qSOFA Has Poor Sensitivity for Prehospital Identification of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock

Correlation of vital sign centiles with in-hospital outcomes among adults encountered by emergency medical services

BACKGROUND

Vital signs are a critical component of the prehospital assessment. Prior work has suggested that vital signs may vary in their distribution by age. These differences in vital signs may have implications on in-hospital outcomes or be utilized within prediction models. We sought to (1) identify empirically derived (unadjusted) cut points for vital signs for adult patients encountered by emergency medical services (EMS), (2) evaluate differences in age-adjusted cutoffs for vital signs in this population, and (3) evaluate unadjusted and age-adjusted vital signs measures with in-hospital outcomes.

METHODS

We used two multiagency EMS data sets to derive (National EMS Information System from 2018) and assess agreement (ESO, Inc., from 2019 to 2021) of vital signs cutoffs among adult EMS encounters. We compared unadjusted to age-adjusted cutoffs. For encounters within the ESO sample that had in-hospital data, we compared the association of unadjusted cutoffs and age-adjusted cutoffs with hospitalization and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

We included 13,405,858 and 18,682,684 encounters in the derivation and validation samples, respectively. Both extremely high and extremely low vital signs demonstrated stepwise increases in admission and in-hospital mortality. When evaluating age-based centiles with vital signs, a gradual decline was noted at all extremes of heart rate (HR) with increasing age. Extremes of systolic blood pressure at upper and lower margins were greater in older age groups relative to younger age groups. Respiratory rate (RR) cut points were similar for all adult age groups. Compared to unadjusted vital signs, age-adjusted vital signs had slightly increased accuracy for HR and RR but lower accuracy for SBP for outcomes of mortality and hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

We describe cut points for vital signs for adults in the out-of-hospital setting that are associated with both mortality and hospitalization. While we found age-based differences in vital signs cutoffs, this adjustment only slightly improved model performance for in-hospital outcomes.

Validation of SeptiCyte RAPID to Discriminate Sepsis from Non-Infectious Systemic Inflammation

(1) Background: SeptiCyte RAPID is a molecular test for discriminating sepsis from non-infectious systemic inflammation, and for estimating sepsis probabilities. The objective of this study was the clinical validation of SeptiCyte RAPID, based on testing retrospectively banked and prospectively collected patient samples. (2) Methods: The cartridge-based SeptiCyte RAPID test accepts a PAXgene blood RNA sample and provides sample-to-answer processing in ~1 h. The test output (SeptiScore, range 0-15) falls into four interpretation bands, with higher scores indicating higher probabilities of sepsis. Retrospective (N = 356) and prospective (N = 63) samples were tested from adult patients in ICU who either had the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), or were suspected of having/diagnosed with sepsis. Patients were clinically evaluated by a panel of three expert physicians blinded to the SeptiCyte test results. Results were interpreted under either the Sepsis-2 or Sepsis-3 framework. (3) Results: Under the Sepsis-2 framework, SeptiCyte RAPID performance for the combined retrospective and prospective cohorts had Areas Under the ROC Curve (AUCs) ranging from 0.82 to 0.85, a negative predictive value of 0.91 (sensitivity 0.94) for SeptiScore Band 1 (score range 0.1-5.0; lowest risk of sepsis), and a positive predictive value of 0.81 (specificity 0.90) for SeptiScore Band 4 (score range 7.4-15; highest risk of sepsis). Performance estimates for the prospective cohort ranged from AUC 0.86-0.95. For physician-adjudicated sepsis cases that were blood culture (+) or blood, urine culture (+)(+), 43/48 (90%) of SeptiCyte scores fell in Bands 3 or 4. In multivariable analysis with up to 14 additional clinical variables, SeptiScore was the most important variable for sepsis diagnosis. A comparable performance was obtained for the majority of patients reanalyzed under the Sepsis-3 definition, although a subgroup of 16 patients was identified that was called septic under Sepsis-2 but not under Sepsis-3. (4) Conclusions: This study validates SeptiCyte RAPID for estimating sepsis probability, under both the Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 frameworks, for hospitalized patients on their first day of ICU admission.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHOCK INDEX, MODIFIED SHOCK INDEX, AND AGE SHOCK INDEX AND 28-DAY MORTALITY AMONG PATIENTS WITH PREHOSPITAL SEPTIC SHOCK

BACKGROUND

A relative hypovolemia occurs during septic shock (SS); the early phase is clinically reflected by tachycardia and low blood pressure. In the prehospital setting, simple objective tools to assess hypovolemia severity are needed to optimize triaging.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between shock index (SI), diastolic SI (DSI), modified SI (MSI), and age SI (ASI) and 28-day mortality of patients with SS initially cared for in a prehospital setting of a mobile intensive care unit (MICU).

METHODS

From April 6, 2016 through December 31, 2021, 530 patients with SS cared for at a prehospital MICU were analyzed retrospectively. Initial SI, MSI, DSI, and ASI values, that is, first measurement after MICU arrival to the scene were calculated. A propensity score analysis with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method was used to assess the relationship between SI, DSI, MSI, and ASI and 28-day mortality.

RESULTS

SS resulted mainly from pulmonary, digestive, and urinary infections in 44%, 25%, and 17% of patients. The 28-day overall mortality was 31%. IPTW propensity score analysis indicated a significant relationship between 28-day mortality and SI (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.13; 95% CI 1.01-1.26; p = 0.04), DSI (aOR 1.16; 95% CI 1.06-1.34; p = 0.03), MSI (aOR 1.03; 95% CI 1.01-1.17; p = 0.03), and ASI (aOR 3.62; 95% CI 2.63-5.38; p < 10-6).

CONCLUSIONS

SI, DSI, MSI, and ASI were significantly associated with 28-day mortality among patients with SS cared for at a prehospital MICU. Further studies are needed to confirm the usefulness of SI and SI derivates for prehospital SS optimal triaging.

The onset of sepsis as experienced by patients and family members: A qualitative interview study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To explore the onset of sepsis based on patients' and family members' experiences.

BACKGROUND

Knowledge about the onset of sepsis is limited among patients and their families, which makes early recognition of sepsis difficult. Previous studies argue that their stories are important to recognising sepsis and reduced suffering and mortality.

DESIGN

A descriptive design with a qualitative approach was used.

METHODS

In total, 29 patients and family members participated in 24 interviews with open-ended questions, including five dyadic and 19 individual interviews. The interviews were conducted during 2021, and participants were recruited from a sepsis group on social media. A thematic analysis based on descriptive phenomenology was performed. The study followed the COREQ checklist.

FINDINGS

Two themes emerged from the experiences: (1) When health changes into something unknown, including the two subthemes; Bodily symptoms and signs being vague but still tangible and Feelings of uncertainty, and (2) Turning points when warnings signs are deemed as serious, including the two subthemes Passing borders when feeling out of control and Difficulties understanding the seriousness.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' and family members' stories of the onset of sepsis indicate that symptoms and signs appeared insidiously and then noticeably worsen. The symptoms and signs seemed not be attributed to sepsis; instead, there was uncertainty about what the symptoms and signs meant. It was mainly family members who possibly understood the seriousness of the disease.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE

Patients' experiences of their symptoms and signs and family members' unique knowledge of the patient, indicate that healthcare professionals should listen and try to understand what the patient and family members are telling and take their concerns seriously. How the condition appears, and family members' concerns are important pieces of the assessment to recognise patients with sepsis.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients and family members contributed to the data collected.

Machine Learning-Based Early Prediction of Sepsis Using Electronic Health Records: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Sepsis, a life-threatening infection-induced inflammatory condition, has significant global health impacts. Timely detection is crucial for improving patient outcomes as sepsis can rapidly progress to severe forms. The application of machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) to predict sepsis using electronic health records (EHRs) has gained considerable attention for timely intervention.

METHODS

PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Google Scholar, and Scopus were searched for relevant studies. All studies that used ML/DL to detect or early-predict the onset of sepsis in the adult population using EHRs were considered. Data were extracted and analyzed from all studies that met the criteria and were also evaluated for their quality.

