The quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) is a good predictor of in-hospital mortality in very elderly patients with bloodstream infections: A retrospective observational study

A novel deterioration prediction system for mild COVID-19 patients in Korea: a retrospective study

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presents serious public health threats. Omicron, the current most prevalent strain of COVID-19, has a low fatality rate and very high transmissibility, so the number of patients with mild symptoms of COVID-19 is rapidly increasing. This change of pandemic challenges medical systems worldwide in many aspects, including sharp increases in demands for hospital infrastructure, critical shortages in medical equipment, and medical staff. Predicting deterioration in mild patients could alleviate these problems. A novel scoring system was proposed for predicting the deterioration of patients whose condition may worsen rapidly and those who all still mild or asymptomatic. Retrospective cohorts of 954 and 2,035 patients that quarantined in the Residential Treatment Center were assembled for derivation and external validation of mild COVID-19, respectively. Deterioration was defined as transfer to a local hospital due to worsening condition of the patients during the 2-week isolation period. A total of 15 variables: sex, age, seven pre-existing conditions (diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, liver disease, kidney disease, and organ transplant), and five vital signs (systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), heart rate (HR), body temperature, and oxygen saturation (SpO2)) were collected. A scoring system was developed using seven variables (age, pulse rate, SpO2, SBP, DBP, temperature, and hypertension) with significant differences between the transfer and not transfer groups in logistic regression. The proposed system was compared with existing scoring systems that assess the severity of patient conditions. The performance of the proposed scoring system to predict deterioration in patients with mild COVID-19 showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) of 0.868. This is a statistically significant improvement compared to the performance of the previous patient condition assessment scoring systems. During external validation, the proposed system showed the best and most robust predictive performance (AUC = 0.768; accuracy = 0.899). In conclusion, we proposed a novel scoring system for predicting patients with mild COVID-19 who will experience deterioration which could predict the deterioration of the patient's condition early with high predictive performance. Furthermore, because the scoring system does not require special calculations, it can be easily measured to predict the deterioration of a patients' condition. This system can be used as effective tool for early detection of deterioration in mild COVID-19 patients.

Are Deep Odontogenic Infections Associated With an Increased Risk for Sepsis?

BACKGROUND

Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) is recommended to identify sepsis. Odontogenic infection (OI) can progress to sepsis, causing systematic inflammatory complications or organ failure.

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to measure the association between OI location and risk for sepsis at admission.

STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, AND SAMPLE

This retrospective cohort study included subjects treated for OI at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, TX, from January 9, 2019 to July 30, 2022. Subjects > 18 years old who were treated under general anesthesia were included. OI limited to periapical, vestibular, buccal, and/or canine spaces were excluded from the sample.

PREDICTOR VARIABLE

The primary predictor variable was OI anatomic location (superficial or deep). Superficial OI infection includes submental, submandibular, sublingual, submasseteric, and/or superficial temporal spaces. Deep OI includes pterygomandibular, deep temporal, lateral pharyngeal, retropharyngeal, pretracheal, and/or prevertebral.

MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLES

The primary outcome variable was risk for sepsis measured using a qSOFA score (0 to 3). A higher score (>0) indicates the patient has a high risk for sepsis.

COVARIATES

Covariates were demographics, clinical, laboratory, and radiological findings, antibiotic route, postoperative endotracheal intubation, tracheostomy, intensive care unit, admission, and length of stay.

ANALYSES

Descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed. A χ2 test was used for categorical variables. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for continuous variables. Statistical significance was P < .05.

RESULTS

The sample was composed of 168 subjects with a mean age of 42.8 ± 21.5 and 69 (48.6%) subjects were male. There were 11 (6.5%) subjects with a qSOFA score > 0. The relative risk of a qSOFA > 0 for a deep OI is 5.4 times greater than for a superficial OI (136 (95.8) versus 21 (80.8%): RR (95% confidence interval): 5.4 (1.51 to 19.27), P = .004). After adjusting for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and involved anatomical spaces, there was a significant correlation between laterality and the number of involved anatomical spaces and qSOFA score (odd ratio = 9.13, 95% confidence interval: 2.48 to 33.55, adjusted P = <.001).

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

The study findings suggest that the OI location is associated with the qSOFA score >0.

Bacteraemia and quick Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) are independent risk factors for long-term mortality in very elderly patients with suspected infection: retrospective cohort study

Background

In older adult patients, bloodstream infections cause significant mortality. However, data on long-term prognosis in very elderly patients are scarce. This study aims to assess 1-year mortality from bacteraemia in very elderly patients.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study in inpatients aged 80 years or older and suspected of having sepsis. Patients with (n = 336) and without (n = 336) confirmed bacteraemia were matched for age, sex, and date of culture, and their characteristics were compared. All-cause mortality and risk of death were assessed using the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR).

