Validation of the Denver Emergency Department Trauma Organ Failure Score to Predict Post-Injury Multiple Organ Failure

Performance of early warning and risk stratification scores versus clinical judgement in the acute setting: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Risk stratification is increasingly based on Early Warning Score (EWS)-based models, instead of clinical judgement. However, it is unknown how risk-stratification models and EWS perform as compared with the clinical judgement of treating acute healthcare providers. Therefore, we performed a systematic review of all available literature evaluating clinical judgement of healthcare providers to the use of risk-stratification models in predicting patients' clinical outcome.

METHODS

Studies comparing clinical judgement and risk-stratification models in predicting outcomes in adult patients presenting at the ED were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes included the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission; severe adverse events; clinical deterioration and mortality. Risk of bias among the included studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool.

RESULTS

Six studies (6419 participants) were included of which 4 studies were judged to be at high risk of bias. Only descriptive analysis was performed as a meta-analysis was not possible due to few included studies and high clinical heterogeneity. The performance of clinical judgement and risk-stratification models were both moderate in predicting mortality, deterioration and need for ICU admission with area under the curves between 0.70 and 0.89. The performance of clinical judgement did not significantly differ from risk-stratification models in predicting mortality (n=2 studies) or deterioration (n=1 study). However, clinical judgement of healthcare providers was significantly better in predicting the need for ICU admission (n=2) and severe adverse events (n=1 study) as compared with risk-stratification models.

CONCLUSION

Based on limited existing data, clinical judgement has greater accuracy in predicting the need for ICU admission and the occurrence of severe adverse events compared with risk-stratification models in ED patients. However, performance is similar in predicting mortality and deterioration.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020218893.

A Novel Strategy for Predicting 72-h Mortality After Admission in Patients With Polytrauma: A Study on the Development and Validation of a Web-Based Calculator

Background

Early and accessible screening of patients with polytrauma at a high risk of hospital death is essential. The purpose of this research was to seek an accurate and convenient solution to predict deaths occurring within 72 h after admission of these patients.

Methods

A secondary analysis was conducted on 3,075 patients with polytrauma from the Dryad database. We imputed missing values in eligible individuals with the k-nearest neighbor algorithm and then randomly stratified them into the training group (n = 2,461) and the validation group (n = 614) based on a proportion of 8:2. The restricted cubic spline, univariate, backward stepwise, and multivariate logistic regression methods were employed to determine the suitable predictors. Calibration and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were applied to assess the calibration and discrimination of the obtained model. The decision curve analysis was then chosen as the measure to examine the clinical usage.

Results

Age, the Glasgow Coma Scale score, the Injury Severity Score, base excess, and the initial lactate level were inferred as independent prognostic factors related to mortality. These factors were then integrated and applied to construct a model. The performance of calibration plots, ROC curves, and decision curve analysis indicated that the model had satisfactory predictive power for 72-h mortality after admission of patients with polytrauma. Moreover, we developed a nomogram for visualization and a web-based calculator for convenient application (https://songandwen.shinyapps.io/DynNomapp/).

Conclusions

A convenient web-based calculator was constructed to robustly estimate the risk of death in patients with polytrauma within 72 h after admission, which may aid in further rationalization of clinical decision-making and accurate individual treatment.

Time for a prehospital-modified sequential organ failure assessment score: An ambulance-Based cohort study

BACKGROUND

To adapt the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score to fit the prehospital care needs; to do that, the SOFA was modified by replacing platelets and bilirubin, by lactate, and tested this modified SOFA (mSOFA) score in its prognostic capacity to assess the mortality-risk at 2 days since the first Emergency Medical Service (EMS) contact.

METHODS

Prospective, multicentric, EMS-delivery, ambulance-based, pragmatic cohort study of adults with acute diseases, referred to two tertiary care hospitals (Spain), between January 1st and December 31st, 2020. The discriminative power of the predictive variable was assessed through a prediction model trained using the derivation cohort and evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) on the validation cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 1114 participants comprised two separated cohorts recruited from 15 ambulance stations. The 2-day mortality rate (from any cause) was 5.9% (66 cases). The predictive validity of the mSOFA score was assessed by the calculation of the AUC of ROC in the validation cohort, resulting in an AUC of 0.946 (95% CI, 0.913-0.978, p < .001), with a positive likelihood ratio was 23.3 (95% CI, 0.32-46.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Scoring systems are now a reality in prehospital care, and the mSOFA score assesses multiorgan dysfunction in a simple and agile manner either bedside or en route. Patients with acute disease and an mSOFA score greater than 6 points transferred with high priority by EMS represent a high early mortality group.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN48326533, Registered Octuber 312,019, Prospectively registered (doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN48326533).

Semiautomated Glasgow-Blatchford Bleeding Score helps direct bed placement for patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

OBJECTIVE

The Glasgow-Blatchford Bleeding Score (GBS) was designed to identify patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) who do not require hospitalisation. It may also help stratify patients unlikely to benefit from intensive care.

