针对急诊科不同感染灶的 MEWS、NEWS、NEWS-2 和 qSOFA 验证,acutelines 队列。

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-16 DOI:10.1007/s10096-024-04961-1
Carolina Hincapié-Osorno, Raymond J van Wijk, Douwe F Postma, Jacqueline Koeze, Jan C Ter Maaten, Fabian Jaimes, Hjalmar R Bouma
{"title":"针对急诊科不同感染灶的 MEWS、NEWS、NEWS-2 和 qSOFA 验证,acutelines 队列。","authors":"Carolina Hincapié-Osorno, Raymond J van Wijk, Douwe F Postma, Jacqueline Koeze, Jan C Ter Maaten, Fabian Jaimes, Hjalmar R Bouma","doi":"10.1007/s10096-024-04961-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The lack of specific prognostic markers necessitates tools for early risk identification in patients with suspected infections in emergency department (ED). This study evaluates the prognostic accuracy of various Early Warning Scores (EWS)-MEWS, NEWS, NEWS-2, and qSOFA-for in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and ICU admission, considering the site of infection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Acutelines cohort, which included data collected from patients admitted to the University Medical Centre Groningen ED between September 2020 and July 2023. Patients were included if they had an ICD-10 code for infection. EWS were calculated using clinical data within 8 h post-admission. Predictive performance was assessed using AUC-ROC, calibration by the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and calibration curves, and operative characteristics like sensitivity and specificity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1661 patients were analyzed, with infections distributed as follows: lower respiratory tract (32.9%), urinary tract (30.7%), abdominal (12.5%), skin and soft tissue (9.5%), and others (8.2%). The overall in-hospital mortality was 6.7%, and ICU admission was 7.1%. The highest AUC-ROC for in-hospital mortality prediction was observed with NEWS and NEWS-2 in abdominal infections (0.86), while the lowest was for qSOFA in skin and soft tissue infections (0.57). Predictive performance varied by infection site.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study highlights the variability in EWS performance based on infection site, emphasizing the need to consider the source of infection in EWS development for sepsis prognosis. Tailored or hybrid models may enhance predictive accuracy, balancing simplicity and specificity.</p>","PeriodicalId":11782,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"2441-2452"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of MEWS, NEWS, NEWS-2 and qSOFA for different infection foci at the emergency department, the acutelines cohort.\",\"authors\":\"Carolina Hincapié-Osorno, Raymond J van Wijk, Douwe F Postma, Jacqueline Koeze, Jan C Ter Maaten, Fabian Jaimes, Hjalmar R Bouma\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10096-024-04961-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The lack of specific prognostic markers necessitates tools for early risk identification in patients with suspected infections in emergency department (ED). This study evaluates the prognostic accuracy of various Early Warning Scores (EWS)-MEWS, NEWS, NEWS-2, and qSOFA-for in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and ICU admission, considering the site of infection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Acutelines cohort, which included data collected from patients admitted to the University Medical Centre Groningen ED between September 2020 and July 2023. Patients were included if they had an ICD-10 code for infection. EWS were calculated using clinical data within 8 h post-admission. Predictive performance was assessed using AUC-ROC, calibration by the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and calibration curves, and operative characteristics like sensitivity and specificity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1661 patients were analyzed, with infections distributed as follows: lower respiratory tract (32.9%), urinary tract (30.7%), abdominal (12.5%), skin and soft tissue (9.5%), and others (8.2%). The overall in-hospital mortality was 6.7%, and ICU admission was 7.1%. The highest AUC-ROC for in-hospital mortality prediction was observed with NEWS and NEWS-2 in abdominal infections (0.86), while the lowest was for qSOFA in skin and soft tissue infections (0.57). Predictive performance varied by infection site.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study highlights the variability in EWS performance based on infection site, emphasizing the need to consider the source of infection in EWS development for sepsis prognosis. Tailored or hybrid models may enhance predictive accuracy, balancing simplicity and specificity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2441-2452\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-024-04961-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-024-04961-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:脓毒症是全球发病和死亡的主要原因。由于缺乏特异性预后标志物,因此急诊科(ED)需要对疑似感染患者进行早期风险识别的工具。本研究评估了各种早期预警评分(EWS)--MEWS、NEWS、NEWS-2 和 qSOFA--对院内死亡率、30 天死亡率和入住重症监护病房的预后准确性,并考虑了感染部位:我们使用 Acutelines 队列中的数据进行了回顾性分析,该队列包括 2020 年 9 月至 2023 年 7 月期间格罗宁根大学医疗中心急诊室收治的患者数据。如果患者有感染的 ICD-10 编码,则将其纳入分析范围。使用入院后 8 小时内的临床数据计算 EWS。使用AUC-ROC评估预测性能,使用Hosmer-Lemeshow检验和校准曲线进行校准,并评估灵敏度和特异性等手术特征:共分析了1661名患者,感染分布如下:下呼吸道(32.9%)、泌尿道(30.7%)、腹部(12.5%)、皮肤和软组织(9.5%)以及其他(8.2%)。总体院内死亡率为 6.7%,入住重症监护室的比例为 7.1%。在腹部感染中,NEWS 和 NEWS-2 预测院内死亡率的 AUC-ROC 最高(0.86),而在皮肤和软组织感染中,qSOFA 预测院内死亡率的 AUC-ROC 最低(0.57)。感染部位不同,预测效果也不同:该研究强调了基于感染部位的 EWS 性能差异,强调了在开发用于败血症预后的 EWS 时考虑感染源的必要性。定制或混合模型可提高预测准确性,同时兼顾简便性和特异性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Validation of MEWS, NEWS, NEWS-2 and qSOFA for different infection foci at the emergency department, the acutelines cohort.