Results

Compared to controls, cases showed a higher 1-year mortality (34.8% vs. 45.2%) and mortality rate (0.46 vs. 0.69 deaths per person-year). Multivariable analysis showed significant risk of 1-year mortality in patients with bacteraemia (aHR: 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03–1.67), quick Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score of 2 or more (aHR: 2.71, 95% CI 2.05–3.57), and age of 90 years or older (aHR 1.53, 95% CI 1.17–1.99).

Conclusions

In elderly patients suspected of sepsis, bacteraemia is associated with a poor prognosis and higher long-term mortality. Other factors related to excess mortality were age over 90 years and a qSOFA score of 2 or more.

Clinical features and risk factors for mortality among long-term care facility residents hospitalized due to COVID-19 in Spain

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 severely impacted older adults and long-term care facility (LTCF) residents. Our primary aim was to describe differences in clinical and epidemiological variables, in-hospital management, and outcomes between LTCF residents and community-dwelling older adults hospitalized with COVID-19. The secondary aim was to identify risk factors for mortality due to COVID-19 in hospitalized LTCF residents.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional analysis within a retrospective cohort of hospitalized patients≥75 years with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to 160 Spanish hospitals. Differences between groups and factors associated with mortality among LTCF residents were assessed through comparisons and logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of 6,189 patients≥75 years, 1,185 (19.1%) were LTCF residents and 4,548 (73.5%) were community-dwelling. LTCF residents were older (median: 87.4 vs. 82.1 years), mostly female (61.6% vs. 43.2%), had more severe functional dependence (47.0% vs 7.8%), more comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index: 6 vs 5), had dementia more often (59.1% vs. 14.4%), and had shorter duration of symptoms (median: 3 vs 6 days) than community-dwelling patients (all, p<.001). Mortality risk factors in LTCF residents were severe functional dependence (aOR:1.79;95%CI:1.13-2.83;p=.012), dyspnea (1.66;1.16-2.39;p=.004), SatO2<94% (1.73;1.27-2.37;p=.001), temperature≥37.8ºC (1.62;1.11-2.38; p=.013); qSOFA index≥2 (1.62;1.11-2.38;p=.013), bilateral infiltrates (1.98;1.24-2.98;p<.001), and high C-reactive protein (1.005;1.003-1.007;p<.001). In-hospital mortality was initially higher among LTCF residents (43.3% vs 39.7%), but lower after adjusting for sex, age, functional dependence, and comorbidities (aOR:0.74,95%CI:0.62-0.87;p<.001).

CONCLUSION

Basal functional status and COVID-19 severity are risk factors of mortality in LTCF residents. The lower adjusted mortality rate in LTCF residents may be explained by earlier identification, treatment, and hospitalization for COVID-19.

Prognostic accuracy of Quick SOFA in older adults hospitalised with community acquired urinary tract infection

INTRODUCTION

Quick [Sepsis-related] Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) is a prognostic score based on sepsis-3 definition, easy to carry out, whose application has been studied in older adults with sepsis from different sources and respiratory sepsis. However, to date no study has analysed its prognostic accuracy in older adults admitted to hospital with community urinary tract infection.

METHODS

In a prospective study of 282 older adults admitted to hospital with community acquired urinary tract infection, the application of qSOFA to predict hospital mortality was analysed. The predictive capacity of qSOFA for in-hospital mortality was compared with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome score (SIRS) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), which require laboratory test in order to be calculated.

RESULTS

In a population with a median age of 81 years, where 51.8% were males and 10.6% had septic shock, qSOFA showed sensibility and specificity of 88.46 and 75.78% and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC) of 0.810. AUROC for qSOFA was significantly higher than that of SIRS (AUROC 0.597, P = .005) and with no statistical differences with SOFA (AUROC 0.841, P = .635).

CONCLUSION

qSOFA showed a better predictive prognostic accuracy than SIRS and similar to SOFA in older adults admitted to hospital with community acquired urinary tract infection, having the advantage of not requiring laboratory tests.

The qSOFA score combined with the initial red cell distribution width as a useful predictor of 30 day mortality among older adults with infection in an emergency department

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate whether the qSOFA and initial red cell distribution width (RDW) in the emergency department (ED) are associated with mortality in older adults with infections who visited the ED.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study conducted in 5 EDs between November 2016 and February 2017. We recorded age, sex, comorbidities, body temperature, clinical findings, and initial laboratory results, including the RDW. The initial RDW values and the qSOFA criteria were obtained at the time of the ED visit. The primary outcome was 30 day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 1,446 patients were finally included in this study, of which 134 (9.3%) died within 30 days and the median (IQR) age was 77 (72, 82) years. In the multivariable analysis, the RDW (14.0-15.4%) and highest RDW (> 15.4%) quartile were shown to be independent risk factors for 30 day mortality (OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.12-4.02; p = 0.021) (OR 3.35; 95% CI 1.83-6.13; p < 0.001). The patients with qSOFA 2 and 3 were shown to have the high odds ratios of 30-day mortality (OR 3.50; 95% CI 2.09-5.84; p < 0.001) (OR 11.30; 95% CI 5.06-25.23; p < 0.001). The qSOFA combined with the RDW quartile for the prediction of 30 day mortality showed an AUROC value of 0.710 (0.686-0.734).