RESULTS

This systematic review examined 1942 articles, selecting 42 studies while adhering to strict criteria. The chosen studies were predominantly retrospective (n = 38) and spanned diverse geographic settings, with a focus on the United States. Different datasets, sepsis definitions, and prevalence rates were employed, necessitating data augmentation. Heterogeneous parameter utilization, diverse model distribution, and varying quality assessments were observed. Longitudinal data enabled early sepsis prediction, and quality criteria fulfillment varied, with inconsistent funding-article quality correlation.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review underscores the significance of ML/DL methods for sepsis detection and early prediction through EHR data.

Prehospital pulse pressure and mortality of septic shock patients cared for by a mobile intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Septic shock medical treatment relies on a bundle of care including antibiotic therapy and hemodynamic optimisation. Hemodynamic optimisation consists of fluid expansion and norepinephrine administration aiming to optimise cardiac output to reach a mean arterial pressure of 65mmHg. In the prehospital setting, direct cardiac output assessment is difficult because of the lack of invasive and non-invasive devices. This study aims to assess the relationship between 30-day mortality and (i) initial pulse pressure (iPP) as (ii) pulse pressure variation (dPP) during the prehospital stage among patients cared for SS by a prehospital mobile intensive care unit (MICU).

METHODS

From May 09th, 2016 to December 02nd, 2021, septic shock patients requiring MICU intervention were retrospectively analysed. iPP was calculated as the difference between systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) at the first contact between the patient and the MICU team prior to any treatment and, dPP as the difference between the final PP (the difference between SBP and DBP at the end of the prehospital stage) and iPP divided by prehospital duration. To consider cofounders, the propensity score method was used to assess the relationship between (i) iPP < 40mmHg, (ii) positive dPP and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Among the 530 patients analysed, pulmonary, digestive, and urinary infections were suspected among 43%, 25% and 17% patients, respectively. The 30-day overall mortality rate reached 31%. Cox regression analysis showed an association between 30-day mortality and (i) iPP < 40mmHg; aHR of 1.61 [1.03-2.51], and (ii) a positive dPP; aHR of 0.56 [0.36-0.88].

CONCLUSION

The current study reports an association between 30-day mortality rate and iPP < 40mmHg and a positive dPP among septic shock patients cared for by a prehospital MICU. A negative dPP could be helpful to identify septic shock with higher risk of poor outcome despite prehospital hemodynamic optimization.

Evidence for Use of Validated Sepsis Screening Tools in the Prehospital Population: A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Early detection and treatment of sepsis improves chances of survival; however, sepsis is often difficult to diagnose initially. This is especially true in the prehospital setting, where resources are scarce, yet time is of great significance. Early warning scores (EWS) based on vital signs were originally developed to guide medical practitioners in determining the degree of illness of a patient in the in-patient setting. These EWS were adapted for use in the prehospital setting to predict critical illness and sepsis. We performed a scoping review to evaluate the existing evidence for use of validated EWS to identify prehospital sepsis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search using the CINAHL, Embase, Ovid-MEDLINE, and PubMed databases on September 1, 2022. Articles that examined the use of EWS to identify prehospital sepsis were included and assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included in this review: one validation study, two prospective studies, two systematic reviews, and 18 retrospective studies. Study characteristics, classification statistics, and primary conclusions of each article were extracted and tabulated. Classification statistics varied markedly for prehospital sepsis identification across all included EWS: sensitivities ranged from 0.02-1.00, specificities from 0.07-1.00, and PPV and NPV from 0.19-0.98 and 0.32-1.00, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

All studies demonstrated inconsistency for the identification of prehospital sepsis. The variety of available EWS and study design heterogeneity suggest it is unlikely that new research can identify a single gold standard score. Based on our findings in this scoping review, we recommend future efforts focus on combining standardized prehospital care with clinical judgment to provide timely interventions for unstable patients where infection is considered a likely etiology, in addition to improving sepsis education for prehospital clinicians. At most, EWS can be used as an adjunct to these efforts, but they should not be relied on alone for prehospital sepsis identification.

Application Prospect of the SOFA Score and Related Modification Research Progress in Sepsis

In 2016, the SOFA score was proposed as the main evaluation system for diagnosis in the definition of sepsis 3.0, and the SOFA score has become a new research focus in sepsis. Some people are skeptical about diagnosing sepsis using the SOFA score. Experts and scholars from different regions have proposed different, modified versions of SOFA score to make up for the related problems with the use of the SOFA score in the diagnosis of sepsis. While synthesizing the different improved versions of SOFA proposed by experts and scholars in various regions, this paper also summarizes the relevant definitions of sepsis put forward in recent years to build a clear, improved application framework of SOFA score. In addition, the comparison between machine learning and SOFA scores related to sepsis is described and discussed in the article. Taken together, by summarizing the application of the improved SOFA score proposed in recent years in the related definition of sepsis, we believe that the SOFA score is still an effective means of diagnosing sepsis, but in the process of the continuous refinement and development of sepsis in the future, the SOFA score needs to be further refined and improved to provide more accurate coping strategies for different patient populations or application directions regarding sepsis. Against the big data background, machine learning has immeasurable value and significance, but its future applications should add more humanistic references and assistance.

Prediction of the Risk of Sepsis by Using Analysis of Plasma Glucose and Serum Lactate in Ambulance Services: A Prospective Study

INTRODUCTION

The early recognition of patients with sepsis is difficult and the initial assessment outside of hospitals is challenging for ambulance clinicians (ACs). Indicators that ACs can use to recognize sepsis early are beneficial for patient outcomes. Research suggests that elevated point-of-care (POC) plasma glucose and serum lactate levels may help to predict sepsis in the ambulance service (AS) setting.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the elevation of POC plasma glucose and serum lactate levels may help to predict Sepsis-3 in the AS.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was performed in the AS setting of Gothenburg in Sweden from the beginning of March 2018 through the end of September 2019. The criteria for sampling POC plasma glucose and serum lactate levels in the AS setting were high or intermediate risk according to the Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System (RETTS), as red, orange, yellow, and green if the respiratory rate was >22 breaths/minutes. Sepsis-3 were identified retrospectively. A primary and secondary analyses were carried out. The primary analysis included patients cared for in the AS and emergency department (ED) and were hospitalized. In the secondary analysis, patients who were only cared for in the AS and ED without being hospitalized were also included. To evaluate the predictive ability of these biomarkers, the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were used.

RESULTS

A total of 1,057 patients were included in the primary analysis and 1,841 patients were included in the secondary analysis. In total, 253 patients met the Sepsis-3 criteria (in both analyses). The AUC for POC plasma glucose and serum lactate levels showed low accuracy in predicting Sepsis-3 in both the primary and secondary analyses. Among all hospitalized patients, regardless of Sepsis-3, more than two-thirds had elevated plasma glucose and nearly one-half had elevated serum lactate when measured in the AS.

CONCLUSIONS

As individual biomarkers, an elevated POC plasma glucose and serum lactate were not associated with an increased likelihood of Sepsis-3 when measured in the AS in this study. However, the high rate of elevation of these biomarkers before arrival in hospital highlights that their role in clinical decision making at this early stage needs further evaluation, including other endpoints than Sepsis-3.

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.

Screening auf Sepsis in der Notfallmedizin – qSOFA ist uns nicht genug

Hintergrund

Die Sepsis ist eine häufige und lebensbedrohliche Komplikation einer akuten Infektion. In der Notfallmedizin hat sich zum Screening auf Sepsis der Quick Sequential-Organ-Failure-Assessment(qSOFA)-Score etabliert. Bereits mit der Einführung des Scores wurde dessen schwache Sensitivität kritisiert. Nun fordern aktuelle Leitlinien, den qSOFA-Score nicht mehr zum Screening auf Sepsis einzusetzen. Als eine Alternative wird der National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) vorgeschlagen.

Ziel der Arbeit

In einer Subanalyse einer Kohorte von notfallmedizinischen Patient*innen soll die diagnostische Aussagekraft des qSOFA-Scores und des NEWS2 zur Erkennung einer Sepsis verglichen werden. Zusätzlich soll gezeigt werden, inwieweit mithilfe von abweichenden Vitalparametern bereits eine Risikoerhöhung für eine Sepsis ableitbar ist.

Methodik

Mittels AUROC (Area Under Receiver Operating Characteristics) und Odds Ratios wurden die Scores bzw. die Vitalparameter auf ihre Fähigkeit untersucht, septische Patient*innen zu erkennen.

