Garbero Rodrigo de Freitas, Simões Analice Alves, Martins Gabriela Alves, Cruz Ludmilla Vale da, von Zuben Vinícius Gabriel Monteiro
Faculty of Medicine, Superior School of Health Sciences, Brasília, Federal District, Brazil.
Turk J Emerg Med. 2019 Jun 8;19(3):106-110. doi: 10.1016/j.tjem.2019.05.002. eCollection 2019 Jul.
To evaluate the adequacy of SOFA and qSOFA for predicting unfavorable outcomes, and of qSOFA as a screening tool for sepsis in patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) of a Brazilian public hospital.
This was a single-center retrospective study conducted on a cohort of patients admitted to a Brazilian public hospital between August 2016 and November 2017 due to suspected infection. Exclusion criteria were: age <18 years, admission to the ED after 24 h of hospitalization, lack of information in the medical records, advanced comorbidities, or request of limited invasive care.
A total of 184 patients were included; 84.24% had a SOFA score of 2 or higher. The relative risk of death, need for intensive care unit (ICU) and mechanical ventilation (MV) related to a positive SOFA on admission were: 5.17 (2.11-12.87), 1.45 (1.09-2.15) and 2.74 (1.63-5.16), respectively; sensitivity was 93.7% for death, 88.5% for ICU need and 93.6% for undergoing MV. The mean length of hospital stay was 38.83 days for patients with a positive SOFA score and 8.95 days for patients with a negative score (p = 0.02). The median SOFA value was higher for the patients who died; 41% of the patients had a positive qSOFA and its sensitivity for a positive SOFA was 46.4%. The relative risk of death, ICU and MV need related to qSOFA at admission were 1.83 (1.39-2.44), 0.98 (0.82-1.16) and 1.60 (1.23-1.97), respectively, and its sensitivity was 56.8% for death, 41.4% for ICU need and 53.6% for MV.
qSOFA did not perform well as a screening tool for sepsis and for predicting a poor prognosis in the ED. SOFA, on the other hand, showed reasonable sensitivity for predicting unfavorable outcomes and scores ≥2 were related to a poor prognosis.
评估序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分和快速序贯器官衰竭评估(qSOFA)评分预测不良结局的充分性,以及qSOFA作为巴西一家公立医院急诊科脓毒症筛查工具的有效性。
这是一项单中心回顾性研究,研究对象为2016年8月至2017年11月因疑似感染入住巴西一家公立医院的患者队列。排除标准为:年龄<18岁、住院24小时后入住急诊科、病历信息缺失、存在晚期合并症或要求进行有限的侵入性治疗。
共纳入184例患者;84.24%的患者SOFA评分为2分或更高。入院时SOFA评分阳性与死亡、入住重症监护病房(ICU)和需要机械通气(MV)的相对风险分别为:5.17(2.11 - 12.87)、1.45(1.09 - 2.15)和2.74(1.63 - 5.16);死亡敏感性为93.7%,入住ICU敏感性为88.5%,接受MV敏感性为93.6%。SOFA评分阳性患者的平均住院时间为38.83天,评分阴性患者为8.95天(p = 0.02)。死亡患者的SOFA中位数更高;41%的患者qSOFA阳性,其对SOFA阳性的敏感性为46.4%。入院时qSOFA阳性与死亡、入住ICU和需要MV的相对风险分别为1.83(1.39 - 2.44)、0.98(0.82 - 1.16)和1.60(1.23 - 1.97),死亡敏感性为56.8%,入住ICU敏感性为41.4%,接受MV敏感性为53.6%。
qSOFA作为脓毒症筛查工具以及预测急诊科患者不良预后的表现不佳。另一方面,SOFA在预测不良结局方面显示出合理的敏感性,评分≥2分与不良预后相关。