DESIGN

We reviewed patients assigned a GBS in the emergency room (ER) via a semiautomated calculator. Patients with a score ≤7 (low risk) were directed to an unmonitored bed (UMB), while those with a score of ≥8 (high risk) were considered for MB placement. Conformity with guidelines and subsequent transfers to MB were reviewed, along with transfusion requirement, rebleeding, length of stay, need for intervention and death.

RESULTS

Over 34 months, 1037 patients received a GBS in the ER. 745 had an UGIB. 235 (32%) of these patients had a GBS ≤7. 29 (12%) low-risk patients were admitted to MBs. Four low-risk patients admitted to UMB required transfer to MB within the first 48 hours. Low-risk patients admitted to UMBs were no more likely to die, rebleed, need transfusion or require more endoscopic, radiographic or surgical procedures than those admitted to MBs. No low-risk patient died from GIB. Patients with GBS ≥8 were more likely to rebleed, require transfusion and interventions to control bleeding but not to die.

CONCLUSION

A semiautomated GBS calculator can be incorporated into an ER workflow. Patients with a GBS ≤7 are unlikely to need MB care for UGIB. Further studies are warranted to determine an ideal scoring system for MB admission.

Microcirculatory Impairment Is Associated With Multiple Organ Dysfunction Following Traumatic Hemorrhagic Shock: The MICROSHOCK Study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relationship between microcirculatory perfusion and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in patients following traumatic hemorrhagic shock.

DESIGN

Multicenter prospective longitudinal observational study.

SETTING

Three U.K. major trauma centers.

PATIENTS

Fifty-eight intubated and ventilated patients with traumatic hemorrhagic shock.

INTERVENTIONS

Sublingual incident dark field microscopy was performed within 12 hours of ICU admission (D0) and repeated 24 and 48 hours later. Cardiac output was assessed using oesophageal Doppler. Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome was defined as Serial Organ Failure Assessment score greater than or equal to 6 at day 7 post injury.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Data from 58 patients were analyzed. Patients had a mean age of 43 ± 19 years, Injury Severity Score of 29 ± 14, and initial lactate of 7.3 ± 6.1 mmol/L and received 6 U (interquartile range, 4-11 U) of packed RBCs during initial resuscitation. Compared with patients without multiple organ dysfunction syndrome at day 7, patients with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome had lower D0 perfused vessel density (11.2 ± 1.8 and 8.6 ± 1.8 mm/mm; p < 0.01) and microcirculatory flow index (2.8 [2.6-2.9] and 2.6 [2.2-2.8]; p < 0.01) but similar cardiac index (2.5 [± 0.6] and 2.1 [± 0.7] L/min//m; p = 0.11). Perfused vessel density demonstrated the best discrimination for predicting subsequent multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (area under curve 0.87 [0.76-0.99]) compared with highest recorded lactate (area under curve 0.69 [0.53-0.84]), cardiac index (area under curve 0.66 [0.49-0.83]) and lowest recorded systolic blood pressure (area under curve 0.54 [0.39-0.70]).

CONCLUSIONS

Microcirculatory hypoperfusion immediately following traumatic hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation is associated with increased multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Microcirculatory variables are better prognostic indicators for the development of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome than more traditional indices. Microcirculatory perfusion is a potential endpoint of resuscitation following traumatic hemorrhagic shock.

Shock volume: Patient-specific cumulative hypoperfusion predicts organ dysfunction in a prospective cohort of multiply injured patients

BACKGROUND

Multiply injured patients are at risk of developing hemorrhagic shock and organ dysfunction. We determined how cumulative hypoperfusion predicted organ dysfunction by integrating serial Shock Index measurements.

METHODS

In this study, we calculated shock volume (SHVL) which is a patient-specific index that quantifies cumulative hypoperfusion by integrating abnormally elevated Shock Index (heart rate/systolic blood pressure ≥ 0.9) values acutely after injury. Shock volume was calculated at three hours (3 hr), six hours (6 hr), and twenty-four hours (24 hr) after injury. Organ dysfunction was quantified using Marshall Organ Dysfunction Scores averaged from days 2 through 5 after injury (aMODSD2-D5). Logistic regression was used to determine correspondence of 3hrSHVL, 6hrSHVL, and 24hrSHVL to organ dysfunction. We compared correspondence of SHVL to organ dysfunction with traditional indices of shock including the initial base deficit (BD) and the lowest pH measurement made in the first 24 hr after injury (minimum pH).

RESULTS

SHVL at all three time intervals demonstrated higher correspondence to organ dysfunction (R = 0.48 to 0.52) compared to initial BD (R = 0.32) and minimum pH (R = 0.32). Additionally, we compared predictive capabilities of SHVL, initial BD and minimum pH to identify patients at risk of developing high-magnitude organ dysfunction by constructing receiver operator characteristic curves. SHVL at six hours and 24 hours had higher area under the curve compared to initial BD and minimum pH.