Ergebnisse

Von 312 eingeschlossenen Patient*innen wurde bei 17,9 % eine Sepsis diagnostiziert. Der qSOFA-Score erkannte eine Sepsis mit einer AUROC von 0,77 (NEWS2 0,81). Für qSOFA fand sich eine Sensitivität von 57 % (Spezifität 83 %), für NEWS2 96 % (Spezifität 45 %). Die Analyse der einzelnen Vitalparameter zeigte, dass unter Patient*innen mit einer akuten Infektion eine Vigilanzminderung als deutliches Warnsignal für eine Sepsis zu werten ist.

Diskussion

In der Notfallmedizin sollte qSOFA nicht als alleiniges Tool für das Screening auf Sepsis verwendet werden. Bei Verdacht auf eine akute Infektion sollten grundsätzlich sämtliche Vitalparameter erfasst werden, um das Vorliegen einer akuten Organschädigung und somit einen septischen Krankheitsverlauf frühzeitig zu erkennen.

Graphic abstract

Validation of Sepsis-3 using survival analysis and clinical evaluation of quick SOFA, SIRS, and burn-specific SIRS for sepsis in burn patients with suspected infection

PURPOSE

Sepsis-3 is a life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by dysregulated host responses to infection; and defined using the Sepsis-3 criteria, introduced in 2016, however, the criteria need to be validated in specific clinical fields. We investigated mortality prediction and compared the diagnostic performance of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), and burn-specific SIRS (bSIRS) in burn patients.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study examined burn patients in Seoul, Korea during January 2010-December 2020. Overall, 1,391 patients with suspected infection were divided into four sepsis groups using SOFA, qSOFA, SIRS, and burn-specific SIRS.

RESULTS

Hazard ratios (HRs) of all unadjusted models were statistically significant; however, the HR (0.726, p = 0.0080.001) in the SIRS ≥2 group is below 1. In the adjusted model, HRs of the SOFA ≥2 (2.426, <0.001), qSOFA ≥2 (7.198, p<0.001), and SIRS ≥2 (0.575, p<0.001) groups were significant. The diagnostic performance of dichotomized qSOFA, SIRS, and bSIRS for sepsis was defined by the Sepsis-3 criteria. The mean onset day was 4.13±2.97 according to Sepsis-3. The sensitivity of SIRS (0.989, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.982-0.994) was higher than that of qSOFA (0.841, 95% CI: 0.819-0.861) and bSIRS (0.803, 95% CI: 0.779-0.825). Specificities of qSOFA (0.929, 95% CI: 0.876-0.964) and bSIRS (0.922, 95% CI: 0.868-0.959) were higher than those of SIRS (0.461, 95% CI: 0.381-0.543).

CONCLUSION

Sepsis-3 is a good alternative diagnostic tool because it reflects sepsis severity without delaying diagnosis. SIRS showed higher sensitivity than qSOFA and bSIRS and may therefore more adequately diagnose sepsis.

Accuracy of Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score & Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Criteria in Predicting Adverse Outcomes in Emergency Surgical Patients With Suspected Sepsis: A Prospective Observational Study

Purpose: Due to the mixed population enrolled in different studies i.e., medical and surgical cases, conflicting data exists about the accuracy of quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) scores in predicting adverse outcomes in patients with suspected sepsis presenting to the surgical emergency.

Method: A prospective observational study was done in the department of surgery of a tertiary teaching hospital, India from June 2018 to July 2019. Consecutive patients who visited the surgical emergency department with suspected sepsis were included. Patients were followed up until hospital discharge or death.

Results: Of the 410 patients screened, 287 were included in the analysis. The median age was 52 years (interquartile range, 41 to 61years) and 208 (72.8%) were men. Around 56.8% of patients had intra-abdominal pathology, and 43.2% had skin and soft -tissue infection. Sixty-nine (24%) patients died during their hospitalization, 98 (34.1%) patients had organ dysfunction, and 168 (58.5%) patients needed admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). A higher qSOFA score (≥2) was associated with organ dysfunction, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality. The specificity, positive predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of qSOFA for organ dysfunction (85.7%, 67.8%, 76.3%), ICU admission (92.4%, 89.3%, 64.5%), and in-hospital mortality (81.6%, 52.4%, 77.4%) was higher than SIRS. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for qSOFA for these variables was also higher than for SIRS (0.826 vs. 0.524, 0.823 vs. 0.577, and 0.823 vs. 0.555, respectively).

Conclusion: qSOFA is a better model for predicting adverse outcomes and mortality, organ dysfunction, and ICU admission in surgical patients. However, SIRS indicates intervention requirements in a surgical patient better than qSOFA.

Association between prehospital shock index variation and 28-day mortality among patients with septic shock

PURPOSE

Septic shock (SS) hyperdynamic phase is characterized by tachycardia and low-blood pressure reflecting the relative hypovolemia. Shock index (SI), the ratio between heart rate and systolic blood pressure, is a simple objective tool, usable for SS prognosis assessment. This study aims to evaluate the relationship between prehospital SI variation and 28-day mortality of SS patients initially cared for in prehospital setting by a mobile intensive care unit (mICU).

METHODS

From April 6^th, 2016 to December 31^st, 2020, 406 patients with SS requiring prehospital mICU were retrospectively analyzed. Initial SI, i.e. first measurement after mICU arrival to the scene, and final SI, i.e. last measurement of the prehospital stage, were used to calculate delta SI (initial SI-final SI) and to define positive and negative delta SI. A survival analysis after propensity score matching compared the 28-day mortality of SS patients with positive/negative delta SI.

RESULTS

The main suspected origins of infection were pulmonary (42%), digestive (25%) and urinary (17%). The 28-day overall mortality reached 29%. Cox regression analysis revealed a significant association between 28-day mortality and delta SI. A negative delta SI was associated with an increase in mortality (adjusted hazard ratio (HRa) of 1.88 [1.07-3.31] (p = 0.03)), whereas a positive delta SI was associated with a mortality decrease (HRa = 0.53 [0.30-0.94] (p < 10^-3)).

CONCLUSION

Prehospital hemodynamic delta SI among SS patients cared for by a mICU is associated with 28-day mortality. A negative prehospital delta SI could help physicians to identify SS with higher risk of 28-day mortality.

Varying Estimates of Sepsis among Adults Presenting to US Emergency Departments: Estimates from a National Dataset from 2002-2018

Background

A variety of approaches to defining sepsis using administrative datasets have been previously reported. We aimed to compare estimates, demographics, treatment factors, outcomes and longitudinal trends of patients identified with sepsis in United States emergency departments (EDs) using differing sets of sepsis criteria.

Methods

We performed a cross-sectional study using the National Healthcare Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, a complex survey of nonfederal US ED encounters between 2002 to 2018. We obtained survey-weighted population-adjusted encounters of sepsis using the following criteria: explicit sepsis, severe sepsis, and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score combined with the presence of infection.

Results

Age-adjusted for US adults, 18.6, 16.1 and 8.9 encounters per 10 000 population were identified when using the explicit, severe sepsis and qSOFA definitions, respectively. A higher proportion of the explicit cohort was hospitalized and had blood cultures performed, compared to cohorts ascertained using severe sepsis and qSOFA criteria, though confidence intervals overlapped. Antibiotic use was highest in encounters meeting qSOFA criteria. When inspecting unweighted encounters meeting each set of criteria, there was minimal overlap, with only 3% meeting all three. Encounters meeting the explicit and severe sepsis criteria were increasing over time.

Conclusion

The explicit, severe sepsis and qSOFA criteria generated similar annual rates of presentation when applied to US ED encounters, with some evidence of the explicit sepsis cohort being higher acuity. There was minimal overlap of cases and instability in estimates when assessed longitudinally. Our findings inform research efforts to accurately identify sepsis among ED encounters using administrative data.

