Department of Pathology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Division of Infectious Diseases and International Health, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Dec 1;4(12):e2136398. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.36398.
Severity scores are used to improve triage of hospitalized patients in high-income settings, but the scores may not translate well to low- and middle-income settings such as sub-Saharan Africa.
To assess the performance of the Universal Vital Assessment (UVA) score, derived in 2017, compared with other illness severity scores for predicting in-hospital mortality among adults with febrile illness in northern Tanzania.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prognostic study used clinical data collected for the duration of hospitalization among patients with febrile illness admitted to Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre or Mawenzi Regional Referral Hospital in Moshi, Tanzania, from September 2016 through May 2019. All adult and pediatric patients with a history of fever within 72 hours or a tympanic temperature of 38.0 °C or higher at screening were eligible for enrollment. Of 3761 eligible participants, 1132 (30.1%) were enrolled in the parent study; of those, 597 adults 18 years or older were included in this analysis. Data were analyzed from December 2019 to September 2021.
Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) assessment, and UVA.
The main outcome was in-hospital mortality during the same hospitalization as the participant's enrollment. Crude risk ratios and 95% CIs for in-hospital death were calculated using log-binomial risk regression for proposed score cutoffs for each of the illness severity scores. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for estimating the risk of in-hospital death was calculated for each score.
Among 597 participants, the median age was 43 years (IQR, 31-56 years); 300 participants (50.3%) were female, 198 (33.2%) were HIV-infected, and in-hospital death occurred in 55 (9.2%). By higher risk score strata for each score, compared with lower risk strata, risk ratios for in-hospital death were 3.7 (95% CI, 2.2-6.2) for a MEWS of 5 or higher; 2.7 (95% CI, 0.9-7.8) for a NEWS of 5 or 6; 9.6 (95% CI, 4.2-22.2) for a NEWS of 7 or higher; 4.8 (95% CI, 1.2-20.2) for a qSOFA score of 1; 15.4 (95% CI, 3.8-63.1) for a qSOFA score of 2 or higher; 2.5 (95% CI, 1.2-5.2) for a SIRS score of 2 or higher; 9.1 (95% CI, 2.7-30.3) for a UVA score of 2 to 4; and 30.6 (95% CI, 9.6-97.8) for a UVA score of 5 or higher. The AUROCs, using all ordinal values, were 0.85 (95% CI, 0.80-0.90) for the UVA score, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.75-0.87) for the NEWS, 0.75 (95% CI, 0.69-0.82) for the MEWS, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.67-0.79) for the qSOFA score, and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.56-0.71) for the SIRS score. The AUROC for the UVA score was significantly greater than that for all other scores (P < .05 for all comparisons) except for NEWS (P = .08).
This prognostic study found that the NEWS and the UVA score performed favorably compared with other illness severity scores in predicting in-hospital mortality among a hospitalized cohort of adults with febrile illness in northern Tanzania. Given its reliance on readily available clinical data, the UVA score may have utility in the triage and prognostication of patients admitted to the hospital with febrile illness in low- to middle-income settings such as sub-Saharan Africa.
严重程度评分用于提高高收入环境中住院患者的分诊效果,但这些评分可能无法很好地转化为撒哈拉以南非洲等中低收入环境。
评估通用生命评估(UVA)评分在预测坦桑尼亚北部发热患者住院期间死亡率方面的表现,该评分于 2017 年得出,与其他疾病严重程度评分相比。
设计、地点和参与者:这是一项预后研究,使用了 2016 年 9 月至 2019 年 5 月期间在坦桑尼亚莫希的 Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre 或 Mawenzi Regional Referral Hospital 住院发热患者的住院期间收集的临床数据。所有有发热病史 72 小时内或筛查时鼓膜温度为 38.0°C 或更高的成人和儿科患者均有资格入组。在 3761 名符合条件的参与者中,1132 名(30.1%)参加了父母研究;其中,597 名 18 岁或以上的成年人包括在本分析中。数据分析于 2019 年 12 月至 2021 年 9 月进行。
改良早期预警评分(MEWS)、国家早期预警评分(NEWS)、快速序贯器官衰竭评估(qSOFA)、全身性炎症反应综合征(SIRS)评估和 UVA。
主要结果是参与者入组期间住院期间的院内死亡率。使用对数二项式风险回归计算了每个疾病严重程度评分的建议评分截断值的院内死亡的粗风险比和 95%CI。为每个评分计算了接受者操作特征曲线(AUROC)下的面积,以估计院内死亡的风险。
在 597 名参与者中,中位年龄为 43 岁(IQR,31-56 岁);300 名参与者(50.3%)为女性,198 名(33.2%)为 HIV 感染者,55 名(9.2%)发生院内死亡。与较低风险分层相比,每个评分的较高风险分层的院内死亡风险比为:MEWS 为 5 或更高为 3.7(95%CI,2.2-6.2);NEWS 为 5 或 6 为 2.7(95%CI,0.9-7.8);NEWS 为 7 或更高为 9.6(95%CI,4.2-22.2);qSOFA 评分为 1 为 4.8(95%CI,1.2-20.2);qSOFA 评分为 2 或更高为 15.4(95%CI,3.8-63.1);SIRS 评分为 2 或更高为 2.5(95%CI,1.2-5.2);UVA 评分为 2 至 4 为 9.1(95%CI,2.7-30.3);UVA 评分为 5 或更高为 30.6(95%CI,9.6-97.8)。使用所有序数值的 AUROCs 为 UVA 评分为 0.85(95%CI,0.80-0.90),NEWS 为 0.81(95%CI,0.75-0.87),MEWS 为 0.75(95%CI,0.69-0.82),qSOFA 评分为 0.73(95%CI,0.67-0.79),SIRS 评分为 0.63(95%CI,0.56-0.71)。UVA 评分的 AUROC 明显大于其他所有评分(所有比较的 P 值均<.05),除了 NEWS(P=.08)。
这项预后研究发现,NEWS 和 UVA 评分在预测坦桑尼亚北部发热住院患者的院内死亡率方面表现优于其他疾病严重程度评分。鉴于其依赖于现成的临床数据,UVA 评分可能在中低收入环境(如撒哈拉以南非洲)中用于发热患者入院的分诊和预后。