Prognostic value of prehospital quick sequential organ failure assessment score among patients with suspected infection

Comparison of eight prehospital early warning scores in life-threatening acute respiratory distress: a prospective, observational, multicentre, ambulance-based, external validation study

BACKGROUND

A myriad of early warning scores (EWSs) exist, yet there is a need to identify the most clinically valid score to be used in prehospital respiratory assessments to estimate short-term and midterm mortality, intensive-care unit admission, and airway management in life-threatening acute respiratory distress.

METHODS

This is a prospective, observational, multicentre, ambulance-based, external validation study performed in 44 ambulance services and four hospitals across three Spanish provinces (ie, Salamanca, Segovia, and Valladolid). We identified adults (ie, those aged 18 years and older) discharged to the emergency department with suspected acute respiratory distress. The primary outcome was 2-day all-cause in-hospital mortality, for all the patients or according to prehospital respiratory conditions, including dyspnoea, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), COVID-19, other infections, and other conditions (asthma exacerbation, haemoptysis, and bronchoaspirations). 30-day mortality, intensive-care unit admission, and invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation were secondary outcomes. Eight EWSs, namely, the National Early Warning Score 2, the Modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score, the Rapid Acute Physiology Score, the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score, the CURB-65 Severity Score for Community-Acquired Pneumonia, the BAP-65 Score for Acute Exacerbation of COPD, the Quick COVID-19 Severity Index, and the Modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (mSOFA), were explored to determine their predictive validity through calibration, clinical net benefit as determined through decision curve analysis, and discrimination analysis (area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic [AUROC], compared with Delong's test).

FINDINGS

Between Jan 1, 2020, and Nov 31, 2022, 902 patients were enrolled. The global 2-day mortality rate was 87 (10%); in proportion to various respiratory conditions, the rates were 35 (40%) for dyspnoea, nine (10%) for COPD, 13 (15%) for COVID-19, 28 (32%) for other infections, and two (2%) for others conditions. mSOFA showed the best calibration, a higher net benefit, and the best discrimination (AUROC 0·911, 95% CI 0·86-0·95) for predicting 2-day mortality, and its discrimination was statistically significantly more accurate (p<0·0001) compared with the other scores. The performance of mSOFA for predicting 2-day mortality was higher than the other scores when considering the prehospital respiratory conditions, and was also higher for the secondary outcomes, except for non-invasive mechanical ventilation.

INTERPRETATION

Our results showed that mSOFA outperformed other EWSs. The inclusion of mSOFA in prehospital decision making will entail a quick identification of patients in acute respiratory distress at high risk of deterioration, allowing prioritisation of resources and patient care.

FUNDING

Gerencia Regional de Salud, Public Health System of Castilla y León (GRS Spain).

TRANSLATION

For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

The timing of use of risk stratification tools affects their ability to predict mortality from sepsis. A meta-regression analysis

Background: Risk stratification tools (RSTs) are used in healthcare settings to identify patients at risk of sepsis and subsequent adverse outcomes. In practice RSTs are used on admission and thereafter as ‘trigger’ tools prompting sepsis management. However, studies investigating their performance report scores at a single timepoint which varies in relation to admission. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine if the predictive performance of RSTs is altered by the timing of their use. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-regression analysis of studies published from inception to 31 October 2018, using EMBASE and PubMed databases. Any cohort studies investigating the ability of an RST to predict mortality in adult sepsis patients admitted to hospital, from which a 2x2 table was available or could be constructed, were included. The diagnostic performance of RSTs in predicting mortality was the primary outcome. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and area under the receiver-operating curve (AUROC) were the primary measures, enabling further meta-regression analysis. Results: 47 studies were included, comprising 430,427 patients. Results of bivariate meta-regression analysis found tools using a first-recorded score were less sensitive than those using worst-recorded score (REML regression coefficient 0.57, 95% CI 0.07-1.08). Using worst-recorded score led to a large increase in sensitivity (summary sensitivity 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.83, for worst-recorded scores vs. 0.64 (0.57-0.71) for first-recorded scores). Scoring system type did not have a significant relationship with studies’ predictive ability. The most analysed RSTs were qSOFA (n=37) and EWS (n=14). Further analysis of these RSTs also found timing of their use to be associated with predictive performance. Conclusion: The timing of any RST is paramount to their predictive performance. This must be reflected in their use in practice, and lead to prospective studies in future.