CONCLUSION

SHVL is a non-invasive metric that can predict anticipated organ dysfunction and identify patients at risk for high-magnitude organ dysfunction after injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study, level III.

Risk factors for infection and evaluation of Sepsis-3 in patients with trauma

BACKGROUND

We aim to examine the risk factors associated with infection in trauma patients and the Sepsis-3 definition.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adult trauma patients admitted to a Level I trauma center between January 2014 and January 2016.

RESULTS

A total of 1499 trauma patients met inclusion criteria and 15% (n = 232) had an infection. Only 19.8% (n = 46) of infected patients met criteria for Sepsis-3, with the majority (43%) of infected cases having a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score greater on admission compared to the time of suspected infection. In-hospital death was 7% vs 9% (p = 0.65) between Sepsis-3 and infected patients, respectively. Risk factors associated with infection were female sex, admission SOFA score, Elixhauser score, and severe injury (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with trauma often arrive with organ dysfunction, which adds complexity and inaccuracy to the operational definition of Sepsis-3 using changes in SOFA scores. Injury severity score, comorbidities, SOFA score, and sex are risk factors associated with developing an infection after trauma.

Denver ED Trauma Organ Failure Score predicts healthcare resource utilization in adult trauma patients

BACKGROUND

Early identification of trauma patients who need specialized healthcare resources may facilitate goal-directed resuscitation and effective secondary triage.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate associations between Denver Emergency Department (ED) Trauma Organ Failure (TOF) Score and healthcare resource utilization.

METHODS

Retrospective study of adult trauma patients at Denver Health Medical Center. The outcome was resource utilization including: intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, procedures, and costs. Multivariable regression analyses were used to estimate associations between moderate- or high-risk patients, as determined by the Denver ED TOF Score, and healthcare resource utilization.

RESULTS

We included 3000 patients with a median age of 42 (IQR 27-56) years, 71% male, median injury severity score 9 (IQR 5-16), and 83% blunt mechanism. Among the cohort, 1379 patients (46%) were admitted to the ICU and 122 (4%) died. The adjusted relative risk for high- and moderate-risk as compared to low risk for number of procedures performed was 2.31 (95% CI 2.07-2.57) and 1.80 (95% CI 1.59-2.03) respectively; ICU LOS was 2.87 (95% CI 2.70-3.05) and 1.71 (95% CI 1.60-1.83) respectively; hospital LOS was 3.33 (95% CI 3.21-3.45) and 1.97 (95% CI 1.90-2.05) respectively. The adjusted geometric mean for high-, moderate-, and low-risk for costs was $48,881 (95% CI $43,799-$54,552), $27,890 (95% CI $25,460-$30,551), and $12,983 (95% CI $12,493-$13,492), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The Denver ED TOF Score predicts healthcare resource utilization, and is a useful bedside tool to identify patients early after injury that are likely to require significant healthcare resources and specialized trauma care.

Which score should be used for posttraumatic multiple organ failure? - Comparison of the MODS, Denver- and SOFA- Scores

BACKGROUND

Multiple organ dysfunction and multiple organ failure (MOF) is still a major complication and challenge in the treatment of severely injured patients. The incidence varies decisively in current studies, which complicates the comparability regarding risk factors, treatment recommendations and patients' outcome. Therefore, we analysed how the currently used scoring systems, the MODS, Denver- and SOFA Score, influence the definition and compared the scores' predictive ability.

METHODS

Out of datasets of severely injured patients (ISS ≥ 16, Age ≥ 16) staying more tha 48 h on the ICU, the scores were calculated, respectively. The scores' predictive ability on day three after trauma for resource requiring measurements and patient specific outcomes were compared using receiver-operating characteristics.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-six patients with a mean ISS 28 ± 13 could be included. MODS and SOFA score defined the incidence of MOF consistently (46.5 % vs. 52.3 %), while the Denver score defined MOF in 22.2 %. The MODS outperformed Denver- and SOFA score in predicting mortality (area under the curve/AUC: 0.83 vs. 0.67 vs. 0.72), but was inferior predicting the length of stay (AUC 0.71 vs.0.80 vs.0.82) and a prolonged time on mechanical ventilation (AUC 0.75 vs. 0.81 vs. 0.84). MODS and SOFA score were comparably sensitive and the Denver score more specific in all analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

All three scores have a comparable ability to predict the outcome in trauma patients including patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Either score could be favored depending weather a higher sensitivity or specificity is targeted. The SOFA score showed the most balanced relation of sensitivity and specificity. The incidence of posttraumatic MOF relies decisively on the score applied. Therefore harmonizing the competing scores and definitions is desirable.