Accuracy of qSOFA for the diagnosis of sepsis-3: a secondary analysis of a population-based cohort study

Prognostic evaluation of quick sequential organ failure assessment score in ICU patients with sepsis across different income settings

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence on association between quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and sepsis mortality in ICU patients. The primary aim of this study was to determine the association between qSOFA and 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. Association of qSOFA with early (3-day), medium (28-day), late (90-day) mortality was assessed in low and lower middle income (LLMIC), upper middle income (UMIC) and high income (HIC) countries/regions.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of the MOSAICS II study, an international prospective observational study on sepsis epidemiology in Asian ICUs. Associations between qSOFA at ICU admission and mortality were separately assessed in LLMIC, UMIC and HIC countries/regions. Modified Poisson regression was used to determine the adjusted relative risk (RR) of qSOFA score on mortality at 28 days with adjustments for confounders identified in the MOSAICS II study.

RESULTS

Among the MOSAICS II study cohort of 4980 patients, 4826 patients from 343 ICUs and 22 countries were included in this secondary analysis. Higher qSOFA was associated with increasing 28-day mortality, but this was only observed in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) and not HIC (p = 0.220) countries/regions. Similarly, higher 90-day mortality was associated with increased qSOFA in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) only. In contrast, higher 3-day mortality with increasing qSOFA score was observed across all income countries/regions (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that qSOFA remained associated with 28-day mortality (adjusted RR 1.09 (1.00-1.18), p = 0.038) even after adjustments for covariates including APACHE II, SOFA, income country/region and administration of antibiotics within 3 h.

CONCLUSIONS

qSOFA was independently associated with 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. In LLMIC and UMIC countries/regions, qSOFA was associated with early to late mortality but only early mortality in HIC countries/regions.

Development and Validation of Deep-Learning-Based Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Prediction System (DeepSEPS) Using Real-World ICU Data

BACKGROUND

Successful sepsis treatment depends on early diagnosis. We aimed to develop and validate a system to predict sepsis and septic shock in real time using deep learning.

METHODS

Clinical data were retrospectively collected from electronic medical records (EMRs). Data from 2010 to 2019 were used as development data, and data from 2020 to 2021 were used as validation data. The collected EMRs consisted of eight vital signs, 13 laboratory data points, and three demographic information items. We validated the deep-learning-based sepsis and septic shock early prediction system (DeepSEPS) using the validation datasets and compared our system with other traditional early warning scoring systems, such as the national early warning score, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), and quick sequential organ failure assessment.

RESULTS

DeepSEPS achieved even higher area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) values (0.7888 and 0.8494 for sepsis and septic shock, respectively) than SOFA. The prediction performance of traditional scoring systems was enhanced because the early prediction time point was close to the onset time of sepsis; however, the DeepSEPS scoring system consistently outperformed all conventional scoring systems at all time points. Furthermore, at the time of onset of sepsis and septic shock, DeepSEPS showed the highest AUROC (0.9346).

CONCLUSIONS

The sepsis and septic shock early warning system developed in this study exhibited a performance that is worth considering when predicting sepsis and septic shock compared to other traditional early warning scoring systems. DeepSEPS showed better performance than existing sepsis prediction programs. This novel real-time system that simultaneously predicts sepsis and septic shock requires further validation.

Biomarker-Based Assessment Model for Detecting Sepsis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

The concept of the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) simplifies sepsis detection, and the next SOFA should be analyzed subsequently to diagnose sepsis. However, it does not include the concept of suspected infection. Thus, we simply developed a biomarker-based assessment model for detecting sepsis (BADS). We retrospectively reviewed the electronic health records of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of a 2000-bed university tertiary referral hospital in South Korea. A total of 989 patients were enrolled, with 77.4% (n = 765) of them having sepsis. The patients were divided into a ratio of 8:2 and assigned to a training and a validation set. We used logistic regression analysis and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test to derive the BADS and assess the model. BADS was developed by analyzing the variables and then assigning weights to the selected variables: mean arterial pressure, shock index, lactate, and procalcitonin. The area under the curve was 0.754, 0.615, 0.763, and 0.668 for BADS, qSOFA, SOFA, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II, respectively, showing that BADS is not inferior in sepsis prediction compared with SOFA. BADS could be a simple scoring method to detect sepsis in critically ill patients quickly at the bedside.