Combination of Prehospital NT-proBNP with qSOFA and NEWS to Predict Sepsis and Sepsis-Related Mortality

Background. The aim of this study was to assess the role of prehospital point-of-care N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide to predict sepsis, septic shock, or in-hospital sepsis-related mortality. Methods. A prospective, emergency medical service-delivered, prognostic, cohort study of adults evacuated by ambulance and admitted to emergency department between January 2020 and May 2021. 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 of the receiver operating characteristic on the validation cohort. Results. A total of 1,360 patients were enrolled with medical disease in the study. The occurrence of sepsis, septic shock, and in-hospital sepsis-related mortality was 6.4% (67 cases), 4.2% (44 cases), and 6.1% (64 cases). Prehospital National Early Warning Score 2 had superior predictive validity than quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide for detecting sepsis and septic shock, but N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide outperformed both scores in in-hospital sepsis-related mortality estimation. Application of N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide to subgroups of the other two scores improved the identification of sepsis, septic shock, and sepsis-related mortality in the group of patients with low-risk scoring. Conclusions. The incorporation of N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide in prehospital care combined with already existing scores could improve the identification of sepsis, septic shock, and sepsis-related mortality.

Risk prediction of biomarkers for early multiple organ dysfunction in critically ill patients

Background

Shock and organ damage occur in critically ill patients in the emergency department because of biological responses to invasion, and cytokines play an important role in their development. It is important to predict early multiple organ dysfunction (MOD) because it is useful in predicting patient outcomes and selecting treatment strategies. This study examined the accuracy of biomarkers, including interleukin (IL)-6, in predicting early MOD in critically ill patients compared with that of quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA).

Methods

This was a multicenter observational sub-study. Five universities from 2016 to 2018. Data of adult patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome who presented to the emergency department or were admitted to the intensive care unit were prospectively evaluated. qSOFA score and each biomarker (IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor-α, C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin [PCT]) level were assessed on Days 0, 1, and 2. The primary outcome was set as MOD on Day 2, and the area under the curve (AUC) was analyzed to evaluate qSOFA scores and biomarker levels.

Results

Of 199 patients, 38 were excluded and 161 were included. Patients with MOD on Day 2 had significantly higher qSOFA, SOFA, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores and a trend toward worse prognosis, including mortality. The AUC for qSOFA score (Day 0) that predicted MOD (Day 2) was 0.728 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.651–0.794). IL-6 (Day 1) showed the highest AUC among all biomarkers (0.790 [95% CI: 0.711–852]). The combination of qSOFA (Day 0) and IL-6 (Day 1) showed improved prediction accuracy (0.842 [95% CI: 0.771–0.893]). The combination model using qSOFA (Day 1) and IL-6 (Day 1) also showed a higher AUC (0.868 [95% CI: 0.799–0.915]). The combination model of IL-8 and PCT also showed a significant improvement in AUC.

Conclusions

The addition of IL-6, IL-8 and PCT to qSOFA scores improved the accuracy of early MOD prediction.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-021-00534-z.

Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracies of qSOFA, NEWS, and MEWS to Identify Sepsis in Older Inpatients With Suspected Infection

OBJECTIVES

To determine and compare the accuracies of the quick Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and Modified and National Early Warning Scores (NEWS and MEWS) to identify sepsis in older inpatients with suspected infection.

DESIGN

Prospective diagnostic accuracy study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients admitted to an acute geriatric unit of an Italian University Hospital with at least one sepsis risk factor and suspected infection defined as antibiotic prescription and associated culture test during hospital stay.

METHODS

Sepsis diagnosis was defined as the presence on discharge documents of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth revision, Clinical Modification codes for severe sepsis, septic shock, or for infection and acute organ disfunction. For each patient, clinical parameters were evaluated at least twice daily throughout hospital stay; qSOFA, NEWS, and MEWS were derived, and worst scores recorded. Positive cutoffs were set at ≥2, ≥7, and ≥5, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV, respectively), and positive and negative likelihood ratios, as well as areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Among 230 geriatric patients with suspected infection at risk for sepsis (median age 86 years, 49% women), 30.9% had a sepsis diagnosis. A qSOFA ≥2 was recorded in 111 (48.3%) patients, a MEWS ≥5 in 65 (28.3%), and a NEWS ≥7 in 115 (50.0%). The qSOFA showed the highest sensitivity [81.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 71.7%-89.5%], but low specificity (66.7%, 95% CI 59.1%-73.7%), resulting in a high NPV (89.1%; 95% CI 82.7%-93.8%) and poor PPV (52.3%, 95% CI 43.0%-61.4%). The AUROC for qSOFA was 0.76 (95% CI 0.69-0.83), comparable with that of NEWS (0.74, 95% CI 0.67-0.81, P = .44), but significantly higher than that of MEWS (0.70, 95% CI 0.63-0.77, P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Repeated qSOFA determinations are useful to rule out sepsis in geriatric inpatients with suspected infection, but poorly support its diagnosis due to low specificity. More complex MEWS and NEWS do not perform better. Implementation of clinical scores to reliably identify sepsis in older patients is urgently needed.

Diagnostic Performance of Procalcitonin for the Early Identification of Sepsis in Patients with Elevated qSOFA Score at Emergency Admission

Infectious biomarkers such as procalcitonin (PCT) can help overcome the lack of sensitivity of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score for early identification of sepsis in emergency departments (EDs) and thus might be beneficial as point-of-care biomarkers in EDs. Our primary aim was to investigate the diagnostic performance of PCT for the early identification of septic patients and patients likely to develop sepsis within 96 h of admission to an ED among a prospectively selected patient population with elevated qSOFA score. In a large multi-centre prospective cohort study, we included all adult patients (n = 742) with a qSOFA score of at least 1 who presented to the ED. PCT levels were measured upon admission. Of the study population 27.3% (n = 202) were diagnosed with sepsis within the first 96 h. The area under the curve for PCT for the identification of septic patients in EDs was 0.86 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83–0.89). The resultant sensitivity for PCT at a cut-off of 0.5 µg/L was 63.4% (95% CI: 56.3–70.0). Furthermore, specificity was 89.2% (95% CI: 86.3–91.7), the positive predictive value was 68.8% (95% CI: 62.9–74.2), and the negative predictive value was 86.7% (95% CI: 84.4–88.7). The early measurement of PCT in a patient population with elevated qSOFA score served as an effective tool for the early identification of sepsis in ED patients.

Relationship between the prehospital quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and prognosis in patients with sepsis or suspected sepsis: a population-based ORION registry

Aim

The quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) was proposed for use as a simple screening tool for sepsis. In this study, we evaluated the relationship between the prehospital use of qSOFA and prognosis in patients with sepsis or suspected sepsis using the population‐based Osaka Emergency Information Research Intelligent Operation Network (ORION) registry, which compiles prehospital ambulance data and in‐hospital information.

Methods

The study enrolled 437,974 patients in the ORION registry from January 1 to December 31, 2016. We selected hospitalized patients with sepsis or suspected sepsis using the appropriate codes from the International Classification of Diseases revision 10. We excluded patients with: (i) missing data (outcome, Japan Coma Scale, respiratory rate, and blood pressure); (ii) respiratory rate ≥60/min; and (iii) blood pressure ≥250 mmHg. These measures were evaluated by ambulance personnel when they first contacted the patient in the prehospital setting. The primary end‐point was discharge to death.

Results

In total, 12,646 patients (median age, 78 [interquartile range, 65–85] years; male, n = 6,760 [53.5%]) were eligible for our analysis. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusted for confounding factors, the proportion of patients discharged to death was significantly higher for those evaluated as qSOFA positive (≥2 points) than qSOFA negative (≤1 point) (265/2,250 [11.78%] vs. 415/10,396 [3.99%]; adjusted odds ratio 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 2.47–3.43; P < 0.0001). The specificity and sensitivity were 83.4% and 39.0%, respectively, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for qSOFA positive was 0.61.

Conclusions

The qSOFA evaluated by ambulance personnel in the prehospital setting was significantly associated with prognosis in patients with sepsis or suspected sepsis.

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).

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.

Comparison of the quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment and adult sepsis pathway in predicting adverse outcomes among adult patients in general wards: a retrospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) is recommended for use by the most recent international sepsis definition taskforce to identify suspected sepsis in patients outside the intensive care unit (ICU) at risk of adverse outcomes. Evidence of its comparative effectiveness with existing sepsis recognition tools is important to guide decisions about its widespread implementation.

AIM

To compare the performance of qSOFA with the adult sepsis pathway (ASP), a current sepsis recognition tool widely used in NSW hospitals and systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria in predicting adverse outcomes in adult patients on general wards.

