We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Comparing the Ability and Accuracy of mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 in Predicting the Status of Nontraumatic Patients Referred to a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Study.
- Authors
Ebrahimian, Abbasali; Shahcheragh, Seyyed-Mohammad-Taghi; Fakhr-Movahedi, Ali
- Abstract
Introduction: This study was proposed to compare the ability and accuracy of modified sequential organ failure assessment (mSOFA), quick SOFA (qSOFA), and qSOFA-65 in predicting the status of nontraumatic patients referred to hospital emergency departments (EDs). Materials and methods: This study was a prospective design that performed on the 746 nontraumatic patients referred to the ED. Each patient data was collected using a demographic questionnaire, mSOFA, qSOFA, and qSOFA-65 scales. Related variables of each scale were recorded based on patients' medical records. Then, the outcome of each patient in the ED was followed up and recorded. The severity and specificity of each scale were estimated by the area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve at 99% confidence interval (CI). Results: The mean and standard deviation of scores were as follows: mSOFA = 4.40 ± 2.58, qSOFA = 0.50 ± 0.70, and qSOFA-65 = 0.92 ± 0.96. Patients requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) were identified with AUROC curve as follows: mSOFA = 0.882 (99% CI = 0.778--0.865); qSOFA = 0.717 (99% CI = 0.662--0.773); and qSOFA-65 = 0.771 (99% CI = 0.721--0.820), which showed that mSOFA has higher sensitivity and specificity than the other two scales in identifying patients requiring admission to the ICU. Conclusion: All three scales were found to be reliable for identifying nontraumatic patients at risk of death and patients requiring admission to the ICU. However, since the time and data required to complete qSOFA and qSOFA-65 are much less than those of mSOFA, it is recommended that qSOFA and especially qSOFA-65 be used in ED to identify critically ill nontraumatic patients.
- Subjects
HOSPITALS; INTENSIVE care units; HOSPITAL emergency services; CONFIDENCE intervals; RESEARCH methodology evaluation; RESEARCH methodology; MULTIPLE organ failure; ACQUISITION of data; PATIENTS; RISK assessment; HOSPITAL admission &; discharge; MEDICAL referrals; MEDICAL records; DESCRIPTIVE statistics; SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC factors; SENSITIVITY &; specificity (Statistics); LONGITUDINAL method
- Publication
Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine, 2020, Vol 24, Issue 11, p1045
- ISSN
0972-5229
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23656