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

Audit of a computerized version of the Manchester triage system and a SIRS-based system for the detection of sepsis at triage in the emergency department

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE

Different triage systems can be used to screen for sepsis and are often incorporated into local electronic health records. Often the design and interface of these digitalizations are not audited, possibly leading to deleterious effects on screening test performance.

OBJECTIVE

To audit a digital version of the MTS for detection of sepsis during triage in the ED.

DESIGN

A single-center retrospective study SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n=29766) presenting to an ED of a tertiary-care center who received formal triage were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS

Calculated performance measures included sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and AUC for the detection of sepsis. Errors in the application of the specific sepsis discriminator of the MTS were recorded.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 189 (0.7%) subjects met the Sepsis-3 criteria, with 47 cases meeting the criteria for septic shock. The MTS had a low sensitivity of 47.6% (95% CI 40.3 to 55.0) for allocating sepsis patients to the correct triage category. However, specificity was high at 99.4% (95% CI 99.3 to 99.5).

Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of monocyte distribution width and procalcitonin in sepsis cases in the emergency department: a prospective cohort study

Background

Early diagnosis and treatment of patients with sepsis reduce mortality significantly. In terms of exploring new diagnostic tools of sepsis, monocyte distribution width (MDW), as part of the white blood cell (WBC) differential count, was first reported in 2017. MDW greater than 20 and abnormal WBC count together provided a satisfactory accuracy and was proposed as a novel diagnostic tool of sepsis. This study aimed to compare MDW and procalcitonin (PCT)’s diagnostic accuracy on sepsis in the emergency department.

Methods

This was a single-center prospective cohort study. Laboratory examinations including complete blood cell and differentiation count (CBC/DC), MDW, PCT were obtained while arriving at the ED. We divided patients into non-infection, infection without systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), infection with SIRS, and sepsis-3 groups. This study’s primary outcome is the sensitivity and specificity of MDW, PCT, and MDW + WBC in differentiating septic and non-septic patients. In addition, the cut-off value for MDW was established to maximize sensitivity at an optimal level of specificity.

Results

From May 2019 to September 2020, 402 patients were enrolled for data analysis. Patient number in each group was: non-infection 64 (15.9%), infection without SIRS 82 (20.4%), infection with SIRS 202 (50.2%), sepsis-3 15 (7.6%). The AUC of MDW, PCT, and MDW + WBC to predict infection with SIRS was 0.753, 0.704, and 0.784, respectively (p < 0.01). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of MDW using 20 as the cutoff were 86.4%, 54.2%, 76.4%, and 70%, compared to 32.9%, 88%, 82.5%, and 43.4% using 0.5 ng/mL as the PCT cutoff value. On combing MDW and WBC count, the sensitivity and NPV further increased to 93.4% and 80.3%, respectively. In terms of predicting sepsis-3, the AUC of MDW, PCT, and MDW + WBC was 0.72, 0.73, and 0.70, respectively. MDW, using 20 as cutoff, exhibited sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 90.6%, 37.1%, 18.7%, and 96.1%, respectively, compared to 49.1%, 78.6%, 26.8%, and 90.6% when 0.5 ng/mL PCT was used as cutoff.

Conclusions

In conclusion, MDW is a more sensitive biomarker than PCT in predicting infection-related SIRS and sepsis-3 in the ED. MDW < 20 shows a higher NPV to exclude sepsis-3. Combining MDW and WBC count further improves the accuracy in predicting infection with SIRS but not sepsis-3.

Trial registration The study was retrospectively registered to the ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT04322942) on March 26th, 2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-021-06999-4.

A comparison of different scores for diagnosis and mortality prediction of adults with sepsis in Low-and-Middlencome Countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical scores for sepsis have been primarily developed for, and applied in High-Income Countries. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the performance of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and Universal Vital Assessment (UVA) scores for diagnosis and prediction of mortality in patients with suspected infection in Low-and-Middle-Income Countries.

METHODS

PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched until May 18, 2021. Studies reporting the performance of at least one of the above-mentioned scores for predicting mortality in patients of 15 years of age and older with suspected infection or sepsis were eligible. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool was used for risk-of-bias assessment. PRISMA guidelines were followed (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020153906). The bivariate random-effects regression model was used to pool the individual sensitivities, specificities and areas-under-the-curve (AUC).