METHODS

A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted which included all adults with suspected infections admitted to a Sydney teaching hospital between December 2014 and June 2016. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality with two secondary composite outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 2940 patients with suspected infection, 217 (7.38%) died in-hospital and 702 (23.88%) were subsequently admitted to ICU. The ASP showed the greatest ability to correctly discriminate in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for mortality was 0.76 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74-0.78), compared to 0.64 for the qSOFA tool (95% CI: 0.61-0.67, P < 0.0001). Median time from the first ASP sepsis warning to death was 8.21 days (interquartile range (IQR): 2.29-16.75) while it was 0 days for qSOFA (IQR: 0-2.58).

CONCLUSIONS

The ASP demonstrated both greater prognostic accuracy and earlier warning for in-hospital mortality for adults on hospital wards compared to qSOFA. Hospitals already using ASP may not benefit from switching to the qSOFA tool.

Assessment of patients with suspected sepsis in ambulance services: a qualitative interview study

Background

The initial care of patients with sepsis is commonly performed by ambulance clinicians (ACs). Early identification, care and treatment are vital for patients with sepsis to avoid adverse outcomes. However, knowledge about how patients with sepsis are assessed in ambulance services (AS) by AC is limited. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the meaning of ACs’ lived experiences in assessing patients suspected of having sepsis.

Methods

A descriptive design with a qualitative approach was used. Fourteen ACs from three Swedish ambulance organizations participated in dyadic and individual semistructured interviews. A thematic analysis based on descriptive phenomenology was performed.

Results

AC experiences were grouped into four themes: (1) being influenced by previous experience; (2) searching for clues to the severity of the patient’s condition; (3) feeling confident when signs and symptoms were obvious; and (4) needing health-care professionals for support and consultation.

Conclusions

This study indicates that several factors are important to assessments. ACs needed to engage in an ongoing search for information, discuss the cases with colleagues and reconsider the assessment throughout the entire ambulance mission. A reflective and open stance based on professional knowledge could contribute to recognizing patients with sepsis.

Pre-hospital antibiotic therapy preceded by blood cultures in a physician-manned mobile emergency care unit

BACKGROUND

Rapid recognition and antibiotic treatment, preferably preceded by blood cultures (BCs), is a mainstay in sepsis therapy. The objective of this investigation was to determine if pre-hospital BCs were feasible and drawn with an acceptably low level of contamination and to investigate whether pre-hospital antibiotics were administered on correct indications.

METHODS

We performed a register-based study in a pre-hospital physician-manned mobile emergency care unit (MECU) operating in a mixed urban/rural area in Denmark. All patients who received pre-hospital antibiotics by the MECU from November 2013 to October 2018 were reviewed. Outcome measures were characterisation of microbial findings and subsequent in-hospital confirmation of the pre-hospital indication for antibiotics.

RESULTS

One-hundred-and-nineteen patients received antibiotics pre-hospitally. Six were excluded. One-hundred-and-thirteen patients were included in the study. BCs were drawn in 107 of the 113 patients (94.7% [88.8%-98.0%]). We found a true pathogen of sepsis in 29 (27.1% [19.0%-36.6%]) of these 107 patients. Nine (8.4% [3.9%-15.4%]) patients had contaminated pre-hospital BCs. Forty-nine of all patients (36.3% [27.4%-45.9%]) had causative pathogens in either their BCs or other samples confirming the pre-hospital tentative diagnosis. Eighty-two (72.6% [63.4%-80.5%]) patients received antibiotic therapy in-hospitally, while 27 (23.9% [16.4%-32.8%]) were assigned an in-hospital diagnosis not associated with infection. Four (3.5% [1.0%-8.8%]) patients died in hospital before a diagnosis was established.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-hospital administration of antibiotics preceded by BCs is feasible, although with somewhat high blood culture contamination rates. Antibiotics are administered on reasonable indications.

Clinical and microbiological characterization of sepsis and evaluation of sepsis scores

Background

Despite the necessity of early recognition for an optimal outcome, sepsis often remains unrecognized. Available tools for early recognition are rarely evaluated in low- and middle-income countries. In this study, we analyzed the spectrum, treatment and outcome of sepsis at an Ethiopian tertiary hospital and evaluated recommended sepsis scores.

Methods

Patients with an infection and ≥2 SIRS criteria were screened for sepsis by SOFA scoring. From septic patients, socioeconomic and clinical data as well as blood cultures were collected and they were followed until discharge or death; 28-day mortality was determined.

Results

In 170 patients with sepsis, the overall mortality rate was 29.4%. The recognition rate by treating physicians after initial clinical assessment was low (12.4%). Increased risk of mortality was significantly associated with level of SOFA and qSOFA score, Gram-negative bacteremia (in comparison to Gram-positive bacteremia; 42.9 versus 16.7%), and antimicrobial regimen including ceftriaxone (35.7% versus 19.2%) or metronidazole (43.8% versus 25.0%), but not with an increased respiratory rate (≥22/min) or decreased systolic blood pressure (≤100mmHg). In Gram-negative isolates, extended antimicrobial resistance with expression of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase and carbapenemase genes was common. Among adult patients, sensitivity and specificity of qSOFA score for detection of sepsis were 54.3% and 66.7%, respectively.

Conclusion

Sepsis is commonly unrecognized and associated with high mortality, showing the need for reliable and easy-applicable tools to support early recognition. The established sepsis scores were either of limited applicability (SOFA) or, as in the case of qSOFA, were significantly impaired in their sensitivity and specificity, demonstrating the need for further evaluation and adaptation to local settings. Regional factors like malaria endemicity and HIV prevalence might influence the performance of different scores. Ineffective empirical treatment due to antimicrobial resistance is common and associated with mortality. Local antimicrobial resistance statistics are needed for guidance of calculated antimicrobial therapy to support reduction of sepsis mortality.

An interpretable deep-learning model for early prediction of sepsis in the emergency department

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition with high mortality rates and expensive treatment costs. Early prediction of sepsis improves survival in septic patients. In this paper, we report our top-performing method in the 2019 DII National Data Science Challenge to predict onset of sepsis 4 h before its diagnosis on electronic health records of over 100,000 unique patients in emergency departments. A long short-term memory (LSTM)-based model with event embedding and time encoding is leveraged to model clinical time series and boost prediction performance. Attention mechanism and global max pooling techniques are utilized to enable interpretation for the deep-learning model. Our model achieved an average area under the curve of 0.892 and was selected as one of the winners of the challenge for both prediction accuracy and clinical interpretability. This study paves the way for future intelligent clinical decision support, helping to deliver early, life-saving care to the bedside of septic patients.

NEWS and qSIRS superior to qSOFA in the prediction of 30-day mortality in emergency department patients in Hong Kong

BACKGROUND

We aim to compare the prognostic value of Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and the previous Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and along with their combinations in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This single-centre prospective study recruited a convenience sample of unselected ED patients triaged as category 2 (Emergency) and 3 (Urgent). Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses were performed to determine the Area Under the Curve (AUC), along with sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios for the various scores.

RESULTS

Of 1253 patients recruited, overall 30-day mortality was 5.7%. The prognostic value for prediction of 30-day mortality, with AUCs for qSOFA ≥2, SIRS ≥2, NEWS ≥5, qSIRS (qSOFA + SIRS) ≥2 and NSIRS (NEWS + SIRS) ≥5 of 0.56 (95%CI 0.53-0.58), 0.61 (95%CI 0.58-0.64), 0.61 (95%CI 0.58-0.64), 0.64 (95%CI 0.62-0.67) and 0.61 (95%CI 0.58-0.63), respectively. Using pairwise comparisons of ROC curves, NEWS ≥5 and qSIRS ≥2 were better than qSOFA ≥2 at predicting 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Among unselected emergency and urgent ED patients, the prognostic value for NEWS and qSIRS were greater than qSOFA, Combinations of qSOFA and SIRS could improve the predictive value for 30-day mortality for ED patients. Key messages NEWS ≥5 and qSIRS ≥2 were better than qSOFA ≥2 at predicting 30-day mortality in ED patients. Combinations of qSOFA and SIRS could improve the predictive value for 30-day mortality for ED patients.

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.

