risk stratificatio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Groot, Bas, Stolwijk, Frank, Warmerdam, Mats, Lucke, Jacinta A., Singh, Gurpreet K., Abbas, Mo, Mooijaart, Simon P., Ansems, Annemieke, Esteve Cuevas, Laura, Rijpsma, Douwe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5594503/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28893325
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0436-3
_version_ 1783263216039624704
author de Groot, Bas
Stolwijk, Frank
Warmerdam, Mats
Lucke, Jacinta A.
Singh, Gurpreet K.
Abbas, Mo
Mooijaart, Simon P.
Ansems, Annemieke
Esteve Cuevas, Laura
Rijpsma, Douwe
author_facet de Groot, Bas
Stolwijk, Frank
Warmerdam, Mats
Lucke, Jacinta A.
Singh, Gurpreet K.
Abbas, Mo
Mooijaart, Simon P.
Ansems, Annemieke
Esteve Cuevas, Laura
Rijpsma, Douwe
author_sort de Groot, Bas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Sepsis recognition in older emergency department (ED) patients is difficult due to atypical symptom presentation. We therefore investigated whether the prognostic and discriminative performance of the five most commonly used disease severity scores were appropriate for risk stratification of older ED sepsis patients (≥70 years) compared to a younger control group (<70 years). METHODS: This was an observational multi-centre study using an existing database in which ED patients who were hospitalized with a suspected infection were prospectively included. Patients were stratified by age < 70 and ≥70 years. We assessed the association with in-hospital mortality (primary outcome) and the area under the curve (AUC) with receiver operator characteristics of the Predisposition, Infection, Response, Organ dysfunction (PIRO), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), Mortality in ED Sepsis (MEDS), and the Modified and National Early Warning (MEWS and NEWS) scores. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 9.5% ((95%-CI); 7.4–11.5) in the 783 included older patients, and 4.6% (3.6–5.7) in the 1497 included younger patients. In contrast to younger patients, disease severity scores in older patients associated poorly with mortality. The AUCs of all disease severity scores were poor and ranged from 0.56 to 0.64 in older patients, significantly lower than the good AUC range from 0.72 to 0.86 in younger patients. The MEDS had the best AUC (0.64 (0.57–0.71)) in older patients. In older and younger patients, the newly proposed qSOFA score (Sepsis 3.0) had a lower AUC than the PIRO score (sepsis 2.0). CONCLUSION: The prognostic and discriminative performance of the five most commonly used disease severity scores was poor and less useful for risk stratification of older ED sepsis patients. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13049-017-0436-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5594503
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55945032017-09-14 The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study de Groot, Bas Stolwijk, Frank Warmerdam, Mats Lucke, Jacinta A. Singh, Gurpreet K. Abbas, Mo Mooijaart, Simon P. Ansems, Annemieke Esteve Cuevas, Laura Rijpsma, Douwe Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Original Research BACKGROUND: Sepsis recognition in older emergency department (ED) patients is difficult due to atypical symptom presentation. We therefore investigated whether the prognostic and discriminative performance of the five most commonly used disease severity scores were appropriate for risk stratification of older ED sepsis patients (≥70 years) compared to a younger control group (<70 years). METHODS: This was an observational multi-centre study using an existing database in which ED patients who were hospitalized with a suspected infection were prospectively included. Patients were stratified by age < 70 and ≥70 years. We assessed the association with in-hospital mortality (primary outcome) and the area under the curve (AUC) with receiver operator characteristics of the Predisposition, Infection, Response, Organ dysfunction (PIRO), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), Mortality in ED Sepsis (MEDS), and the Modified and National Early Warning (MEWS and NEWS) scores. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 9.5% ((95%-CI); 7.4–11.5) in the 783 included older patients, and 4.6% (3.6–5.7) in the 1497 included younger patients. In contrast to younger patients, disease severity scores in older patients associated poorly with mortality. The AUCs of all disease severity scores were poor and ranged from 0.56 to 0.64 in older patients, significantly lower than the good AUC range from 0.72 to 0.86 in younger patients. The MEDS had the best AUC (0.64 (0.57–0.71)) in older patients. In older and younger patients, the newly proposed qSOFA score (Sepsis 3.0) had a lower AUC than the PIRO score (sepsis 2.0). CONCLUSION: The prognostic and discriminative performance of the five most commonly used disease severity scores was poor and less useful for risk stratification of older ED sepsis patients. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13049-017-0436-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-09-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5594503/ /pubmed/28893325 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0436-3 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
de Groot, Bas
Stolwijk, Frank
Warmerdam, Mats
Lucke, Jacinta A.
Singh, Gurpreet K.
Abbas, Mo
Mooijaart, Simon P.
Ansems, Annemieke
Esteve Cuevas, Laura
Rijpsma, Douwe
The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study
title The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study
title_full The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study
title_fullStr The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study
title_full_unstemmed The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study
title_short The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study
title_sort most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5594503/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28893325
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-017-0436-3
work_keys_str_mv AT degrootbas themostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT stolwijkfrank themostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT warmerdammats themostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT luckejacintaa themostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT singhgurpreetk themostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT abbasmo themostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT mooijaartsimonp themostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT ansemsannemieke themostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT estevecuevaslaura themostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT rijpsmadouwe themostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT degrootbas mostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT stolwijkfrank mostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT warmerdammats mostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT luckejacintaa mostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT singhgurpreetk mostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT abbasmo mostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT mooijaartsimonp mostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT ansemsannemieke mostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT estevecuevaslaura mostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy
AT rijpsmadouwe mostcommonlyuseddiseaseseverityscoresareinappropriateforriskstratificationofolderemergencydepartmentsepsispatientsanobservationalmulticentrestudy