FINDINGS

Twenty-four articles (of 5669 identified) with 27,237 patients were eligible for inclusion. qSOFA pooled sensitivity was 0·70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0·60-0·78), specificity 0·73 (95% CI 0·67-0·79), and AUC 0·77 (95% CI 0·72-0·82). SIRS pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 0·88 (95% CI 0·79 -0·93), 0·34 (95% CI 0·25-0·44), and 0·69 (95% CI 0·50-0·83), respectively. MEWS pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 0·70 (95% CI 0·57 -0·81), 0·61 (95% CI 0·42-0·77), and 0·72 (95% CI 0·64-0·77), respectively. UVA pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 0·49 (95% CI 0·33 -0·65), 0·91(95% CI 0·84-0·96), and 0·76 (95% CI 0·44-0·93), respectively. Significant heterogeneity was observed in the pooled analysis.

INTERPRETATION

Individual score performances ranged from poor to acceptable. Future studies should combine selected or modified elements of different scores.

FUNDING

Partially funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (17/63/42).

qSOFA predicted pneumonia mortality better than minor criteria and worse than CURB-65 with robust elements and higher convergence

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available on the discriminatory capacity of quick sequential [sepsis-related] organ failure assessment (qSOFA) versus IDSA/ATS minor criteria for predicting mortality in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).

METHODS

An observational prospective cohort study of 2116 patients with CAP was performed. Construct validity was determined using Cronbach α. Discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and net reclassification improvement (NRI).

RESULTS

Overall in-hospital mortality was 6.43%. Mortality was 25.96% for patients with a qSOFA score of 2 or higher versus 3.05% for those with a qSOFA score less than 2 (odds ratio for mortality 6.57, P < 0.0001), and 13.85% for patients with at least 3 minor criteria versus 2.03% for those with 2 or fewer minor criteria (odds ratio for mortality 2.27, P < 0.0001). qSOFA had a higher correlation with mortality than minor criteria, as well as higher internal consistency (Cronbach alpha 0.43 versus 0.14) and diagnostic values of individual elements (larger AUROCs and higher Youden's indices). qSOFA ≥2 was less sensitive but more specific for predicting mortality than ≥3 minor criteria (qSOFA sensitivity 59.6%, specificity 88.3% and positive likelihood ratio 5.11 versus ≥3 minor criteria sensitivity 80.1%, specificity 65.8% and positive likelihood ratio 2.34). The predictive validity of qSOFA was good for mortality (AUROC = 0.868), was statistically greater than minor criteria, was equal to pneumonia severity index, and was inferior compared with CURB-65 (AUROC, 0.824, 0.902, 0.919; NRI, 0.088, -0.068, -0.103; respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The qSOFA predicted mortality in CAP better than IDSA/ATS minor criteria and worse than CURB-65 with robust elements and higher convergence. qSOFA as a bedside prompt might be positioned as a proxy for minor criteria and increase the recognition and thus merit more appropriate management of CAP patients likely to fare poorly, which might have implications for more accurate clinical triage decisions.

A simple measure to improve sepsis documentation and coding

INTRODUCTION

Sepsis incidence and mortality are increasing, yet sepsis appears to be under-recognised and under-reported. Accurate recognition and coding of sepsis allows for appropriate funding and accurate epidemiological representation.

METHODS

We implemented a discharge summary template for all patients discharged from our infectious diseases service and analysed sepsis documentation and coding before and after its introduction.

RESULTS

Beforehand, we found that 59% of 29 patients had sepsis, yet only 10% had it documented on their discharge summary, and 17% had it coded. Following implementation of the template, 38% of 52 patients had sepsis documented, yet only 20% of these had it coded. After delivery of a training session to the coders regarding the importance of sepsis, 38% of patients with a diagnosis of sepsis had it coded.

DISCUSSION

Despite requiring ongoing education and encouragement of clinicians and coders, implementation of the template was quick, cheap and easy and improved sepsis coding.

Predictive Accuracy of the Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment Score in Brazil. A Prospective Multicenter Study

Rationale: Although proposed as a clinical prompt to sepsis based on predictive validity for mortality, the Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score is often used as a screening tool, which requires high sensitivity.