Usefulness of ischemia-modified albumin in the diagnosis of sepsis/septic shock in the emergency department

Objective

No studies have evaluated the diagnostic value of ischemia-modified albumin (IMA) for the early detection of sepsis/septic shock in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). We aimed to assess the usefulness of IMA in diagnosing sepsis/septic shock in the ED.

Methods

This retrospective, observational study analyzed IMA, lactate, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin levels measured within 1 hour of ED arrival. Patients with suspected infection meeting at least two systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria were included and classified into the infection, sepsis, and septic shock groups using Sepsis-3 definitions. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and multivariate logistic regression were used to determine diagnostic performance.

Results

This study included 300 adult patients. The AUC (95% CI) of IMA levels (cut-off ≥85.5 U/mL vs. ≥87.5 U/mL) was higher for the diagnosis of sepsis than for that of septic shock (0.729 [0.667–0.791] vs. 0.681 [0.613–0.824]) and was higher than the AUC of procalcitonin levels (cut-off ≥1.58 ng/mL, 0.678 [0.613–0.742]) for the diagnosis of sepsis. When IMA and lactate levels were combined, the AUCs were 0.815 (0.762–0.867) and 0.806 (0.754–0.858) for the diagnosis of sepsis and septic shock, respectively. IMA levels independently predicted sepsis (odds ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.00–1.09; P=0.029) and septic shock (odds ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02–1.11; P=0.002).

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that IMA levels are a useful biomarker for diagnosing sepsis/ septic shock early, and their combination with lactate levels can enhance the predictive power for early diagnosis of sepsis/septic shock in the ED.

The Value of Prehospital Early Warning Scores to Predict in - Hospital Clinical Deterioration: A Multicenter, Observational Base-Ambulance Study

OBJECTIVES

Early warning scores are clinical tools capable of identifying prehospital patients with high risk of deterioration. We sought here to contrast the validity of seven early warning scores in the prehospital setting and specifically, to evaluate the predictive value of each score to determine early deterioration-risk during the hospital stay, including mortality at one, two, three and seven- days since the index event. Methods: A prospective multicenter observational based-ambulance study of patients treated by six advanced life support emergency services and transferred to five Spanish hospitals between October 1, 2018 and December 31, 2019. We collected demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables. Seven risk score were constructed based on the analysis of prehospital variables associated with death within one, two, three and seven days since the index event. The area under the receiver operating characteristics was used to determine the discriminant validity of each early warning score. Results: A total of 3,273 participants with acute diseases were accurately linked. The median age was 69 years (IQR, 54-81 years), 1,348 (41.1%) were females. The overall mortality rate for patients in the study cohort ranged from 3.5% for first-day mortality (114 cases), to 7% for seven-day mortality (228 cases). The scores with the best performances for one-day mortality were Vitalpac Early Warning Score with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) of 0.873 (95% CI: 0.81-0.9), for two-day mortality, Triage Early Warning Score with an AUROC of 0.868 (95% CI: 0.83-0.9), for three and seven-days mortality the Modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score with an AUROC of 0.857 (0.82-0.89) and 0.833 (95% CI: 0.8-0.86). In general, there were no significant differences between the scores analyzed. Conclusions: All the analyzed scores have a good predictive capacity for early mortality, and no statistically significant differences between them were found. The National Early Warning Score 2, at the clinical level, has certain advantages. Early warning scores are clinical tools that can help in the complex decision-making processes during critical moments, so their use should be generalized in all emergency medical services.

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.

Lactate-enhanced-qSOFA (LqSOFA) score is superior to the other four rapid scoring tools in predicting in-hospital mortality rate of the sepsis patients

Background

The rising prevalence of early therapy for sepsis has led to the demand for rapid risk-stratification tools that can estimate the risk of in-hospital mortality for sepsis patients and the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. A robust risk-stratification tool is crucial for in-time sepsis treatment. This study aimed to compare the abilities of five rapid scoring systems, i.e., LqSOFA score, qSOFA score, SIRS, MEDS, and MEWS, in predicting the mortality in hospital and ICU admission for sepsis patients.

Methods

A retrospective observational clinical study was conducted in West China Hospital. Our cases included all patients admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of sepsis (sepsis-3). We calculated five rapid prediction scores for the enrolled cases. We then compared each rapid score’s ability to predict in-hospital mortality and ICU admission.

Results

A total of 821 of mixed sepsis patients by sepsis-3 definition were included. The all-cause hospital mortality rate was 21.1%. The LqSOFA score presented the most significant discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.751. The AUC of the LqSOFA score for mortality in the hospital was significantly higher than qSOFA (AUC 0.717), SIRS (AUC 0.704), MEDS (AUC 0.670), and MEWS (AUC 0.685).

Conclusions

LqSOFA is a superior prognostic tool for predicting mortality in the hospital. It may provide more exact information for hospital mortality than the other 4 rapid scores in treating sepsis patients.

Prospective evaluation of the quickSOFA score as a screening for sepsis in the emergency department

In 2016, the new bedside tool quick Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) was presented to identify patients at high risk of developing sepsis or adverse outcome. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of the qSOFA scoring system as a screening in patients presenting at an emergency department (ED) of any cause. Therefore, we compared qSOFA with the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria and two modifications of qSOFA score. This is a prospective single-center study including patients presenting to the ED of any non-traumatic cause. Primary outcome was development of sepsis within 48 h, secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and ICU stay for > 3 days. Data were collected within one hour after arrival to indicate an impression of initial medical contact. Among 1,668 patients, 105 sepsis cases were identified. 8.4% presented with qSOFA ≥ 2, 27.2% with SIRS ≥ 2 within one hour. Sensitivity of qSOFA in predicting sepsis was lower compared to the SIRS criteria. qSOFA showed better prognostic accuracy for 30-day mortality compared to SIRS (p < 0.05), but not for prolonged ICU stay (p = 0.56). Modification of qSOFA in replacing GCS by other scoring systems recording altered mental status did not improve its sensitivity. The qSOFA score has poor sensitivity to identify patients at risk of developing sepsis and can therefore not be considered as an adequate screening for sepsis in patients presenting to the ED. Furthermore, a positive qSOFA at arrival at the ED showed no sufficient reliability in detecting patients with adverse clinical course.

Superior performance of National Early Warning Score compared with quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment Score in predicting adverse outcomes: a retrospective observational study of patients in the prehospital setting

BACKGROUND

Early intervention and response to deranged physiological parameters in the critically ill patient improve outcomes. A National Early Warning Score (NEWS) based on physiological observations has been developed for use throughout the National Health Service in the UK. The quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment Score (qSOFA) was developed as a simple bedside criterion to identify adult patients outwith the ICU with suspected infection who are likely to have a prolonged ICU stay or die in hospital. We aim to compare the ability of NEWS and qSOFA to predict adverse outcomes in a prehospital population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All clinical observations taken by emergency ambulance crews transporting patients to a single hospital were collated along with information relating to mortality over a 2-month period. The performance of the NEWS and qSOFA in identifying the endpoints of 30-day mortality, ICU admission and a combined endpoint of 48 h. ICU admission or 30-day mortality was analysed.

RESULTS

Complete data were available for 1713 patients. For the primary outcome of ICU admission within 48 h or 30-day mortality, the odds ratio for a qSOFA score of 3 compared with 0 was 124.1 [95% confidence interval (CI): 13.5-1137.7] and the odds ratio for a high NEWS category, compared with the low NEWS category was 9.82 (95% CI: 5.74-16.81). Comparison of qSOFA and NEWS performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the primary outcome for qSOFA was 0.679 (95% CI: 0.624-0.733), for NEWS category was 0.707 (95% CI: 0.654-0.761) and for NEWS total score was 0.740 (95% CI: 0.685-0.795). Comparison of the receiver operating characteristic curves between NEWS total score and qSOFA using DeLong's test showed NEWS total score to be superior to qSOFA at predicting combined ICU admission within 48 h of presentation or 30-day mortality (P = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows qSOFA can identify patients at risk of adverse outcomes in the prehospital setting. However, NEWS is superior to qSOFA in a prehospital environment at identifying patients at risk of adverse outcomes.

Improved Outcomes After Regional Implementation of Sepsis Alert: A Novel Triage Model

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether the triage model Sepsis Alert for Emergency Departments results in improved initial care of patients with severe infections.

