TY - JOUR
T1 - Screening tools for predicting mortality of adults with suspected sepsis
T2 - an international sepsis cohort validation study
AU - Blair, Paul W.
AU - Mehta, Rittal
AU - Oppong, Chris Kwaku
AU - Tin, Som
AU - Ko, Emily
AU - Tsalik, Ephraim L.
AU - Chenoweth, Josh
AU - Rozo, Michelle
AU - Adams, Nehkonti
AU - Beckett, Charmagne
AU - Woods, Christopher W.
AU - Striegel, Deborah A.
AU - Salvador, Mark G.
AU - Brandsma, Joost
AU - McKean, Lauren
AU - Mahle, Rachael E.
AU - Hulsey, William R.
AU - Krishnan, Subramaniam
AU - Prouty, Michael
AU - Letizia, Andrew
AU - Fox, Anne
AU - Faix, Dennis
AU - Lawler, James V.
AU - Duplessis, Chris
AU - Gregory, Michael G.
AU - Vantha, Te
AU - Owusu-Ofori, Alex Kwame
AU - Ansong, Daniel
AU - Oduro, George
AU - Schully, Kevin L.
AU - Clark, Danielle V.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 BMJ Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/2/20
Y1 - 2023/2/20
N2 - Objectives We evaluated the performance of commonly used sepsis screening tools across prospective sepsis cohorts in the USA, Cambodia and Ghana. Design Prospective cohort studies. Setting and participants From 2014 to 2021, participants with two or more SIRS (Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome) criteria and suspected infection were enrolled in emergency departments and medical wards at hospitals in Cambodia and Ghana and hospitalised participants with suspected infection were enrolled in the USA. Cox proportional hazards regression was performed, and Harrell's C-statistic calculated to determine 28-day mortality prediction performance of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score ≥2, SIRS score ≥3, National Early Warning Score (NEWS) ≥5, Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) ≥5 or Universal Vital Assessment (UVA) score ≥2. Screening tools were compared with baseline risk (age and sex) with the Wald test. Results The cohorts included 567 participants (42.9% women) including 187 participants from Kumasi, Ghana, 200 participants from Takeo, Cambodia and 180 participants from Durham, North Carolina in the USA. The pooled mortality was 16.4% at 28 days. The mortality prediction accuracy increased from baseline risk with the MEWS (C-statistic: 0.63, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.68; p=0.002), NEWS (C-statistic: 0.68; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.73; p<0.001), qSOFA (C-statistic: 0.70, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.75; p<0.001), UVA score (C-statistic: 0.73, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.78; p<0.001), but not with SIRS (0.60; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.65; p=0.13). Within individual cohorts, only the UVA score in Ghana performed better than baseline risk (C-statistic: 0.77; 95% CI 0.71 to 0.83; p<0.001). Conclusions Among the cohorts, MEWS, NEWS, qSOFA and UVA scores performed better than baseline risk, largely driven by accuracy improvements in Ghana, while SIRS scores did not improve prognostication accuracy. Prognostication scores should be validated within the target population prior to clinical use.
AB - Objectives We evaluated the performance of commonly used sepsis screening tools across prospective sepsis cohorts in the USA, Cambodia and Ghana. Design Prospective cohort studies. Setting and participants From 2014 to 2021, participants with two or more SIRS (Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome) criteria and suspected infection were enrolled in emergency departments and medical wards at hospitals in Cambodia and Ghana and hospitalised participants with suspected infection were enrolled in the USA. Cox proportional hazards regression was performed, and Harrell's C-statistic calculated to determine 28-day mortality prediction performance of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score ≥2, SIRS score ≥3, National Early Warning Score (NEWS) ≥5, Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) ≥5 or Universal Vital Assessment (UVA) score ≥2. Screening tools were compared with baseline risk (age and sex) with the Wald test. Results The cohorts included 567 participants (42.9% women) including 187 participants from Kumasi, Ghana, 200 participants from Takeo, Cambodia and 180 participants from Durham, North Carolina in the USA. The pooled mortality was 16.4% at 28 days. The mortality prediction accuracy increased from baseline risk with the MEWS (C-statistic: 0.63, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.68; p=0.002), NEWS (C-statistic: 0.68; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.73; p<0.001), qSOFA (C-statistic: 0.70, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.75; p<0.001), UVA score (C-statistic: 0.73, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.78; p<0.001), but not with SIRS (0.60; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.65; p=0.13). Within individual cohorts, only the UVA score in Ghana performed better than baseline risk (C-statistic: 0.77; 95% CI 0.71 to 0.83; p<0.001). Conclusions Among the cohorts, MEWS, NEWS, qSOFA and UVA scores performed better than baseline risk, largely driven by accuracy improvements in Ghana, while SIRS scores did not improve prognostication accuracy. Prognostication scores should be validated within the target population prior to clinical use.
KW - Adult intensive & critical care
KW - Epidemiology
KW - INFECTIOUS DISEASES
KW - Public health
KW - Tropical medicine
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85148383886&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85148383886&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067840
DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067840
M3 - Article
C2 - 36806137
AN - SCOPUS:85148383886
SN - 2044-6055
VL - 13
JO - BMJ open
JF - BMJ open
IS - 2
M1 - e067840
ER -