Clinical performance of early warning scoring systems for identifying sepsis among anti-hypertensive agent users

Comparing 11 early warning scores and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores (EWSs) and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong. The primary outcome was sepsis (Sepsis-3 definition) within 48 h of ED presentation. Using c-statistics and the DeLong test, we compared 11 EWSs, including the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), Modified Early Warning Score, and Worthing Physiological Scoring System (WPS), etc., and three shock indices (the shock index [SI], modified shock index [MSI], and diastolic shock index [DSI]), with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) in predicting the primary outcome, intensive care unit admission, and mortality at different time points.

RESULTS

We analyzed 601 patients, of whom 166 (27.6%) developed sepsis. NEWS2 had the highest point estimate (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] 0.75, 95%CI 0.70-0.79) and was significantly better than SIRS, qSOFA, other EWSs and shock indices, except WPS, at predicting the primary outcome. However, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2 ≥ 5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45 (95%CI 0.37-0.52) and 0.88 (95%CI 0.85-0.91), respectively. The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point.

CONCLUSION

NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

Development and Validation of a Novel Method for Converting the Japan Coma Scale to Glasgow Coma Scale

BACKGROUND

The Japan Coma Scale (JCS) is the most frequently adopted method for evaluating level of consciousness in Japan. However, no validated method for converting the JCS to the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) exists. The aims of the present study were to develop and validate a method to convert the JCS to GCS.

METHODS

This is a multicenter retrospective analysis involving three emergency departments (EDs) in Japan. We included all adult patients who visited the ED between 2017 and 2020. The participating facilities were divided into two cohorts-one cohort to develop a table to convert the JCS to GCS (development cohort), and the other cohort to validate the conversion table (validation cohort). The conversion table of the JCS to GCS was developed based on the median values of the GCS. The outcome was the concordance rate between the JCS and GCS.

RESULTS

We identified 8,194 eligible patients. The development cohort included 7,373 patients and the validation cohort included 821 patients. In the validation cohort, the absolute and relative concordance rates were 80.3% (95% confidence interval, 77.4-82.9%) and 93.2% (95% confidence interval, 91.2-94.8%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study developed and validated a novel method for converting the JCS to GCS. Assuming the offset by a single category between the JCS and GCS is acceptable, the concordance rate was over 90% in the general adult patient population visiting the ED. The conversion method may assist researchers to convert JCS scores into GCS scores, which are more commonly recognized among global audiences.

The United Kingdom's National Early Warning Score: should everyone use it? A narrative review

This review critiques the benefits and drawbacks of the United Kingdom's National Early Warning Score (NEWS). Potential developments for the future are considered, as well as the role for NEWS in an emergency department (ED). The ability of NEWS to predict death within 24 h has been well validated in multiple clinical settings. It provides a common language for the assessment of clinical severity and can be used to trigger clinical interventions. However, it should not be used as the only metric for risk stratification as its ability to predict mortality beyond 24 h is not reliable and greatly influenced by other factors. The main drawbacks of NEWS are that measuring it requires trained professionals, it is time consuming and prone to calculation error. NEWS is recommended for use in acute UK hospitals, where it is linked to an escalation policy that reflects postgraduate experience; patients with lower NEWS are first assessed by a junior clinician and those with higher scores by more senior staff. This policy was based on expert opinion that did not consider workload implications. Nevertheless, its implementation has been shown to improve the efficient recording of vital signs. How and who should respond to different NEWS levels is uncertain and may vary according to the clinical setting and resources available. In the ED, simple triage scores which are quicker and easier to use may be more appropriate determinants of acuity. However, any alternative to NEWS should be easier and cheaper to use and provide evidence of outcome improvement.

The prognostic utility of prehospital qSOFA in addition to emergency department qSOFA for sepsis in patients with suspected infection: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) was widely used to estimate the risks of sepsis in patients with suspected infection in the prehospital and emergency department (ED) settings. Due to the insufficient sensitivity of qSOFA on arrival at the ED (ED qSOFA), the Surviving Sepsis Campaign 2021 recommended against using qSOFA as a single screening tool for sepsis. However, it remains unclear whether the combined use of prehospital and ED qSOFA improves its sensitivity for identifying patients at a higher risk of sepsis at the ED.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data from the ED of a tertiary medical center in Japan from April 2018 through March 2021. Among all adult patients (aged ≥18 years) transported by ambulance to the ED with suspected infection, we identified patients who were subsequently diagnosed with sepsis based on the Sepsis-3 criteria. We compared the predictive abilities of prehospital qSOFA, ED qSOFA, and the sum of prehospital and ED qSOFA (combined qSOFA) for sepsis in patients with suspected infection at the ED.

