Literature DB >> 28121217

qSOFA Has Poor Sensitivity for Prehospital Identification of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock.

Maia Dorsett, Melissa Kroll, Clark S Smith, Phillip Asaro, Stephen Y Liang, Hawnwan P Moy.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Sepsis is a common and deadly disease process for which early recognition and intervention can significantly improve clinical outcomes. Despite this, sepsis remains underrecognized and therefore undertreated in the prehospital setting. Recent recommendations by the Society of Critical Care and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine advocate use of the qSOFA (quick Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment) score in non-ICU settings to screen for septic patients at greater risk for poor outcomes.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of a prehospital qSOFA score ≥ 2 for prehospital identification of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Emergency Department (ED) patients with confirmed or suspected infection were classified as having infection without sepsis (n = 71), sepsis (n = 38), or severe sepsis/septic shock (n = 43), where designation of severe sepsis/septic shock required evidence of end-organ dysfunction, hypoperfusion (lactate > 2), or vasopressor requirement.
RESULTS: We found that a prehospital qSOFA score ≥ 2 was 16.3% sensitive (95% CI 6.8-30.7%) and 97.3% specific (95% CI 92.1-99.4%) for patients ultimately confirmed to have severe sepsis/septic shock in the ED. Adding an additional point to the prehospital qSOFA score for a pulse > 100, nursing home residence, age > 50, or reported fever increased the sensitivity to 58.1% (95% CI 42.1-73.0%) and decreased the specificity to 78.0% (95% CI 69.0-85.4%). During their ED stay, approximately two-thirds of patients meeting severe sepsis/septic shock criteria eventually met qSOFA criteria with a sensitivity of 67.4% (95% CI 51.5-80.9) and specificity of 86.2% (95% CI 78.3-92). Failure to meet qSOFA criteria prehospital was predominantly due to a systolic blood pressure and respiratory rate that did not yet meet predetermined thresholds.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the dynamic nature of sepsis can make sensitive detection difficult in the prehospital setting, although combining qSOFA with other clinical information (age, nursing home status, fever, and tachycardia) can identify more patients with sepsis who may benefit from time critical interventions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  prehospital screen; qSOFA; sepsis

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28121217     DOI: 10.1080/10903127.2016.1274348

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care        ISSN: 1090-3127            Impact factor:   3.077


  32 in total

1.  Epidemiology of Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Criteria in Undifferentiated Patients and Association With Suspected Infection and Sepsis.

Authors:  Vijay Anand; Zilu Zhang; Sameer S Kadri; Michael Klompas; Chanu Rhee
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 9.410

2.  NEWS and qSIRS superior to qSOFA in the prediction of 30-day mortality in emergency department patients in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Colin A Graham; Ling Yan Leung; Ronson Sze Long Lo; Chun Yu Yeung; Suet Yi Chan; Kevin Kei Ching Hung
Journal:  Ann Med       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 4.709

3.  [Sepsis detection in emergency medicine : Results of an interprofessional survey on sepsis detection in prehospital emergency medicine and emergency departments].

Authors:  C Metelmann; B Metelmann; C Scheer; M Gründling; B Henkel; K Hahnenkamp; P Brinkrolf
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2018-05-25       Impact factor: 1.041

4.  Relationship between the prehospital quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and prognosis in patients with sepsis or suspected sepsis: a population-based ORION registry.

Authors:  Tomoya Hirose; Yusuke Katayama; Hiroshi Ogura; Yutaka Umemura; Tetsuhisa Kitamura; Yasuaki Mizushima; Takeshi Shimazu
Journal:  Acute Med Surg       Date:  2021-08-12

5.  Association between prehospital shock index variation and 28-day mortality among patients with septic shock.

Authors:  Romain Jouffroy; Basile Gilbert; Léa Thomas; Emmanuel Bloch-Laine; Patrick Ecollan; Josiane Boularan; Vincent Bounes; Benoit Vivien; Papa-Ngalgou Gueye
Journal:  BMC Emerg Med       Date:  2022-05-19

6.  Screening strategies to identify sepsis in the prehospital setting: a validation study.

Authors:  Daniel J Lane; Hannah Wunsch; Refik Saskin; Sheldon Cheskes; Steve Lin; Laurie J Morrison; Damon C Scales
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2020-03-09       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Emergency Medical Services Care and Sepsis Trajectories.

Authors:  Robert Liu; Ninad S Chaudhary; Donald M Yealy; David T Huang; Henry E Wang
Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 3.077

8.  Addition of lactic acid levels improves the accuracy of quick sequential organ failure assessment in predicting mortality in surgical patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Yun Tae Jung; Jiyeon Jeon; Jung Yun Park; Myung Jun Kim; Seung Hwan Lee; Jae Gil Lee
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 5.469

9.  A boosting inspired personalized threshold method for sepsis screening.

Authors:  Chen Feng; Paul Griffin; Shravan Kethireddy; Yajun Mei
Journal:  J Appl Stat       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 1.416

10.  Low sensitivity of qSOFA, SIRS criteria and sepsis definition to identify infected patients at risk of complication in the prehospital setting and at the emergency department triage.

Authors:  Selin Tusgul; Pierre-Nicolas Carron; Bertrand Yersin; Thierry Calandra; Fabrice Dami
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2017-11-03       Impact factor: 2.953

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.