Camm Christian Fielder, Hayward Gail, Elias Tania C N, Bowen Jordan S T, Hassanzadeh Roya, Fanshawe Thomas, Pendlebury Sarah T, Lasserson Daniel S
Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
BMJ Open. 2018 Apr 9;8(4):e020497. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020497.
To assess the performance of currently available sepsis recognition tools in patients referred to a community-based acute ambulatory care unit.
Service evaluation of consecutive patients over a 4-month period.
Community-based acute ambulatory care unit.
Observations, blood results and outcome data were analysed from patients with a suspected infection. Clinical features at first assessment were used to populate sepsis recognition tools including: systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, National Early Warning Score (NEWS), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) criteria. Scores were assessed against the clinical need for escalated care (use of intravenous antibiotics, fluids, ongoing ambulatory care or hospital treatment) and poor clinical outcome (all-cause mortality and readmission at 30 days after index assessment).
Of 533 patients (median age 81 years), 316 had suspected infection with 120 patients requiring care escalated beyond simple community care. SIRS had the highest positive predictive value (50.9%, 95% CI 41.6% to 60.3%) and negative predictive value (68.9%, 95% CI 62.6% to 75.3%) for the need for escalated care. Both NEWS and SIRS were better at predicting the need for escalated care than qSOFA and NICE criteria in patients with suspected infection (all P<0.001). While new-onset confusion predicted the need for escalated care for infection in patients ≥85 years old (n=114), 23.7% of patients ≥85 years had new-onset confusion without evidence for infection.
Acute ambulatory care clinicians should use caution in applying the new NICE endorsed criteria for determining the need for intravenous therapy and hospital-based location of care. NICE criteria have poorer performance when compared against NEWS and SIRS and new-onset confusion was prevalent in patients aged ≥85 years without infection.
评估目前可用的脓毒症识别工具在转诊至社区急性门诊护理单元的患者中的性能。
对连续4个月的患者进行服务评估。
社区急性门诊护理单元。
对疑似感染患者的观察结果、血液检查结果和结局数据进行分析。首次评估时的临床特征用于填充脓毒症识别工具,包括:全身炎症反应综合征(SIRS)标准、国家早期预警评分(NEWS)、快速序贯器官衰竭评估(qSOFA)和英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)标准。根据强化护理的临床需求(使用静脉抗生素、补液、持续门诊护理或住院治疗)和不良临床结局(全因死亡率和指数评估后30天内再次入院)对评分进行评估。
在533例患者(中位年龄81岁)中,316例疑似感染,其中120例患者需要的护理超出了单纯社区护理的范畴。SIRS对于强化护理需求的阳性预测值最高(50.9%,95%CI 41.6%至60.3%),阴性预测值也最高(68.9%,95%CI 62.6%至75.3%)。在疑似感染患者中,NEWS和SIRS在预测强化护理需求方面均优于qSOFA和NICE标准(所有P<0.001)。虽然新发意识模糊可预测≥85岁患者(n=114)感染时对强化护理的需求,但≥85岁的患者中有23.7%出现新发意识模糊且无感染证据。
急性门诊护理临床医生在应用新的NICE认可标准来确定静脉治疗需求和基于医院的护理地点时应谨慎。与NEWS和SIRS相比,NICE标准的性能较差,且≥85岁无感染患者中普遍存在新发意识模糊。