DESIGN

Interventional study comparing patient care before and after the start of a new triage model, including 90-day follow-up.

SETTING

Eight emergency departments in Skåne County, Sweden.

SUBJECTS

Patients with suspected severe infection.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients with severely deviating vital signs and suspected infection were triaged into a designated sepsis line called Sepsis Alert, for rapid evaluation supported by an infectious disease specialist. Also, all emergency department staff participated in a designated sepsis education before the model was introduced.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Medical records were evaluated for a 3-month period 1 year before the triage system was started in 2016 and for a 3-month period 1 year after. Of 195,607 patients admitted to these emergency departments during two 3-month periods, a total of 5,321 patients presented severely abnormal vital signs. Of these, 1,066 patients who presented with fever greater thanor equal to 38°C or history of fever/chills were considered to be patients at risk of having severe sepsis. Among patients triaged according to Sepsis Alert, 89.3% received antibiotic treatment within 1 hour after arrival to the emergency department (median time to antibiotics, 26 min), which was significantly better than before the start of the new triage: 67.9% (median time to antibiotics, 37 min) (p < 0.001). Additionally, sepsis treatment quality markers were significantly improved after the introduction of Sepsis Alert, including number of blood cultures and lactate measurements taken, percentage of patients receiving IV fluids, and appropriate initial antibiotic treatment. There were no differences in 28- or 90-day mortality rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of the new triage model Sepsis Alert with special attention to severe sepsis patients led to faster and more accurate antibiotic treatment and improved diagnostic procedures and supportive care.

Emergency Medical Services Care and Sepsis Trajectories

Objective: Many sepsis patients receive initial care from prehospital Emergency Medical Services (EMS). While earlier sepsis care improves outcomes, the characteristics, care and outcomes of those treated by EMS versus those arriving directly to an emergency department (ED) are currently not detailed. We sought to determine differences in hospital presentation, course and outcomes between EMS and non-EMS patients enrolled in the Protocolized Care of Early Septic Shock (ProCESS) trial. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of ProCESS, which studied ED patients with septic shock. EMS care was the primary exposure. We determined differences in demographics, clinical features, interventions and hospital course between EMS and non-EMS patients. Using mixed models, we determined the association between EMS care and 60-day mortality. Results: Among 1,341 patients, 826 (61.6%) received initial EMS care. EMS patients were older, more likely to be black (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.14-1.95) or nursing home residents (5.57, 3.61-8.60), and more likely to have chronic respiratory disease (1.36, 1.04-1.78), cerebral vascular disease (1.56; 1.04-2.33), peripheral vascular disease (2.02; 1.29-3.16), and dementia (3.53; 2.04-6.10). EMS patients were more likely to present with coma (4.48; 2.53-7.96) or elevated lactate (1.30; 1.04-1.63), and to receive mechanical ventilation in the ED (7.16; 4.34-11.79). There were no differences in infection source or total intravenous fluids. Initial differences in vasopressor use (1.66; 1.22-2.26) resolved at 6 hours (1.18; 0.94-1.47). Initial differences in APACHE II (EMS 21.8 vs. non-EMS 19.0) narrowed by 48 hours (17.9 vs. 16.3, [EMS X time] interaction p = 0.003). Although EMS patients exhibited higher 60-day mortality, after adjustment for confounders, this association was not significant (1.09, 95% CI: 0.78-1.55). Conclusions: While EMS sepsis patients presented with worse chronic, nonmodifiable characteristics and higher acuity than non-EMS patients, differences in acuity narrowed after initial hospital care. Despite having higher illness burden, EMS patients did not have worse adjusted short-term mortality.

A boosting inspired personalized threshold method for sepsis screening

Sepsis is one of the biggest risks to patient safety, with a natural mortality rate between 25% and 50%. It is difficult to diagnose, and no validated standard for diagnosis currently exists. A commonly used scoring criteria is the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA). It demonstrates very low specificity in ICU populations, however. We develop a method to personalize thresholds in qSOFA that incorporates easily to measure patient baseline characteristics. We compare the personalized threshold method to qSOFA, five previously published methods that obtain an optimal constant threshold for a single biomarker, and to the machine learning algorithms based on logistic regression and AdaBoosting using patient data in the MIMIC-III database. The personalized threshold method achieves higher accuracy than qSOFA and the five published methods and has comparable performance to machine learning methods. Personalized thresholds, however, are much easier to adopt in real-life monitoring than machine learning methods as they are computed once for a patient and used in the same way as qSOFA, whereas the machine learning methods are hard to implement and interpret.

Comparison of Monocyte Distribution Width (MDW) and Procalcitonin for early recognition of sepsis

We carried out a prospective observational study to evaluate whether Monocyte Distribution Width (MDW) may play a role in identifying patients with sepsis in comparison with Procalcitonin (PCT). We prospectively enrolled all consecutive patients hospitalized at the Infectious Diseases Unit of Pescara General Hospital for bacterial infection or sepsis. MDW values were collected for all patients. Clinical characteristics, demographic data, past and present medical history, microbiological results, PCT, as well as neutrophil and monocytes indices at entry were compared in the 2 groups. Two-hundred-sixty patients were enrolled, 63.5% males, aged 59.1±19.5 years. Sepsis was diagnosed in 105 (40.4%); in 60 (57.1%) at least 1 microorganism was isolated from blood cultures. In multivariate models, MDW as a continuous variable (OR:1.57 for each unit increase; 95%CI: 1.31–1.87, p<0.001) and PCT˃1 ng/mL (OR: 48.5; 95%CI: 14.7–160.1, p<0.001) were independently associated with sepsis. Statistical best cut points associated with sepsis were 22.0 for MDW and 1.0 ng/mL for PCT whereas MDW values<20 were invariably associated with negative blood cultures. At ROC curve analysis, the AUC of MDW (0.87) was nearly overlapping that of PCT (0.88). Our data suggest that incorporating MDW within current routine WBC counts and indices may be of remarkable use for detection of sepsis. Further research is warranted.

A Data-Driven Approach to Predicting Septic Shock in the Intensive Care Unit

Early diagnosis of sepsis and septic shock has been unambiguously linked to lower mortality and better patient outcomes. Despite this, there is a strong unmet need for a reliable clinical tool that can be used for large-scale automated screening to identify high-risk patients. We addressed the following questions: Can a novel algorithm to identify patients at high risk of septic shock 24 hours before diagnosis be discovered using available clinical data? What are performance characteristics of this predictive algorithm? Can current metrics for evaluation of sepsis be improved using novel algorithm? Publicly available data from the intensive care unit setting was used to build septic shock and control patient cohorts. Using Bayesian networks, causal relationships between diagnosis groups, procedure groups, laboratory results, and demographic data were inferred. Predictive model for septic shock 24 hours prior to digital diagnosis was built based on inferred causal networks. Sepsis risk scores were augmented by de novo inferred model and performance was evaluated. A novel predictive model to identify high-risk patients 24 hours ahead of time, with area under curve of 0.81, negative predictive value of 0.87, and a positive predictive value as high as 0.65 was built. The specificity of quick sequential organ failure assessment, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and modified early warning score was improved when augmented with the novel model, whereas no improvements were made to the sequential organ failure assessment score. We used a data-driven, expert knowledge agnostic method to build a screening algorithm for early detection of septic shock. The model demonstrates strong performance in the data set used and provides a basis for expanding this work toward building an algorithm that is used to screen patients based on electronic medical record data in real time.

Performance of a quick sofa-65 score as a rapid sepsis screening tool during initial emergency department assessment: A propensity score matching study

PURPOSE

We sought to elucidate the performance of a Quick Sequential Organ Function Assessment-65 (qSOFA-65) score in recognizing sepsis and to compare the qSOFA-65 score to systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and qSOFA scores.

METHODS

We performed a matched case-control study using propensity score matching. The number of patients meeting qSOFA-65, qSOFA, and SIRS positive criteria were calculated between the sepsis and non-sepsis groups. We compared the diagnostic performance of the three scoring systems in predicting sepsis.