Purpose: Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The lack of specific prognostic markers necessitates tools for early risk identification in patients with suspected infections in emergency department (ED). This study evaluates the prognostic accuracy of various Early Warning Scores (EWS)-MEWS, NEWS, NEWS-2, and qSOFA-for in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and ICU admission, considering the site of infection.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Acutelines cohort, which included data collected from patients admitted to the University Medical Centre Groningen ED between September 2020 and July 2023. Patients were included if they had an ICD-10 code for infection. EWS were calculated using clinical data within 8 h post-admission. Predictive performance was assessed using AUC-ROC, calibration by the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and calibration curves, and operative characteristics like sensitivity and specificity.

Results: A total of 1661 patients were analyzed, with infections distributed as follows: lower respiratory tract (32.9%), urinary tract (30.7%), abdominal (12.5%), skin and soft tissue (9.5%), and others (8.2%). The overall in-hospital mortality was 6.7%, and ICU admission was 7.1%. The highest AUC-ROC for in-hospital mortality prediction was observed with NEWS and NEWS-2 in abdominal infections (0.86), while the lowest was for qSOFA in skin and soft tissue infections (0.57). Predictive performance varied by infection site.

Conclusions: The study highlights the variability in EWS performance based on infection site, emphasizing the need to consider the source of infection in EWS development for sepsis prognosis. Tailored or hybrid models may enhance predictive accuracy, balancing simplicity and specificity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
2.20%
发文量
138
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: EJCMID is an interdisciplinary journal devoted to the publication of communications on infectious diseases of bacterial, viral and parasitic origin.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of performances of laboratory methods in diagnosing pulmonary cryptococcosis in 1508 patients having lung biopsy tissues collected: a 6-year retrospective study. Treatment outcomes and their predictors in children hospitalized with varicella complicated by bacterial superinfections after pandemic of COVID-19 - a retrospective multicenter analysis of real-life data in Poland. Vaginal microbiota stability over 18 months in young student women in France. Carbapenem resistant Campylobacter jejuni bacteremia in a Bruton's X-linked agammaglobulinemia patient. Clinical experience with ceftazidime/avibactam for the treatment of extensively drug-resistant or pandrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae in neonates and children.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1