Poor specificity of National Early Warning Score (NEWS) in spinal cord injuries (SCI) population: a retrospective cohort study

Positive predictive value of a sepsis-screening protocol for patients with tetraplegia

OBJECTIVE

To determine the positive predictive value (PPV) of a sepsis-screening protocol in patients with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI).

DESIGN/METHOD

Retrospective review of all patients with cervical SCI who screened positive for two or more systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria while hospitalized in acute care or inpatient rehabilitation units over a 3.5-year period. Sepsis was defined by the occurrence of (1) any culture order followed by an intravenous (IV) antibiotic within 72 hours or (2) an IV antimicrobial followed by a culture order within 24 hours.

RESULTS

A total of 134 patients screened positive for two or more SIRS criteria. Of these, 36 patients (26.9%) were diagnosed with sepsis. Factors associated with a true-positive SIRS screen on multivariable analysis included American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade A-C (vs. D; p < .001). The PPV of the screen was 38% in patients with AIS A-C and 9% in patients with AIS D. Altered mental status (AMS) was strongly associated with a diagnosis of sepsis; 16 of 18 (88.9%) of those with AMS had sepsis (p < .001). Age, sex, and neurologic level of injury were not associated with true-positive screening. For patients with new SCI, the first true-positive screen occurred a median of 31 days post-injury. The most common SIRS criteria combinations in patients with true-positive screens were elevated heart rate and either abnormal white blood cell count (43% of true positives) or abnormal temperature (26% of true positives). Abnormally low body temperature (<36°C) contributed to false-positive screening for 10 of 38 (26%) AIS D patients who screened positive.

CONCLUSION

Sepsis screening using SIRS criteria in hospitalized patients with tetraplegia has a PPV of 26.9%; it is significantly higher in patients with AIS A-C versus D injuries. AMS, when combined with a positive SIRS screening, is strongly associated with sepsis.

Vital sign differences between septic patients with tetraplegia and paraplegia

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

OBJECTIVES

Sepsis is a leading preventable cause of death in patients with chronic spinal cord injury (SCI). Individuals with tetraplegia may exhibit different signs and symptoms of infection compared to those with paraplegia. In this study, we examine differences in vital signs (VS) and mental status between septic patients with tetraplegia and paraplegia with the goal of improving early identification of sepsis in this population.

SETTING

Veterans hospital in Washington, USA.

METHODS

Participants consisted of 19 patients with tetraplegia and 16 with paraplegia who were transferred from an SCI Service to a higher level of care with sepsis between June 1, 2010 and June 1, 2018 (n = 35). We compared VS between patients with tetraplegia and paraplegia at baseline and during sepsis including temperature, heart rate (HR), and blood pressure as well as presence/absence of altered mental status (AMS).

RESULTS

While there were no significant VS differences between groups at baseline, septic patients with tetraplegia had lower maximum temperature (38.2 °C versus 39.2 °C, p = 0.003), lower maximum HR (106 versus 124 beats/minute, p = 0.004), and more frequent AMS compared to septic patients with paraplegia (79% versus 31%, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Patients with tetraplegia may not be able to mount fever and tachycardia to the same degree as patients with paraplegia and may be more prone to developing AMS during sepsis. These findings suggest that changes to VS parameter cut-offs may improve sensitivity and be useful in identifying sepsis earlier in the tetraplegic population.

Identification of Serious Adverse Events in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injuries, from Prehospital Care to Intensive-Care Unit, Using Early Warning Scores

Traumatic brain injuries are complex situations in which the emergency medical services must quickly determine the risk of deterioration using minimal diagnostic methods. The aim of this study is to analyze whether the use of early warning scores can help with decision-making in these dynamic situations by determining the patients who need the intensive care unit. A prospective, multicentric cohort study without intervention was carried out on traumatic brain injury patients aged over 18 given advanced life support and taken to the hospital. Our study included a total of 209 cases. The total number of intensive-care unit admissions was 50 cases (23.9%). Of the scores analyzed, the National Early Warning Score2 was the best result presented with an area under the curve of 0.888 (0.81–0.94; p < 0.001) and an odds ratio of 25.4 (95% confidence interval (CI):11.2–57.5). The use of early warning scores (and specifically National Early Warning Score2) can help the emergency medical services to differentiate traumatic brain injury patients with a high risk of deterioration. The emergency medical services should use the early warning scores routinely in all cases for the early detection of high-risk situations.