qSOFA评分作为脓毒症筛查工具在急诊科的应用。

IF 1.2 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-24 DOI:10.4103/jets.jets_99_22
Atul Kumar Tiwari, Nayer Jamshed, Ankit Kumar Sahu, Akshay Kumar, Praveen Aggarwal, Sanjeev Bhoi, Roshan Mathew, Meera Ekka
{"title":"qSOFA评分作为脓毒症筛查工具在急诊科的应用。","authors":"Atul Kumar Tiwari,&nbsp;Nayer Jamshed,&nbsp;Ankit Kumar Sahu,&nbsp;Akshay Kumar,&nbsp;Praveen Aggarwal,&nbsp;Sanjeev Bhoi,&nbsp;Roshan Mathew,&nbsp;Meera Ekka","doi":"10.4103/jets.jets_99_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Sepsis is the leading cause of mortality, and various scoring systems have been developed for its early identification and treatment. The objective was to test the ability of quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score to identify sepsis and predict sepsis-related mortality in the emergency department (ED).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective study from July 2018 to April 2020. Consecutive patients with age ≥18 years who presented to the ED with a clinical suspicion of infection were included. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive values (NPV), and odds ratio (OR) for sepsis related mortality on day 7 and 28 were measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1200 patients were recruited; of which 48 patients were excluded and 17 patients were lost to follow-up. 54 (45.4%) of 119 patients with positive qSOFA (qSOFA >2) died at 7 days and 76 (63.9%) died at 28 days. A total of 103 (10.1%) of 1016 patients with negative qSOFA (qSOFA score <2) died at 7 days and 207 (20.4%) died at 28 days. Patients with positive qSOFA score were at higher odds of dying at 7 days (OR: 3.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.1-5.2, <i>P</i> < 0.001) and 28 days (OR: 6.9, 95% CI: 4.6-10.3, <i>P</i> < 0.001). The PPV and NPV with positive qSOFA score to predict 7- and 28-day mortality were 45.4%, 89.9% and 63.9%, 79.6%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The qSOFA score can be used as a risk stratification tool in a resource-limited setting to identify infected patients at an increased risk of death.</p>","PeriodicalId":15692,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10167823/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of qSOFA Score as a Screening Tool for Sepsis in the Emergency Department.\",\"authors\":\"Atul Kumar Tiwari,&nbsp;Nayer Jamshed,&nbsp;Ankit Kumar Sahu,&nbsp;Akshay Kumar,&nbsp;Praveen Aggarwal,&nbsp;Sanjeev Bhoi,&nbsp;Roshan Mathew,&nbsp;Meera Ekka\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jets.jets_99_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Sepsis is the leading cause of mortality, and various scoring systems have been developed for its early identification and treatment. The objective was to test the ability of quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score to identify sepsis and predict sepsis-related mortality in the emergency department (ED).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective study from July 2018 to April 2020. Consecutive patients with age ≥18 years who presented to the ED with a clinical suspicion of infection were included. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive values (NPV), and odds ratio (OR) for sepsis related mortality on day 7 and 28 were measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1200 patients were recruited; of which 48 patients were excluded and 17 patients were lost to follow-up. 54 (45.4%) of 119 patients with positive qSOFA (qSOFA >2) died at 7 days and 76 (63.9%) died at 28 days. A total of 103 (10.1%) of 1016 patients with negative qSOFA (qSOFA score <2) died at 7 days and 207 (20.4%) died at 28 days. Patients with positive qSOFA score were at higher odds of dying at 7 days (OR: 3.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.1-5.2, <i>P</i> < 0.001) and 28 days (OR: 6.9, 95% CI: 4.6-10.3, <i>P</i> < 0.001). The PPV and NPV with positive qSOFA score to predict 7- and 28-day mortality were 45.4%, 89.9% and 63.9%, 79.6%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The qSOFA score can be used as a risk stratification tool in a resource-limited setting to identify infected patients at an increased risk of death.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15692,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10167823/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jets.jets_99_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jets.jets_99_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:脓毒症是导致死亡的主要原因,已经开发了各种评分系统来早期识别和治疗脓毒症。目的是测试快速序贯器官衰竭评估(qSOFA)评分在急诊科(ED)识别败血症和预测败血症相关死亡率的能力。方法:我们于2018年7月至2020年4月进行了一项前瞻性研究。年龄≥18岁的连续患者因临床怀疑感染而就诊于急诊科。测量第7天和第28天败血症相关死亡率的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)和比值比(OR)。结果:共招募了1200名患者;其中48例被排除,17例失访。119例qSOFA阳性(qSOFA>2)患者中,54例(45.4%)在第7天死亡,76例(63.9%)在第28天死亡。在1016例qSOFA阴性(qSOFA评分P<0.001)和28天(OR:6.9,95%CI:4.6-10.3,P<0.001)的患者中,共有103例(10.1%)。qSOFA阳性的PPV和NPV预测7天和28天死亡率分别为45.4%、89.9%和63.9%、79.6%。结论:在资源有限的情况下,qSOFA评分可以作为一种风险分层工具,用于识别死亡风险增加的感染患者。
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
Performance of qSOFA Score as a Screening Tool for Sepsis in the Emergency Department.

Introduction: Sepsis is the leading cause of mortality, and various scoring systems have been developed for its early identification and treatment. The objective was to test the ability of quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score to identify sepsis and predict sepsis-related mortality in the emergency department (ED).

Methods: We conducted a prospective study from July 2018 to April 2020. Consecutive patients with age ≥18 years who presented to the ED with a clinical suspicion of infection were included. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive values (NPV), and odds ratio (OR) for sepsis related mortality on day 7 and 28 were measured.

Results: A total of 1200 patients were recruited; of which 48 patients were excluded and 17 patients were lost to follow-up. 54 (45.4%) of 119 patients with positive qSOFA (qSOFA >2) died at 7 days and 76 (63.9%) died at 28 days. A total of 103 (10.1%) of 1016 patients with negative qSOFA (qSOFA score <2) died at 7 days and 207 (20.4%) died at 28 days. Patients with positive qSOFA score were at higher odds of dying at 7 days (OR: 3.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.1-5.2, P < 0.001) and 28 days (OR: 6.9, 95% CI: 4.6-10.3, P < 0.001). The PPV and NPV with positive qSOFA score to predict 7- and 28-day mortality were 45.4%, 89.9% and 63.9%, 79.6%, respectively.

Conclusion: The qSOFA score can be used as a risk stratification tool in a resource-limited setting to identify infected patients at an increased risk of death.

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
2.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
52
审稿时长
39 weeks
期刊最新文献
A Case of Spastic Quadriplegia Remaining after Multiple Traumatic Injuries Complicated by Sepsis and Reversible Posterior Leukoencephalopathy Syndrome, as well as Delayed Multifocal Microbleeds. Acute Myocardial Infarction with Refractory Cardiogenic Shock after High-Voltage Electrocution: An Intriguing Case. Air Everywhere without Bowel Injury. Bed-up-head-elevated Position versus Supine Sniffing Position in Patients Undergoing Rapid Sequence Intubation Using Direct Laryngoscopy in the Emergency Department - A Randomized Controlled Trial. Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Acute Liver Injury in Sepsis Patients.
×
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