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.

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.

Prehospital lactate clearance is associated with reduced mortality in patients with septic shock

BACKGROUND

Assessment of disease severity in patients with septic shock (SS) is crucial in determining optimal level of care. In both pre- and in-hospital settings, blood lactate measurement is broadly used in combination with the clinical evaluation of patients as the clinical picture alone is not sufficient for assessing disease severity and outcomes.

METHODS

From 15th April 2017 to 15th April 2019, patients with SS requiring prehospital mobile Intensive Care Unit intervention (mICU) were prospectively included in this observational study. Prehospital blood lactate clearance was estimated by the difference between prehospital (time of first contact between the patients and the mICU prior to any treatment) and in-hospital (at hospital admission) blood lactate levels divided by prehospital blood lactate.

RESULTS

Among the 185 patients included in this study, lactate measurement was missing for six (3%) in the prehospital setting and for four (2%) at hospital admission, thus 175 (95%) were analysed for prehospital blood lactate clearance (mean age 70 ± 14 years). Pulmonary, digestive and urinary infections were probably the cause of the SS in respectively 56%, 22% and 10% of the cases. The 30-day overall mortality was 32%. Mean prehospital blood lactate clearance was significantly different between patients who died and those who survived (respectively 0.41 ± 2.50 mmol.l^-1 vs 1.65 ± 2.88 mmol.l^-1, p = 0.007). Cox regression analysis showed that 30-day mortality was associated with prehospital blood lactate clearance > 10% (HRa [CI95] = 0.49 [0.26-0.92], p = 0.028) and prehospital blood lactate clearance < 10% (HRa [CI95] = 2.04 [1.08-3.84], p = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

A prehospital blood lactate clearance < 10% is associated with 30-day mortality increase in patients with SS handled by the prehospital mICU. Further studies will be needed to evaluate if prehospital blood lactate clearance alone or combined with clinical scores could affected the triage decision-making process for those patients.

Pre-Hospital Lactatemia Predicts 30-Day Mortality in Patients with Septic Shock-Preliminary Results from the LAPHSUS Study

Background: Assessment of disease severity in patients with septic shock (SS) is crucial in determining optimal level of care. In both pre- and in-hospital settings, the clinical picture alone is not sufficient for assessing disease severity and outcomes. Because blood lactate level is included in the clinical criteria of SS it should be considered to improve the assessment of its severity. This study aims to investigate the relationship between pre-hospital blood lactate level and 30-day mortality in patients with SS. Methods: From 15 April 2017 to 15 April 2019, patients with SS requiring pre-hospital Mobile Intensive Care Unit intervention (MICU) were prospectively included in the LAPHSUS study, an observational, non-randomized controlled study. Pre-hospital blood lactate levels were measured at the time of first contact between the patients and the MICU. Results: Among the 183 patients with septic shock requiring action by the MICU drawn at random from LAPHSUS study patients, six (3%) were lost to follow-up on the 30th day and thus 177 (97%) were analyzed for blood lactate levels (mean age 70 ± 14 years). Pulmonary, urinary and digestive infections were probably the cause of the SS in respectively 58%, 21% and 11% of the cases. The 30-day overall mortality was 32%. Mean pre-hospital lactatemia was significantly different between patients who died and those who survived (respectively 7.1 ± 4.0 mmol/L vs. 5.9 ± 3.5 mmol/L, p < 10⁻³). Using Cox regression analysis adjusted for potential confounders we showed that a pre-hospital blood lactate level ≥ 4 mmol/L significantly predicted 30-day mortality in patients with SS (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.37, 95%CI (1.01–5.57), p = 0.04). Conclusion: In this study, we showed that pre-hospital lactatemia predicts 30-day mortality in patients with septic shock handled by the MICU. Further studies will be needed to evaluate if pre-hospital lactatemia alone or combined with clinical scores could affect the triage decision-making process for those patients.

Screening strategies to identify sepsis in the prehospital setting: a validation study

BACKGROUND

In the prehospital setting, differentiating patients who have sepsis from those who have infection but no organ dysfunction is important to initiate sepsis treatments appropriately. We aimed to identify which published screening strategies for paramedics to use in identifying patients with sepsis provide the most certainty for prehospital diagnosis.

