Sincan Dr Nafiz Körez State Hospital, Department of Emergency, Ankara, Turkey.
University of Health Sciences, Kartal Dr Lütfi Kırdar Training and Research Hospital, Department of Emergency, Istanbul, Turkey.
Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Mar;41:158-162. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2020.09.049. Epub 2020 Sep 30.
Many biomarkers and scoring systems to make clinical predictions about the prognosis of sepsis have been investigated. In this study, we aimed to assess the use of the quick sequential organ failure assessment score (qSOFA) and modified early warning score (MEWS) scoring systems in emergency health care services for sepsis to predict intensive care hospitalization and 28-day mortality.
Patients who arrived by ambulance at the Emergency Department (ED) of Dışkapı YıldırımBeyazıt Training and Research Hospital between January 2017 and December 2019, and who were diagnosed with sepsis and admitted to the hospital were included in the study. Demographic data and physiological parameters from 112 ambulance case delivery forms were recorded.QSOFA and MEWS scores were calculated from vital parameters.
Of the 266 patients diagnosed with sepsis, 50% (n = 133) were female, and the mean age was 74.8 ± 13. The difference between the rate of intensive care (ICU) hospitalization and mortality for patients with a high MEWS and qSOFA score and patients whose MEWS and qSOFA score were lower was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). Thus, the criteria for MEWS and qSOFA could determine ICU hospitalization and early mortality. Those with a high MEWS value had a mortality rate approximately 1.24 times higher than those with a low MEWS value (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 1.110-1.385), while those with a high qSOFA score had a mortality rate approximately 2.0 times higher than those with a low qSOFA score (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 1.446-2.693). Those with a high MEWS were 1.34 times more likely than hose with a lower MEWS to require ICU hospitalization (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 1.1773-1.5131), while patients with a high qSOFA score were 3.21 times more likely than those with a lower qSOFA score to require ICU care (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 2.2289-4.6093).
Although qSOFA and MEWS are clinical scores used to identify septic patients outside the critical care unit, we believe that patients already diagnosed with sepsis can be assessed with qSOFA and MEWS prior to hospitalization to predict intensive care hospitalization and mortality. qSOFA was found be more valuable than MEWS in determining the prognosis of pre-hospitalization sepsis.
许多生物标志物和评分系统已被用于对脓毒症的预后进行临床预测。本研究旨在评估快速序贯器官衰竭评估评分(qSOFA)和改良早期预警评分(MEWS)评分系统在急诊医疗服务中对脓毒症的应用,以预测重症监护病房(ICU)住院和 28 天死亡率。
本研究纳入了 2017 年 1 月至 2019 年 12 月期间通过救护车抵达 Dışkapı YıldırımBeyazıt 培训和研究医院急诊科(ED),并被诊断为脓毒症并住院的患者。记录了 112 份救护车病例交付表中的人口统计学数据和生理参数。根据生命体征计算 qSOFA 和 MEWS 评分。
在 266 例确诊为脓毒症的患者中,50%(n=133)为女性,平均年龄为 74.8±13 岁。高 MEWS 和 qSOFA 评分患者与 MEWS 和 qSOFA 评分较低患者的 ICU 住院率和死亡率之间的差异具有统计学意义(p<0.05)。因此,MEWS 和 qSOFA 的标准可以确定 ICU 住院和早期死亡率。MEWS 值较高的患者死亡率约为 MEWS 值较低的患者的 1.24 倍(p<0.001,95%CI:1.110-1.385),而 qSOFA 评分较高的患者死亡率约为 qSOFA 评分较低的患者的 2.0 倍(p<0.001,95%CI:1.446-2.693)。MEWS 值较高的患者入住 ICU 的可能性是 MEWS 值较低的患者的 1.34 倍(p<0.001,95%CI:1.1773-1.5131),而 qSOFA 评分较高的患者入住 ICU 的可能性是 qSOFA 评分较低的患者的 3.21 倍(p<0.001,95%CI:2.2289-4.6093)。
虽然 qSOFA 和 MEWS 是用于识别重症监护室外脓毒症患者的临床评分,但我们认为,在患者住院前可以使用 qSOFA 和 MEWS 对已确诊的脓毒症患者进行评估,以预测 ICU 住院和死亡率。qSOFA 在确定院前脓毒症的预后方面比 MEWS 更有价值。