Objectives: To assess the predictive accuracy of qSOFA for mortality in Brazil, focusing on sensitivity.

Methods: We prospectively collected data from two cohorts of emergency department and ward patients. Cohort 1 included patients with suspected infection but without organ dysfunction or sepsis (22 hospitals: 3 public and 19 private). Cohort 2 included patients with sepsis (54 hospitals: 24 public and 28 private). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The predictive accuracy of qSOFA was examined considering only the worst values before the suspicion of infection or sepsis.

Measurements and Main Results: Cohort 1 contained 5,460 patients (mortality rate, 14.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 13.1–15.0), among whom 78.3% had a qSOFA score less than or equal to 1 (mortality rate, 8.3%; 95% CI, 7.5–9.1). The sensitivity of a qSOFA score greater than or equal to 2 for predicting mortality was 53.9% and the 95% CI was 50.3 to 57.5. The sensitivity was higher for a qSOFA greater than or equal to 1 (84.9%; 95% CI, 82.1–87.3), a qSOFA score greater than or equal to 1 or lactate greater than 2 mmol/L (91.3%; 95% CI, 89.0–93.2), and systemic inflammatory response syndrome plus organ dysfunction (68.7%; 95% CI, 65.2–71.9). Cohort 2 contained 4,711 patients, among whom 62.3% had a qSOFA score less than or equal to 1 (mortality rate, 17.3%; 95% CI, 15.9–18.7), whereas in public hospitals the mortality rate was 39.3% (95% CI, 35.5–43.3).

Conclusions: A qSOFA score greater than or equal to 2 has low sensitivity for predicting death in patients with suspected infection in a developing country. Using a qSOFA score greater than or equal to 2 as a screening tool for sepsis may miss patients who ultimately die. Using a qSOFA score greater than or equal to 1 or adding lactate to a qSOFA score greater than or equal to 1 may improve sensitivity.

Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03158493).

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.

Thrombo-inflammatory prognostic score improves qSOFA for risk stratification in patients with sepsis: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Both the thrombo-inflammatory prognostic score (TIPS) and the quick sequential (sepsis-related) organ failure assessment (qSOFA) are quick prognostic scores for sepsis during the early phase, while either of two scores has limited prognostic value for sepsis patients. This study aimed to evaluate whether TIPS adds more information of sepsis risk stratification for qSOFA.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with sepsis in the emergency department (ED). We performed a receiver-operating characteristic curve, integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), net reclassification improvement (NRI) and decision-curve analysis (DCA) analyses to investigate whether TIPS can improve qSOFA for risk prediction in patients with sepsis. The primary endpoint was mortality and the secondary endpoints were mechanical ventilation and admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) during the 28-day follow-up.

Results

We identified 821 patients with sepsis. We randomly assigned the patients’ data to a derivation group (n = 498; n = 112 died during the 28-days follow-up) or to a validation group (n = 323; n = 61). The addition of TIPS to qSOFA (T-qSOFA) improved the area under the curve (AUC) from 0.724 to 0.824 (p < 0.001) for predicting 28-day mortality. The discrimination improvement was confirmed by an IDI of 0.092 (p < 0.001). Addition of TIPS to the qSOFA resulted in a NRI of 0.247 (p < 0.001). The DCA showed that the net benefit of T-qSOFA was higher than that of TIPS or qSOFA for any threshold probabilities.

Conclusions

The prognostic value of qSOFA for patients with sepsis was enhanced by adding the TIPS score on admission for risk prediction in patients with sepsis during early phases in the ED.

Back to Basics: Recognition of Sepsis with New Definition

Patients with serious infections at risk of deterioration represent highly challenging clinical situations, and in particular for junior doctors. A comprehensive clinical examination that integrates the assessment of vital signs, hemodynamics, and peripheral perfusion into clinical decision making is key to responding promptly and effectively to evolving acute medical illnesses, such as sepsis or septic shock. Against this background, the new concept of sepsis definition may provide a useful link between junior doctors and consultant decision making. The purpose of this article is to introduce the updated definition of sepsis and suggest its practical implications, with particular emphasis on integrative clinical assessment, allowing for the rapid identification of patients who are at risk of further deterioration.