Literature DB >> 34278310

Performance Analysis of the National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score in the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial Cohort.

Christopher J Colombo1,2, Rhonda E Colombo1,2,3, Ryan C Maves2,4, Angela R Branche5, Stuart H Cohen6, Marie-Carmelle Elie7, Sarah L George8, Hannah J Jang9, Andre C Kalil10, David A Lindholm2,11, Richard A Mularski12, Justin R Ortiz13, Victor Tapson14, C Jason Liang15.   

Abstract

We sought to validate prognostic scores in coronavirus disease 2019 including National Early Warning Score, Modified Early Warning Score, and age-based modifications, and define their performance characteristics.
DESIGN: We analyzed prospectively collected data from the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial. National Early Warning Score was collected daily during the trial, Modified Early Warning Score was calculated, and age applied to both scores. We assessed prognostic value for the end points of recovery, mechanical ventilation, and death for score at enrollment, average, and slope of score over the first 48 hours.
SETTING: A multisite international inpatient trial. PATIENTS: A total of 1,062 adult nonpregnant inpatients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia.
INTERVENTIONS: Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial 1 randomized participants to receive remdesivir or placebo. The prognostic value of predictive scores was evaluated in both groups separately to assess for differential performance in the setting of remdesivir treatment.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For mortality, baseline National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score were weakly to moderately prognostic (c-index, 0.60-0.68), and improved with addition of age (c-index, 0.66-0.74). For recovery, baseline National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score demonstrated somewhat better prognostic ability (c-index, 0.65-0.69); however, National Early Warning Score+age and Modified Early Warning Score+age further improved performance (c-index, 0.68-0.71). For deterioration, baseline National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score were weakly to moderately prognostic (c-index, 0.59-0.69) and improved with addition of age (c-index, 0.63-0.70). All prognostic performance improvements due to addition of age were significant (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: In the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial 1 cohort, National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score demonstrated moderate prognostic performance in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019, with improvement in predictive ability for National Early Warning Score+age and Modified Early Warning Score+age. Area under receiver operating curve for National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score improved in patients receiving remdesivir versus placebo early in the pandemic for recovery and mortality. Although these scores are simple and readily obtainable in myriad settings, in our data set, they were insufficiently predictive to completely replace clinical judgment in coronavirus disease 2019 and may serve best as an adjunct to triage, disposition, and resourcing decisions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Modified Early Warning Score; National Early Warning Score; age; coronavirus disease 2019; prognostic scores; severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

Year:  2021        PMID: 34278310      PMCID: PMC8280088          DOI: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000474

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Explor        ISSN: 2639-8028


  40 in total

Review 1.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  The SOFA score could predict the severity and prognosis of infective endocarditis.

Authors:  Nobuhiro Asai; Arufumi Shiota; Wataru Ohashi; Hiroki Watanabe; Yuichi Shibata; Hideo Kato; Daisuke Sakanashi; Mao Hagihara; Yusuke Koizumi; Yuka Yamagishi; Hiroyuki Suematsu; Hiroshige Mikamo
Journal:  J Infect Chemother       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 2.211

3.  Accuracy of Clinicians' Ability to Predict the Need for Intensive Care Unit Readmission.

Authors:  Juan C Rojas; Patrick G Lyons; Teresa Jiang; Megha Kilaru; Leslie McCauley; Jamila Picart; Kyle A Carey; Dana P Edelson; Vineet M Arora; Matthew M Churpek
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2020-07

4.  Prognostic Accuracy of the SOFA Score, SIRS Criteria, and qSOFA Score for In-Hospital Mortality Among Adults With Suspected Infection Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit.

Authors:  Eamon P Raith; Andrew A Udy; Michael Bailey; Steven McGloughlin; Christopher MacIsaac; Rinaldo Bellomo; David V Pilcher
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-01-17       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Predictive Value of 5 Early Warning Scores for Critical COVID-19 Patients.

Authors:  Hai Hu; Ni Yao; Yanru Qiu
Journal:  Disaster Med Public Health Prep       Date:  2020-09-09       Impact factor: 1.385

6.  Development and Validation of a Clinical Risk Score to Predict the Occurrence of Critical Illness in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

Authors:  Wenhua Liang; Hengrui Liang; Limin Ou; Binfeng Chen; Ailan Chen; Caichen Li; Yimin Li; Weijie Guan; Ling Sang; Jiatao Lu; Yuanda Xu; Guoqiang Chen; Haiyan Guo; Jun Guo; Zisheng Chen; Yi Zhao; Shiyue Li; Nuofu Zhang; Nanshan Zhong; Jianxing He
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 21.873

7.  Estimated Incidence of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Illness and Hospitalization-United States, February-September 2020.

Authors:  Heather Reese; A Danielle Iuliano; Neha N Patel; Shikha Garg; Lindsay Kim; Benjamin J Silk; Aron J Hall; Alicia Fry; Carrie Reed
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 9.079

8.  Risk Factors Associated With In-Hospital Mortality in a US National Sample of Patients With COVID-19.

Authors:  Ning Rosenthal; Zhun Cao; Jake Gundrum; Jim Sianis; Stella Safo
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2020-12-01

9.  No added value of the modified NEWS score to predict clinical deterioration in COVID-19 patients.

Authors:  Maxime Volff; David Tonon; Jeremy Bourenne; Pierre Simeone; Lionel Velly
Journal:  Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 4.132

10.  Systematic evaluation and external validation of 22 prognostic models among hospitalised adults with COVID-19: an observational cohort study.

Authors:  Rishi K Gupta; Michael Marks; Thomas H A Samuels; Akish Luintel; Tommy Rampling; Humayra Chowdhury; Matteo Quartagno; Arjun Nair; Marc Lipman; Ibrahim Abubakar; Maarten van Smeden; Wai Keong Wong; Bryan Williams; Mahdad Noursadeghi
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2020-12-24       Impact factor: 16.671

View more
  2 in total

1.  Rapid Quantum Magnetic IL-6 Point-of-Care Assay in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19.

Authors:  Johnny Atallah; Dakota Archambault; Jeffrey D Randall; Adam Shepro; Lauren E Styskal; David R Glenn; Colin B Connolly; Katelin Katsis; Kathleen Gallagher; Musie Ghebremichael; Michael K Mansour
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-07

2.  Comparison of Five Triage Tools for Identifying Mortality Risk and Injury Severity of Multiple Trauma Patients Admitted to the Emergency Department in the Daytime and Nighttime: A Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Youguo Ying; Boli Huang; Yan Zhu; Xiaobin Jiang; Jinxiu Dong; Yanfen Ding; Lei Wang; Huimin Yuan; Ping Jiang
Journal:  Appl Bionics Biomech       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 1.781

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.