RESULTS

A total of 2441 patients were included in the study. In propensity matched cohorts, the percentage of patients who met qSOFA-65, qSOFA, and SIRS positive criteria were 46.7%, 14.3%, and 55.6%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity scores for the qSOFA-65, qSOFA, and SIRS positive criteria for sepsis were 0.66 and 0.73, 0.28 and 0.97, and 0.66 and 0.55, respectively. The AUC value of qSOFA-65 positive criteria in predicting sepsis was significantly higher than that of qSOFA and SIRS positive criteria (adjusted AUC 0.688 vs. 0.630 vs. 0.596, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that qSOFA-65 was more likely to identify patients with sepsis on the initial ED visit relative to qSOFA or SIRS. This may have quality improvement implications in predicting sepsis.

A Comparison of the Quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment Score and the National Early Warning Score in Non-ICU Patients With/Without Infection

OBJECTIVES

The Sepsis-3 task force recommended the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment score for identifying patients with suspected infection who are at greater risk of poor outcomes, but many hospitals already use the National Early Warning Score to identify high-risk patients, irrespective of diagnosis. We sought to compare the performance of quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment and National Early Warning Score in hospitalized, non-ICU patients with and without an infection.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Large U.K. General Hospital.

PATIENTS

Adults hospitalized between January 1, 2010, and February 1, 2016.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We applied the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment score and National Early Warning Score to 5,435,344 vital signs sets (241,996 hospital admissions). Patients were categorized as having no infection, primary infection, or secondary infection using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition codes. National Early Warning Score was significantly better at discriminating in-hospital mortality, irrespective of infection status (no infection, National Early Warning Score 0.831 [0.825-0.838] vs quick Sequential [Sepsis-Related] Organ Failure Assessment 0.688 [0.680-0.695]; primary infection, National Early Warning Score 0.805 [0.799-0.812] vs quick Sequential [Sepsis-Related] Organ Failure Assessment 0.677 [0.670-0.685]). Similarly, National Early Warning Score performed significantly better in all patient groups (all admissions, emergency medicine admissions, and emergency surgery admissions) for all outcomes studied. Overall, quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment performed no better, and often worse, in admissions with infection than without.

CONCLUSIONS

The National Early Warning Score outperforms the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment score, irrespective of infection status. These findings suggest that quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment should be reevaluated as the system of choice for identifying non-ICU patients with suspected infection who are at greater risk of poor outcome.

Procalcitonin and MR-Proadrenomedullin Combination with SOFA and qSOFA Scores for Sepsis Diagnosis and Prognosis: A Diagnostic Algorithm

PURPOSE

The third Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) defined sepsis as an organ dysfunction consequent to infection. A Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score at least 2 identifies sepsis. In this study, procalcitonin (PCT) and midregional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM) were evaluated along with SOFA and quick SOFA (qSOFA) scores in patients with sepsis or septic shock.

METHODS

A total of 109 septic patients and 50 patients with noninfectious disease admitted at the Department of Internal Medicine and General Surgery of the University Hospital Campus Bio-Medico of Rome were enrolled. PCT and MR-proADM were measured with immunoluminometric assays (Brahms, Hennigsdorf, Germany). Data were analyzed with receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, likelihood ratios, and Mann-Whitney U test using MedCalc 11.6.1.0 package.

RESULTS

At ROC curve analysis, PCT showed the highest area under the curve and positive likelihood ratio values of 27.42 in sepsis and 43.62 in septic shock. MR-proADM and SOFA score showed a comparable performance. In septic shock, lactate showed the most accurate diagnostic ability. In sepsis, the best combination was PCT with MR-proADM with a posttest probability of 0.988. Based upon these results, an algorithm for sepsis and septic shock diagnosis has been developed. MR-proADM, SOFA, and qSOFA scores significantly discriminated survivors from nonsurvivors.

CONCLUSIONS

PCT and MR-proADM test combination represent a good tool in sepsis diagnosis and prognosis suggesting their inclusion in the diagnostic algorithm besides SOFA and qSOFA scores. Furthermore, MR-proADM as marker of organ dysfunction, with a turn around time of about 30 min, has the advantage to be more objective and rapid than SOFA score.

Accuracy of Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score to Predict Sepsis Mortality in 121 Studies Including 1,716,017 Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

We performed a meta-analysis to assess whether the newly introduced quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score could predict sepsis outcomes and compared its performance to systematic inflammatory response syndrome, the previously widely used screening criteria for sepsis.

Prehospital characteristics among patients with sepsis: a comparison between patients with or without adverse outcome

BACKGROUND

The prehospital care of patients with sepsis are commonly performed by the emergency medical services. These patients may be critically ill and have high in-hospital mortality rates. Unfortunately, few patients with sepsis are identified by the emergency medical services, which can lead to delayed treatment and a worse prognosis. Therefore, early identification of patients with sepsis is important, and more information about the prehospital characteristics that can be used to identify these patients is needed. Based on this lack of information, the objectives of this study were to investigate the prehospital characteristics that are identified while patients with sepsis are being transported to the hospital by the emergency medical services, and to compare these values to those of the patients with and without adverse outcomes during their hospital stays.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study. The patients' electronic health records were reviewed and selected consecutively based on the following: retrospectively diagnosed with sepsis and transported to an emergency department by the emergency medical services. Data were collected on demographics, prehospital characteristics and adverse outcomes, defined as the in-hospital mortality or treatment in the intensive care unit, and analysed by independent sample t-test and chi-square. Sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratio, of prehospital characteristics for predicting or development of adverse outcome were analysed.

RESULTS

In total, 327 patients were included. Of these, 50 patients had adverse outcomes. When comparing patients with or without an adverse outcome, decreased oxygen saturation and body temperature, increased serum glucose level and altered mental status during prehospital care were found to be associated with an adverse outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggests that patients having a decreased oxygen saturation and body temperature, increased serum glucose level and altered mental status during prehospital care are at risk of a poorer patient prognosis and adverse outcome. Recognizing these prehospital characteristics may help to identify patients with sepsis early and improve their long-term outcomes. However further research is required to predict limit values of saturation and serum glucose and to validate the use of prehospital characteristics for adverse outcome in patients with sepsis.

Derivation and internal validation of the screening to enhance prehospital identification of sepsis (SEPSIS) score in adults on arrival at the emergency department

Background

Prehospital recognition of sepsis may inform case management by ambulance clinicians, as well as inform transport decisions. The objective of this study was to develop a prehospital sepsis screening tool for use by ambulance clinicians.

Methods

We derived and validated a sepsis screening tool, utilising univariable logistic regression models to identify predictors for inclusion, and multivariable logistic regression to generate the SEPSIS score. We utilised a retrospective cohort of adult patients transported by ambulance (n = 38483) to hospital between 01 July 2013 and 30 June 2014. Records were linked using LinkPlus® software. Successful linkage was achieved in 33289 cases (86%). Eligible patients included adult, non-trauma, non-mental health, non-cardiac arrest cases. Of 33289 linked cases, 22945 cases were eligible. Eligible cases were divided into derivation (n = 16063, 70%) and validation (n = 6882, 30%) cohorts. The primary outcome measure was high risk of severe illness or death from sepsis, as defined by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Sepsis guideline.

Results

‘High risk of severe illness or death from sepsis’ was present in 3.7% of derivation (n = 593) and validation (n = 254) cohorts. The SEPSIS score comprises the following variables: age, respiratory rate, peripheral oxygen saturations, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, temperature and level of consciousness (p < 0.001 for all variables). Area under the curve was 0.87 (95%CI 0.85–0.88) for the derivation cohort, and 0.86 (95%CI 0.84–0.88) for the validation cohort. In an undifferentiated adult medical population, for a SEPSIS score ≥ 5, sensitivity was 0.37 (0.31–0.44), specificity was 0.96 (0.96–0.97), positive predictive value was 0.27 (0.23–0.32), negative predictive value was 0.97 (0.96–0.97), positive likelihood value was 13.5 (9.7–18.73) and the negative likelihood value was 0.83 (0.78–0.88).

Conclusion

This is the first screening tool developed to identify NICE high risk of severe illness or death from sepsis. The SEPSIS score is significantly associated with high risk of severe illness or death from sepsis on arrival at the Emergency Department. It may assist ambulance clinicians to identify those patients with sepsis in need of antibiotic therapy. However, it requires external validation, in clinical practice by ambulance clinicians, in an independent population.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13049-019-0642-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.