Predictive value of quick SOFA and revised Baux scores in burn patients

Several scoring systems, such as the Baux score, help predict outcomes in burn patients. The quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score (composed of a respiratory rate of 22/min or greater, systolic blood pressure of 100 mmHg or less, and altered mental status) is a new bedside index proposed to help identify patients with suspected infection at risk of complications. We hypothesized that qSOFA scores would be associated with in-hospital mortality, ICU admission, and length of stay (LOS) in patients with burns. We performed a retrospective review of all burn patients admitted between January 2010–March 2017 at an academic, suburban, hospital with a regional burn center. qSOFA scores were calculated as 1 point each for GCS<15, RR≥22, and SBP≤100. A qSOFA value of>2 was considered high risk. Revised Baux (rBaux) scores were calculated as age +%TBSA burned +17 (if inhalation injury). A rBaux score >140 was considered high risk. Univariate, multivariate and receiver operating characteristics analyses were performed to compare qSOFA and rBaux scores. There were 1039 burn admissions during the study period. Mean age was 30 ± 24 years, 66% were male. Mean TBSA was 10 ± 12%, mean injury severity score was 5 ± 8. Mean hospital LOS was 8 ± 24 days, 22 patients (2.1%) died. qSOFA scores were associated with mortality and ICU admission. Of all patients, 80 were high risk by qSOFA and 7 by Baux scores. ROC characteristics of qSOFA and Baux scores for predicting death were sensitivity 36% vs. 32%, specificity 94% vs. 100%, PPV 13% vs. 100%, and NPV 98% vs. 99% respectively. The AUC for qSOFA (0.68 [95% CI, 0.54–0.81]) was lower than for Baux (0.99 [95%CI, 0.99–1.00]). Youden’s index identified an optimal cutoff of 85 on the Baux score yielding sensitivity 100%, specificity 94%, PPV 27%, and NPV 100% for mortality. Our results indicate that while qSOFA scores were associated with outcomes, a rBaux score had greater predictive value. The optimal rBaux score for predicting all mortality and ICU admission was 85.     

Performance and comparison of assessment models to predict 30-day mortality in patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia

BackgroundHospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) is the most common hospital-acquired infection in China with substantial morbidity and mortality. But no specific risk assessment model has been well validated in patients with HAP. The aim of this study was to investigate the published risk assessment models that could potentially be used to predict 30-day mortality in HAP patients in non-surgical departments.MethodsThis study was a single-center, retrospective study. In total, 223 patients diagnosed with HAP from 2012 to 2017 were included in this study. Clinical and laboratory data during the initial 24 hours after HAP diagnosis were collected to calculate the pneumonia severity index (PSI); consciousness, urea nitrogen, respiratory rate, blood pressure, and age ≥65 years (CURB-65); Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II); Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA); and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) scores. The discriminatory power was tested by constructing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and the areas under the curve (AUCs) were calculated.ResultsThe all-cause 30-day mortality rate was 18.4% (41/223). The PSI, CURB-65, SOFA, APACHE II, and qSOFA scores were significantly higher in non-survivors than in survivors (all P < 0.001). The discriminatory abilities of the APACHE II and SOFA scores were better than those of the CURB-65 and qSOFA scores (ROC AUC: APACHE II vs. CURB-65, 0.863 vs. 0.744, Z = 3.055, P = 0.002; APACHE II vs. qSOFA, 0.863 vs. 0.767, Z = 3.017, P = 0.003; SOFA vs. CURB-65, 0.856 vs. 0.744, Z = 2.589, P = 0.010; SOFA vs. qSOFA, 0.856 vs. 0.767, Z = 2.170, P = 0.030). The cut-off values we defined for the SOFA, APACHE II, and qSOFA scores were 4, 14, and 1.ConclusionsThese results suggest that the APACHE II and SOFA scores determined during the initial 24 h after HAP diagnosis may be useful for the prediction of 30-day mortality in HAP patients in non-surgical departments. The qSOFA score may be a simple tool that can be used to quickly identify severe infections.     

NEWS-3PL评分对急诊脓毒症患者的早期识别价值

目的评价NEWS-3PL评分对急诊脓毒症患者的早期识别价值。方法选择2019年7月至2020年7月来我院就诊的急性感染需住院治疗的120例患者为研究对象,获取其入院6 h内的相关生理生化指标进行NEWS-3PL评分、英国国家早期预警评分(NEWS)、快速序贯器官功能衰竭评分(qSOFA)。依据患者出院或死亡诊断分为脓毒症组和非脓毒症组,比较两组上述评分,绘制受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线),比较各评分ROC曲线下面积(AUC)。结果脓毒症组的NEWS-3PL、NEWS、qSOFA评分均高于非脓毒症组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。NEWS-3PL、NEWS、qSOFA评分的AUC分别为0.918(95%CI:0.843~0.961)、0.866(95%CI:0.792~0.921)、0.788(95%CI:0.704~0.857)。NEWS-3PL评分的AUC值大于NEWS评分及qSOFA评分,NEWS评分的AUC值大于qSOFA评分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);NEWS-3PL评分预测值为>5分(灵敏度:88.19%、特异度:84.79%)。结论NEWS-3PL评分可用于脓毒症的早期识别,其识别效能优于NEWS评分和qSOFA评分,但部分评分项目的获取不如后两者方便,存在一定不足。