Oliver C Redfern1, Gary B Smith2, David R Prytherch1, Paul Meredith3, Matthew Inada-Kim4, Paul E Schmidt5. 1. Centre for Healthcare Modelling & Informatics, School of Computing, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom. 2. Centre of Postgraduate Medical Research and Education (CoPMRE), Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, University of Bournemouth, Bournemouth, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Research & Innovation, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom. 4. Acute Medical Unit, Department of Medicine, Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Winchester, United Kingdom. 5. Acute Medical Unit, Department of Medicine, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The Sepsis-3 task force recommended the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment score for identifying patients with suspected infection who are at greater risk of poor outcomes, but many hospitals already use the National Early Warning Score to identify high-risk patients, irrespective of diagnosis. We sought to compare the performance of quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment and National Early Warning Score in hospitalized, non-ICU patients with and without an infection. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large U.K. General Hospital. PATIENTS: Adults hospitalized between January 1, 2010, and February 1, 2016. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We applied the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment score and National Early Warning Score to 5,435,344 vital signs sets (241,996 hospital admissions). Patients were categorized as having no infection, primary infection, or secondary infection using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition codes. National Early Warning Score was significantly better at discriminating in-hospital mortality, irrespective of infection status (no infection, National Early Warning Score 0.831 [0.825-0.838] vs quick Sequential [Sepsis-Related] Organ Failure Assessment 0.688 [0.680-0.695]; primary infection, National Early Warning Score 0.805 [0.799-0.812] vs quick Sequential [Sepsis-Related] Organ Failure Assessment 0.677 [0.670-0.685]). Similarly, National Early Warning Score performed significantly better in all patient groups (all admissions, emergency medicine admissions, and emergency surgery admissions) for all outcomes studied. Overall, quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment performed no better, and often worse, in admissions with infection than without. CONCLUSIONS: The National Early Warning Score outperforms the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment score, irrespective of infection status. These findings suggest that quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment should be reevaluated as the system of choice for identifying non-ICU patients with suspected infection who are at greater risk of poor outcome.
OBJECTIVES: The Sepsis-3 task force recommended the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment score for identifying patients with suspected infection who are at greater risk of poor outcomes, but many hospitals already use the National Early Warning Score to identify high-risk patients, irrespective of diagnosis. We sought to compare the performance of quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment and National Early Warning Score in hospitalized, non-ICU patients with and without an infection. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large U.K. General Hospital. PATIENTS: Adults hospitalized between January 1, 2010, and February 1, 2016. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We applied the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment score and National Early Warning Score to 5,435,344 vital signs sets (241,996 hospital admissions). Patients were categorized as having no infection, primary infection, or secondary infection using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition codes. National Early Warning Score was significantly better at discriminating in-hospital mortality, irrespective of infection status (no infection, National Early Warning Score 0.831 [0.825-0.838] vs quick Sequential [Sepsis-Related] Organ Failure Assessment 0.688 [0.680-0.695]; primary infection, National Early Warning Score 0.805 [0.799-0.812] vs quick Sequential [Sepsis-Related] Organ Failure Assessment 0.677 [0.670-0.685]). Similarly, National Early Warning Score performed significantly better in all patient groups (all admissions, emergency medicine admissions, and emergency surgery admissions) for all outcomes studied. Overall, quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment performed no better, and often worse, in admissions with infection than without. CONCLUSIONS: The National Early Warning Score outperforms the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment score, irrespective of infection status. These findings suggest that quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment should be reevaluated as the system of choice for identifying non-ICU patients with suspected infection who are at greater risk of poor outcome.
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
Authors: Ryan C Maves; Stephanie A Richard; David A Lindholm; Nusrat Epsi; Derek T Larson; Christian Conlon; Kyle Everson; Steffen Lis; Paul W Blair; Sharon Chi; Anuradha Ganesan; Simon Pollett; Timothy H Burgess; Brian K Agan; Rhonda E Colombo; Christopher J Colombo Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2021-08-10 Impact factor: 3.835
Authors: Christopher J Colombo; Rhonda E Colombo; Ryan C Maves; Angela R Branche; Stuart H Cohen; Marie-Carmelle Elie; Sarah L George; Hannah J Jang; Andre C Kalil; David A Lindholm; Richard A Mularski; Justin R Ortiz; Victor Tapson; C Jason Liang Journal: Crit Care Explor Date: 2021-07-13
Authors: Nicholas Levin; Devin Horton; Matthew Sanford; Benjamin Horne; Mahima Saseendran; Kencee Graves; Michael White; Joseph E Tonna Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2019-12-14 Impact factor: 2.469
Authors: Vincent X Liu; Yun Lu; Kyle A Carey; Emily R Gilbert; Majid Afshar; Mary Akel; Nirav S Shah; John Dolan; Christopher Winslow; Patricia Kipnis; Dana P Edelson; Gabriel J Escobar; Matthew M Churpek Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-05-01
Authors: Stephen Gerry; Timothy Bonnici; Jacqueline Birks; Shona Kirtley; Pradeep S Virdee; Peter J Watkinson; Gary S Collins Journal: BMJ Date: 2020-05-20
Authors: Mickael Gette; Sara Fernandes; Marion Marlinge; Marine Duranjou; Wijayanto Adi; Maelle Dambo; Pierre Simeone; Pierre Michelet; Nicolas Bruder; Regis Guieu; Julien Fromonot Journal: Biomedicines Date: 2021-05-18
Authors: Priya A Prasad; Margaret C Fang; Sandra P Martinez; Kathleen D Liu; Kirsten N Kangelaris Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2021-08 Impact factor: 2.899