METHODS

We identified published strategies for screening by paramedics through a literature search. We then conducted a validation study in Alberta, Canada, from April 2015 to March 2016. For adult patients (≥ 18 yr) who were transferred by ambulance, we linked records to an administrative database and then restricted the search to patients with infection diagnosed in the emergency department. For each patient, the classification from each strategy was determined and compared with the diagnosis recorded in the emergency department. For all strategies that generated numeric scores, we constructed diagnostic prediction models to estimate the probability of sepsis being diagnosed in the emergency department.

RESULTS

We identified 21 unique prehospital screening strategies, 14 of which had numeric scores. We linked a total of 131 745 eligible patients to hospital databases. No single strategy had both high sensitivity (overall range 0.02-0.85) and high specificity (overall range 0.38-0.99) for classifying sepsis. However, the Critical Illness Prediction (CIP) score, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and the Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score predicted a low to high probability of a sepsis diagnosis at different scores. The qSOFA identified patients with a 7% (lowest score) to 87% (highest score) probability of sepsis diagnosis.

INTERPRETATION

The CIP, NEWS and qSOFA scores are tools with good predictive ability for sepsis diagnosis in the prehospital setting. The qSOFA score is simple to calculate and may be useful to paramedics in screening patients with possible sepsis.

Use of prehospital qSOFA in predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with suspected infection: A retrospective cohort study

Background

The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score has recently been introduced to the emergency department (ED) and wards, and it predicted a higher number of deaths among patients with sepsis compared with baseline risk. However, studies about the application of the qSOFA score are limited in prehospital settings. Thus, this study aimed to assess the performance of prehospital qSOFA score in predicting the risk of mortality among patients with infection.

Methods

This single center, retrospective cohort study was conducted in a Japanese tertiary care teaching hospital between April 2016 and March 2017. We enrolled all consecutive adult patients transported to the hospital by ambulance and admitted to the ED due to a suspected infection. We calculated the prehospital qSOFA score using the first vital sign obtained at the scene by emergency medical service (EMS) providers. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the association between prehospital qSOFA positivity and in-hospital mortality.

Results

Among the 925 patients admitted to the ED due to a suspected infection, 51.1% (473/925) were prehospital qSOFA-positive and 48.9% (452/925) were prehospital qSOFA-negative. The in-hospital mortality rates were 14.0% (66/473) in prehospital qSOFA-positive patients and 6.0% (27/452) in prehospital qSOFA-negative patients. The Cox proportional hazard regression model revealed a strong association between prehospital qSOFA score and in-hospital mortality (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.41, 95% confidence interval: 1.51–3.98; p <0.01).

Conclusions

Among the patients with suspected infection who were admitted at the ED, a strong association was observed between the prehospital qSOFA score and in-hospital mortality. In order to use this score in clinical practice, future study is necessary to evaluate how infection is suspected in the prehospital arena.

Comparative study on quick sequential organ failure assessment, systemic inflammatory response syndrome and the shock index in prehospital emergency patients: single-site retrospective study

Aim

The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score, shock index (SI), and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria are simple indicators for the mortality of patients in the emergency department (ED). These simple indicators using only vital signs might be more useful in prehospital care than in the ED due to their quick calculation. However, these indicators have not been compared in prehospital settings. The aim of the present study is to compare these indicators measured in prehospital care and verify whether the qSOFA score is useful for prehospital triage.

Methods

We undertook a single‐site retrospective study on patients transferred by ambulance to the Kumamoto Medical Center ED (Kumamoto, Japan) between January 2015 and December 2016. We compared areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves of the qSOFA score, SI, and SIRS criteria measured in prehospital care. We also carried out sensitivity and specificity analyses using the Youden index.

Results

A total of 4,827 patients were included in the present study. The AUROC (95% confidence interval) of the qSOFA score for in‐hospital mortality was 0.64 (0.61–0.67), which was significantly higher than those of the SIRS criteria (0.59 [0.56–0.62]) and SI (0.58 [0.54–0.62]). According to the optimal cut‐off values (qSOFA ≥ 2) decided on as the Youden index, the sensitivity of the qSOFA score was 52.3% and its specificity was 69.9%.

Conclusions

The qSOFA score had the highest AUROC among three indicators. However, it might not be practical in actual prehospital triage due to its low sensitivity.