RESULTS

Among 2,407 patients with suspected infection transported to the ED by ambulance, 369 (15%) patients were subsequently diagnosed with sepsis, and 217 (9%) died during hospitalization. The sensitivity of prehospital qSOFA ≥2 and ED qSOFA ≥2 were comparable (c-statistics for sepsis [95%CI], 0.57 [0.52-0.62] vs. 0.55 [0.50-0.60]). However, combined qSOFA (cutoff, ≥3 [max 6]) was more sensitive than ED qSOFA (cutoff, ≥2) for identifying sepsis (0.67 [95%CI, 0.62-0.72] vs. 0.55 [95%CI, 0.50-0.60]). Using combined qSOFA, we identified 44 (12%) out of 369 patients who were subsequently diagnosed with sepsis, which would have been missed using ED qSOFA alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Using both prehospital and ED qSOFA could improve the screening ability of sepsis among patients with suspected infection at the ED.

Characteristics of patients with hip fractures and comorbid fall-related injuries in the emergency department

Aim

Hip fracture is one of the most common fall‐related injuries in the elderly population. Although falls may cause multiple types of injuries, no study has investigated the details of fall‐related injuries accompanied by hip fractures. This study aimed to characterize the features of such injuries.

Methods

This is a cross‐sectional study using data from four tertiary emergency departments in Japan. We identified patients diagnosed with hip fracture including femoral neck fracture, trochanter fracture, or subtrochanteric fracture from May 12, 2014 to July 12, 2021. Among patients with hip fracture, we included those with fall‐related hip fracture. We excluded patients ages <40 years old and whose fall was high energy onset, defined as fall from more than three steps or 1 m.

Results

Among 326 emergency departments patients diagnosed with fall‐related hip fracture, 288 patients were eligible for the analysis. Seventeen patients (6%) had injuries in addition to hip fractures. The most frequent injury was upper limb injury (e.g., distal radial fracture; n = 5, 30%), followed by head injury (e.g., subdural hematoma; n = 4, 24%), chest injury (e.g., pneumothorax; n = 2, 12%), and trunk injury (vertebral compression fracture; n = 2, 12%). There were no significantly different clinical characteristics between patients with hip injuries and those without.

Conclusion

A total of 6% of patients diagnosed with hip fracture had other fall‐related injuries. The most frequent were upper limb injury and head injury. Our findings underscore the importance of whole‐body assessment in patients with fall‐related hip fracture in the emergency department.

A systematic review of the discrimination and absolute mortality predicted by the National Early Warning Scores according to different cut-off values and prediction windows

BACKGROUND

Although early warning scores were intended to simply identify patients in need of life-saving interventions, prediction has become their commonest metric. This review examined variation in the ability of the National Early Warning Scores (NEWS) in adult patients to predict absolute mortality at different times and cut-offs values.

METHOD

Following PRISMA guidelines, all studies reporting NEWS and NEWS2 providing enough information to fulfil the review's aims were included.

RESULTS

From 121 papers identified, the average area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (AUC) for mortality declined from 0.90 at 24-hours to 0.76 at 30-days. Studies with a low overall mortality had a higher AUC for 24-hour mortality, as did general ward patients compared to patients seen earlier in their treatment. 24-hour mortality increased from 1.8% for a NEWS ≥3 to 7.8% for NEWS ≥7. Although 24-hour mortality for NEWS <3 was only 0.07% these deaths accounted for 9% of all deaths within 24-hours; for NEWS <7 24-hour mortality was 0.23%, which accounted for 44% of all 24-hour deaths. Within 30-days of a NEWS recording 22% of all deaths occurred in patients with a NEWS <3, 52% in patients with a NEWS <5, and 75% in patient with a NEWS <7.

CONCLUSION

NEWS reliably identifies patients most and least likely to die within 24-hours, which is what it was designed to do. However, many patients identified to have a low risk of imminent death die within 30-days. NEWS mortality predictions beyond 24-hours are unreliable.

External validation of the POP score for predicting obstetric and gynecological diseases in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

The POP score was developed as an easy screening tool for predicting obstetrics and gynecological (OBGYN) diseases in the emergency department (ED), and consists of three predictors, each representing one point: past history of OBGYN diseases, no fever or digestive symptoms, and peritoneal irritation signs). However, its external validity has not yet been evaluated. We aimed to perform the external validation of the POP score.

METHODS

This is a multi-center, retrospective cohort study using ED data of three tertiary care hospitals in Japan between Jan 2017 and October 2020. Young adult women aged 16-49 years with abdominal pain were included in the analysis. The probability of OBGYN diseases was calculated using a logistic regression model of the POP score. Predictions were compared with observations to evaluate the calibration of the model. Further, the diagnostic ability (sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio) of the POP score was evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 66,599 ED visits, 1026 young adult women (median age [interquartile range]: 31 [23-41] years) were included for the analysis. The c-statistic was 0.645 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.603-0.687]. The predicted probabilities of OBGYN diseases was generally well-calibrated to the observations. When the cut-off was set between 2 and 3 points for the ruling in of OBGYN diseases, the positive likelihood ratio was 9.72 [95% CI: 3.33-28.4]. When the cut-off was set between 0 and 1 points for ruling out of OBGYN diseases, negative likelihood ratio was 0.181 [95% CI: 0.059-0.558].

CONCLUSIONS

Using ED data of three tertiary care hospitals, we externally validated the POP score for prediction of OBGYN diseases in the ED. The POP score likely has clinical value for screening OBGYN diseases in young adult women with abdominal pain in the ED.