Early Warning Scores for COVID-19 Outcomes: Modified Early Warning Score and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score Performance in Mortality and Hospital Readmission Risk Stratification.

IF 1.4 Q3 NURSING
Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research Pub Date : 2026-05-07 eCollection Date: 2026-03-01 DOI:10.4103/ijnmr.ijnmr_324_25
Mohammad Sahebkar, Mahnaz Langari, Masoumeh Saadati, Abdolghader Assarroudi, Neda Mahdavifar, Hasan Khalili
{"title":"Early Warning Scores for COVID-19 Outcomes: Modified Early Warning Score and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score Performance in Mortality and Hospital Readmission Risk Stratification.","authors":"Mohammad Sahebkar, Mahnaz Langari, Masoumeh Saadati, Abdolghader Assarroudi, Neda Mahdavifar, Hasan Khalili","doi":"10.4103/ijnmr.ijnmr_324_25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for rapid and reliable triage tools to predict patient outcomes and support resource allocation. This study aimed to compare the predictive performance of Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) for predicting mortality and hospitalization among COVID-19 patients.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This prospective cohort study included 900 outpatients and 280 inpatients with COVID-19 who presented to 22 Bahman Hospital in Neyshabur, Iran, between 2022 and 2024. Physiological parameters for both MEWS and REMS were recorded at admission and monitored for 30 days. The receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess the prognostic accuracy of MEWS and REMS for mortality and hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 48 hours before death, MEWS showed slightly better discrimination than REMS (AUC = 74.00, 95% CI: 68.80, 79.20 vs. 73.20, 95% CI: 67.50, 78.90; both <i>p</i> < 0.001). REMS exhibited greater sensitivity (75.50 vs. 38.00), while MEWS showed higher specificity (84.60 vs. 75.80). At 24 hours before death, REMS marginally outperformed MEWS (AUC = 62.80, 95% CI: 55.50, 70.10 vs. 62.30, 95% CI: 54.90, 69.70; <i>p</i> < 0.001 and < 0.001 respectively), with higher sensitivity (48.90 vs. 42.80) and slightly lower specificity (75.00 vs. 83.60).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>REMS demonstrated better prognostic accuracy 24 hours before death, likely reflecting its inclusion of age and neurological status. MEWS showed stronger performance 48 hours before death and in predicting hospitalization.</p>","PeriodicalId":44816,"journal":{"name":"Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research","volume":"31 2","pages":"336-342"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13241022/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijnmr.ijnmr_324_25","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for rapid and reliable triage tools to predict patient outcomes and support resource allocation. This study aimed to compare the predictive performance of Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) for predicting mortality and hospitalization among COVID-19 patients.

Materials and methods: This prospective cohort study included 900 outpatients and 280 inpatients with COVID-19 who presented to 22 Bahman Hospital in Neyshabur, Iran, between 2022 and 2024. Physiological parameters for both MEWS and REMS were recorded at admission and monitored for 30 days. The receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess the prognostic accuracy of MEWS and REMS for mortality and hospitalization.

Results: At 48 hours before death, MEWS showed slightly better discrimination than REMS (AUC = 74.00, 95% CI: 68.80, 79.20 vs. 73.20, 95% CI: 67.50, 78.90; both p < 0.001). REMS exhibited greater sensitivity (75.50 vs. 38.00), while MEWS showed higher specificity (84.60 vs. 75.80). At 24 hours before death, REMS marginally outperformed MEWS (AUC = 62.80, 95% CI: 55.50, 70.10 vs. 62.30, 95% CI: 54.90, 69.70; p < 0.001 and < 0.001 respectively), with higher sensitivity (48.90 vs. 42.80) and slightly lower specificity (75.00 vs. 83.60).

Conclusions: REMS demonstrated better prognostic accuracy 24 hours before death, likely reflecting its inclusion of age and neurological status. MEWS showed stronger performance 48 hours before death and in predicting hospitalization.

COVID-19结局的预警评分:改进的预警评分和快速急诊医学评分在死亡率和再入院风险分层中的表现
背景:2019冠状病毒病大流行凸显了对快速可靠的分诊工具的需求,以预测患者预后并支持资源分配。本研究旨在比较改进早期预警评分(MEWS)和快速急诊医学评分(REMS)对COVID-19患者死亡率和住院率的预测效果。材料和方法:该前瞻性队列研究纳入了2022年至2024年期间在伊朗Neyshabur的22 Bahman医院就诊的900名门诊患者和280名住院患者。入院时记录MEWS和REMS的生理参数,并监测30天。采用受试者工作特征曲线评估MEWS和REMS对死亡率和住院率的预测准确性。结果:在死亡前48小时,MEWS的识别能力略好于REMS (AUC = 74.00, 95% CI: 68.80, 79.20 vs. 73.20, 95% CI: 67.50, 78.90, p均< 0.001)。REMS具有更高的敏感性(75.50 vs. 38.00),而MEWS具有更高的特异性(84.60 vs. 75.80)。在死亡前24小时,REMS略微优于MEWS (AUC = 62.80, 95% CI: 55.50, 70.10 vs. 62.30, 95% CI: 54.90, 69.70; p分别< 0.001和< 0.001),灵敏度更高(48.90 vs. 42.80),特异性略低(75.00 vs. 83.60)。结论:REMS在死亡前24小时表现出更好的预后准确性,可能反映了其包含的年龄和神经状态。MEWS在死亡前48小时和预测住院情况方面表现较好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
79
审稿时长
46 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书