Clinical Scores and Formal Triage for Screening of Sepsis and Adverse Outcomes on Arrival in an Emergency Department All-Comer Cohort

Early recognition of sepsis remains a major challenge. The clinical utility of the Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score is still undefined. Several studies have tested its prognostic value. However, its ability to diagnose sepsis is still unknown. Our aim was to compare the pe...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of emergency medicine 2019-10, Vol.57 (4), p.453-460.e2
Hauptverfasser: Nieves Ortega, Ricardo, Rosin, Christiane, Bingisser, Roland, Nickel, Christian H.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Early recognition of sepsis remains a major challenge. The clinical utility of the Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score is still undefined. Several studies have tested its prognostic value. However, its ability to diagnose sepsis is still unknown. Our aim was to compare the performance of qSOFA, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, National Early Warning Score (NEWS), and formal triage with the Emergency Severity Index (ESI) algorithm to identify patients with sepsis and predict adverse outcomes on arrival in an emergency department (ED) all-comer cohort. We included all patients presenting consecutively to the ED during a 3-week period. We used vital signs recorded at triage to calculate the study scores. Two independent assessors retrospectively assigned the primary outcome of sepsis according to Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock criteria in a chart review process. There were 2523 cases included in the analysis and 39 (1.6%) had the primary outcome of sepsis. The area under the curve for sepsis was 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71–0.86) for qSOFA, 0.81 (95% CI 0.73–0.87) for SIRS, 0.85 (95% CI 0.77–0.92) for NEWS, and 0.77 (95% CI 0.70–0.83) for ESI. qSOFA offered high specificity for the prediction of sepsis and adverse outcomes. However, its low sensitivity does not support widespread use as a screening tool for sepsis. NEWS outperformed qSOFA for prediction of adverse outcomes and screening for sepsis.
ISSN:0736-4679
2352-5029
DOI:10.1016/j.jemermed.2019.06.036