Cargando…

Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study

INTRODUCTION: This study was proposed to compare the ability and accuracy of modified sequential organ failure assessment (mSOFA), quick SOFA (qSOFA), and qSOFA-65 in predicting the status of nontraumatic patients referred to hospital emergency departments (EDs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study wa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ebrahimian, Abbasali, Shahcheragh, Seyyed-Mohammad-Taghi, Fakhr-Movahedi, Ali
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7751043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33384509
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23656
_version_ 1783625594518372352
author Ebrahimian, Abbasali
Shahcheragh, Seyyed-Mohammad-Taghi
Fakhr-Movahedi, Ali
author_facet Ebrahimian, Abbasali
Shahcheragh, Seyyed-Mohammad-Taghi
Fakhr-Movahedi, Ali
author_sort Ebrahimian, Abbasali
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: This study was proposed to compare the ability and accuracy of modified sequential organ failure assessment (mSOFA), quick SOFA (qSOFA), and qSOFA-65 in predicting the status of nontraumatic patients referred to hospital emergency departments (EDs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a prospective design that performed on the 746 nontraumatic patients referred to the ED. Each patient data was collected using a demographic questionnaire, mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 scales. Related variables of each scale were recorded based on patients’ medical records. Then, the outcome of each patient in the ED was followed up and recorded. The severity and specificity of each scale were estimated by the area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve at 99% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The mean and standard deviation of scores were as follows: mSOFA = 4.40 ± 2.58, qSOFA = 0.50 ± 0.70, and qSOFA-65 = 0.92 ± 0.96. Patients requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) were identified with AUROC curve as follows: mSOFA = 0.882 (99% CI = 0.778–0.865); qSOFA = 0.717 (99% CI = 0.662–0.773); and qSOFA-65 = 0.771 (99% CI = 0.721–0.820), which showed that mSOFA has higher sensitivity and specificity than the other two scales in identifying patients requiring admission to the ICU. CONCLUSION: All three scales were found to be reliable for identifying nontraumatic patients at risk of death and patients requiring admission to the ICU. However, since the time and data required to complete qSOFA and qSOFA-65 are much less than those of mSOFA, it is recommended that qSOFA and especially qSOFA-65 be used in ED to identify critically ill nontraumatic patients. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Ebrahimian A, Shahcheragh SMT, Fakhr-Movahedi A. Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(11):1045–1050.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7751043
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77510432020-12-30 Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study Ebrahimian, Abbasali Shahcheragh, Seyyed-Mohammad-Taghi Fakhr-Movahedi, Ali Indian J Crit Care Med Research Article INTRODUCTION: This study was proposed to compare the ability and accuracy of modified sequential organ failure assessment (mSOFA), quick SOFA (qSOFA), and qSOFA-65 in predicting the status of nontraumatic patients referred to hospital emergency departments (EDs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a prospective design that performed on the 746 nontraumatic patients referred to the ED. Each patient data was collected using a demographic questionnaire, mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 scales. Related variables of each scale were recorded based on patients’ medical records. Then, the outcome of each patient in the ED was followed up and recorded. The severity and specificity of each scale were estimated by the area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve at 99% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The mean and standard deviation of scores were as follows: mSOFA = 4.40 ± 2.58, qSOFA = 0.50 ± 0.70, and qSOFA-65 = 0.92 ± 0.96. Patients requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) were identified with AUROC curve as follows: mSOFA = 0.882 (99% CI = 0.778–0.865); qSOFA = 0.717 (99% CI = 0.662–0.773); and qSOFA-65 = 0.771 (99% CI = 0.721–0.820), which showed that mSOFA has higher sensitivity and specificity than the other two scales in identifying patients requiring admission to the ICU. CONCLUSION: All three scales were found to be reliable for identifying nontraumatic patients at risk of death and patients requiring admission to the ICU. However, since the time and data required to complete qSOFA and qSOFA-65 are much less than those of mSOFA, it is recommended that qSOFA and especially qSOFA-65 be used in ED to identify critically ill nontraumatic patients. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Ebrahimian A, Shahcheragh SMT, Fakhr-Movahedi A. Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(11):1045–1050. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2020-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7751043/ /pubmed/33384509 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23656 Text en Copyright © 2020; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd. © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and non-commercial 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 Research Article
Ebrahimian, Abbasali
Shahcheragh, Seyyed-Mohammad-Taghi
Fakhr-Movahedi, Ali
Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study
title Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study
title_full Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study
title_fullStr Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study
title_short Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study
title_sort comparing the ability and accuracy of msofa, qsofa, and qsofa-65 in predicting the status of nontraumatic patients referred to a hospital emergency department: a prospective study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7751043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33384509
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23656
work_keys_str_mv AT ebrahimianabbasali comparingtheabilityandaccuracyofmsofaqsofaandqsofa65inpredictingthestatusofnontraumaticpatientsreferredtoahospitalemergencydepartmentaprospectivestudy
AT shahcheraghseyyedmohammadtaghi comparingtheabilityandaccuracyofmsofaqsofaandqsofa65inpredictingthestatusofnontraumaticpatientsreferredtoahospitalemergencydepartmentaprospectivestudy
AT fakhrmovahediali comparingtheabilityandaccuracyofmsofaqsofaandqsofa65inpredictingthestatusofnontraumaticpatientsreferredtoahospitalemergencydepartmentaprospectivestudy