{"title":"[Early warning scores: a rapid umbrella review].","authors":"Peter Nydahl, Marie-Madlen Jeitziner, Susanne Krotsetis, Koroush Kabir, Ralf Kuhlen, Jan-Peter Braun","doi":"10.1007/s00063-025-01294-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early warning scores (EWS) are used for monitoring and evaluating vital signs in hospitalized patients. With EWS, escalating measures for monitoring, consultation, and admission to intensive care units (ICU) can be initiated based on point values, potentially improving patient outcomes, (mostly mortality, ICU admission, sepsis, cardiac arrest). It remains unclear in which areas the implementation of EWS is most appropriate.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A rapid umbrella review including systematic reviews and meta-analyses, with searches conducted in CINAHL via EBSCO, OVID via Medline, Cochrane via Cochrane Library and LIVIVO via University Library Cologne, and data extraction in May 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 44 systematic reviews and 15 meta-analyses covering 542 individual studies with 57 different EWS versions in various settings/aspects such as methodology, patient outcome (sepsis, emergency departments, obstetrics, pediatrics), implementation, performance, and others were identified. Both the analysis results and the level of evidence from the analyses appear heterogeneous. EWS seem to be most effective in reducing risks in high-risk populations such as in emergency departments, geriatric trauma, medicine, and surgery, and possibly post-ICU patients. However, implementation requires extensive resources in terms of staff, structures, and processes to ensure quality improvement. Electronic aids such as monitoring systems, red flags in electronic patient records, and the use of artificial intelligence could significantly support implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is no general recommendation for or against the widespread introduction of EWS. EWS should first be implemented in high-risk areas, considering available staffing and material resources. Electronic systems could assist in implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":49019,"journal":{"name":"Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00063-025-01294-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Early warning scores (EWS) are used for monitoring and evaluating vital signs in hospitalized patients. With EWS, escalating measures for monitoring, consultation, and admission to intensive care units (ICU) can be initiated based on point values, potentially improving patient outcomes, (mostly mortality, ICU admission, sepsis, cardiac arrest). It remains unclear in which areas the implementation of EWS is most appropriate.
Methods: A rapid umbrella review including systematic reviews and meta-analyses, with searches conducted in CINAHL via EBSCO, OVID via Medline, Cochrane via Cochrane Library and LIVIVO via University Library Cologne, and data extraction in May 2024.
Results: A total of 44 systematic reviews and 15 meta-analyses covering 542 individual studies with 57 different EWS versions in various settings/aspects such as methodology, patient outcome (sepsis, emergency departments, obstetrics, pediatrics), implementation, performance, and others were identified. Both the analysis results and the level of evidence from the analyses appear heterogeneous. EWS seem to be most effective in reducing risks in high-risk populations such as in emergency departments, geriatric trauma, medicine, and surgery, and possibly post-ICU patients. However, implementation requires extensive resources in terms of staff, structures, and processes to ensure quality improvement. Electronic aids such as monitoring systems, red flags in electronic patient records, and the use of artificial intelligence could significantly support implementation.
Conclusion: There is no general recommendation for or against the widespread introduction of EWS. EWS should first be implemented in high-risk areas, considering available staffing and material resources. Electronic systems could assist in implementation.
期刊介绍:
Medizinische Klinik – Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin is an internationally respected interdisciplinary journal. It is intended for physicians, nurses, respiratory and physical therapists active in intensive care and accident/emergency units, but also for internists, anesthesiologists, surgeons, neurologists, and pediatricians with special interest in intensive care medicine.
Comprehensive reviews describe the most recent advances in the field of internal medicine with special focus on intensive care problems. Freely submitted original articles present important studies in this discipline and promote scientific exchange, while articles in the category Photo essay feature interesting cases and aim at optimizing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. In the rubric journal club well-respected experts comment on outstanding international publications. Review articles under the rubric "Continuing Medical Education" present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice. The rubrics "Nursing practice" and "Physical therapy" round out the information.