CONCLUSION

The qSOFA combined with the initial RDW value was associated with 30-day mortality among older adults with infections in the ED. The initial RDW may help emergency physicians predict mortality in older adults with infections visiting the ED.

Severity Scores in COVID-19 Pneumonia: a Multicenter, Retrospective, Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Identification of patients on admission to hospital with coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia who can develop poor outcomes has not yet been comprehensively assessed.

OBJECTIVE

To compare severity scores used for community-acquired pneumonia to identify high-risk patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

DESIGN

PSI, CURB-65, qSOFA, and MuLBSTA, a new score for viral pneumonia, were calculated on admission to hospital to identify high-risk patients for in-hospital mortality, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), or use of mechanical ventilation. Area under receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC), sensitivity, and specificity for each score were determined and AUROC was compared among them.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia included in the SEMI-COVID-19 Network.

KEY RESULTS

We examined 10,238 patients with COVID-19. Mean age of patients was 66.6 years and 57.9% were males. The most common comorbidities were as follows: hypertension (49.2%), diabetes (18.8%), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (12.8%). Acute respiratory distress syndrome (34.7%) and acute kidney injury (13.9%) were the most common complications. In-hospital mortality was 20.9%. PSI and CURB-65 showed the highest AUROC (0.835 and 0.825, respectively). qSOFA and MuLBSTA had a lower AUROC (0.728 and 0.715, respectively). qSOFA was the most specific score (specificity 95.7%) albeit its sensitivity was only 26.2%. PSI had the highest sensitivity (84.1%) and a specificity of 72.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

PSI and CURB-65, specific severity scores for pneumonia, were better than qSOFA and MuLBSTA at predicting mortality in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Additionally, qSOFA, the simplest score to perform, was the most specific albeit the least sensitive.

Clinical Characteristics and Risk Factors for Mortality in Very Old Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in Spain

BACKGROUND

Advanced age is a well-known risk factor for poor prognosis in COVID-19. However, few studies have specifically focused on very old inpatients with COVID-19. This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics of very old inpatients with COVID-19 and identify risk factors for in-hospital mortality at admission.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide, multicenter, retrospective, observational study in patients ≥ 80 years hospitalized with COVID-19 in 150 Spanish hospitals (SEMI-COVID-19) Registry (March 1-May 29, 2020). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. A uni- and multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess predictors of mortality at admission.

RESULTS

A total of 2772 consecutive patients (49.4% men, median age 86.3 years) were analyzed. Rates of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, dementia, and Barthel Index < 60 were 30.8%, 25.6%, 30.5%, and 21.0%, respectively. The overall case-fatality rate was 46.9% (n: 1301) and increased with age (80-84 years: 41.6%; 85-90 years: 47.3%; 90-94 years: 52.7%; ≥95 years: 54.2%). After analysis, male sex and moderate-to-severe dependence were independently associated with in-hospital mortality; comorbidities were not predictive. At admission, independent risk factors for death were: oxygen saturation < 90%; temperature ≥ 37.8°C; quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score ≥ 2; and unilateral-bilateral infiltrates on chest x-rays. Some analytical findings were independent risk factors for death, including estimated glomerular filtration rate < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2; lactate dehydrogenase ≥ 500 U/L; C-reactive protein ≥ 80 mg/L; neutrophils ≥ 7.5 × 103/μL; lymphocytes < 0.8 × 103/μL; and monocytes < 0.5 × 103/μL.

CONCLUSIONS

This first large, multicenter cohort of very old inpatients with COVID-19 shows that age, male sex, and poor preadmission functional status-not comorbidities-are independently associated with in-hospital mortality. Severe COVID-19 at admission is related to poor prognosis.

Best practice: antibiotic decision-making in ICUs

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A major challenge in the ICU is optimization of antibiotic use. This review assesses current understanding of core best practices supporting and promoting astute antibiotic decision-making.

RECENT FINDINGS

Limiting exposure to the shortest effective duration is the cornerstone of antibiotic decision-making. The decision to initiate antibiotics should include assessment of risk for resistance. This requires synthesis of patient-level data and environmental factors to determine whether delayed initiation could be considered in some patients with suspected sepsis until sensitivity data is available. Until improved stratification scores and clinically meaningful cut-off values to identify MDR are available and externally validated, decisions as to which empiric antibiotic is used should rely on syndromic antibiograms and institutional guidance. Optimization of initial and maintenance doses is another enabler of enhanced outcome. Stewardship practices must be streamlined by re-assessment to minimize negative effects, such as a potential increase in duration of therapy and increased risk of collateral damage from exposure to multiple, sequential antibiotics that may ensue from de-escalation.

SUMMARY

Multiple challenges and research priorities for antibiotic optimization remain; however, the best stewardship practices should be identified and entrenched in daily practice. Reducing unnecessary exposure remains a vital strategy to limit resistance development.