Department of Emergency Medicine,West China Hospital, Sichuan University/West China School of Nursing,Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Institute of Disaster Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Nurs Crit Care. 2024 Nov;29(6):1623-1635. doi: 10.1111/nicc.13016. Epub 2023 Dec 21.
In recent years, some studies classified patients with sepsis and predicted their mortality by using some evaluation scales. Several studies reported significant differences in the predictive values of several tools, and the non-uniformity of the cut-off value.
To determine and compare the prognostic accuracy of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria in predicting the mortality of patients with sepsis.
This study comprised of systematic literature review and meta-analysis according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases from their establishment to July 31, 2022. The research articles published in the index journals provide sufficient data (true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative results) for patients with sepsis. The combined sensitivity and specificity of the 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the bivariate random effect model (BRM). The hierarchical overall subject working characteristics (HSROC) curve was drawn to evaluate the accuracy of the overall prognosis.
Data of 55 088 patients from 32 studies were included in this meta-analysis. SOFA had an intermediate sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.67-0.78) and a specificity of 0.70 (0.63-0.76). SIRS criteria had the highest sensitivity of 0.75 (0.66-0.82) and the lowest specificity of 0.40 (0.29-0.52). MEWS had the lowest sensitivity of 0.49 (0.40-0.59) and the highest specificity of 0.82 (0.78-0.86).
Among SOFA, MEWS, and SIRS criteria, SOFA showed moderate sensitivity and specificity for predicting mortality in patients with sepsis, the highest sensitivity of SIRS and the strongest specificity of MEWS for predicting mortality in patients with sepsis. The future research direction is to combine the relevant indicators of MEWS and SIRS to develop a measurement tool with high reliability and validity.
The review provides useful insights into the prognostic accuracy of different assessment tools in predicting mortality in sepsis patients, which will help clinicians choose the most appropriate tool for early identification and treatment of sepsis. The findings may also contribute to the development of more accurate and reliable prognostic models for sepsis.
近年来,一些研究通过使用某些评估量表对脓毒症患者进行分类并预测其死亡率。几项研究报告了几种工具的预测值存在显著差异,并且截断值的非一致性。
确定和比较序贯器官衰竭评估 (SOFA) 评分、改良早期预警评分 (MEWS) 和全身炎症反应综合征 (SIRS) 标准在预测脓毒症患者死亡率方面的预后准确性。
本研究根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目进行了系统文献回顾和荟萃分析。我们从建立到 2022 年 7 月 31 日在 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库中进行了搜索。索引期刊中发表的研究文章为脓毒症患者提供了足够的数据(真阳性、假阳性、真阴性和假阴性结果)。使用双变量随机效应模型 (BRM) 计算 95%置信区间 (CI) 的合并敏感性和特异性。绘制分层总体受试者工作特征 (HSROC) 曲线以评估总体预后的准确性。
来自 32 项研究的 55088 名患者的数据纳入了本次荟萃分析。SOFA 的敏感性为中等,为 0.73(95%CI:0.67-0.78),特异性为 0.70(0.63-0.76)。SIRS 标准的敏感性最高,为 0.75(0.66-0.82),特异性最低,为 0.40(0.29-0.52)。MEWS 的敏感性最低,为 0.49(0.40-0.59),特异性最高,为 0.82(0.78-0.86)。
在 SOFA、MEWS 和 SIRS 标准中,SOFA 对预测脓毒症患者死亡率具有中等敏感性和特异性,SIRS 的敏感性最高,MEWS 的特异性最强。未来的研究方向是结合 MEWS 和 SIRS 的相关指标,开发一种具有高可靠性和有效性的测量工具。
该综述提供了有关不同评估工具在预测脓毒症患者死亡率方面的预后准确性的有用见解,这将有助于临床医生选择最适合早期识别和治疗脓毒症的工具。研究结果还可能有助于开发更准确和可靠的脓毒症预后模型。