Comparison of COVID-GRAM, 4C Mortality, qSOFA, SIRS, NEWS, and MEWS in Predicting Mortality in COVID-19

IF 0.2 Q4 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
H. Aydın, H. Doğan, M. Erdogan
{"title":"Comparison of COVID-GRAM, 4C Mortality, qSOFA, SIRS, NEWS, and MEWS in Predicting Mortality in COVID-19","authors":"H. Aydın, H. Doğan, M. Erdogan","doi":"10.4274/bmj.galenos.2023.2022.7-10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Mortality prediction methods are still controversial about coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of the the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), Modified Early Warning score (MEWS), National Early Warning score, 4C mortality, and COVID-GRAM critical illness risk score (COVID-GRAM), scoring systems in predicting 28-day mortality in adult patients with COVID-19.Methods: This single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study included patients presenting to a pandemic hospital between November 2021 and December 2021. Inclusion criteria were patients aged 18 years or older, patients with positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction test, and thoracic computed tomography imaging. The receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to examine the diagnostic accuracy of the investigated scoring systems in predicting 28-day mortality. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS and MedCalc software packages. A p-value of <0.5 was considered statistically significant.Results: The study was conducted in 846 patients. The median age of the patients included in the study was 49 (36-75) years, and the rate of male patients was 46.3% (n=392). The rate of pneumonia detection was 85.1% (n=720). The hospitalization rate was 49.6% (n=420), the admission rate to the intensive care unit was 7.4% (n=63), and the 28-day mortality rate was 5.7% (n=48). The highest area under the curve (AUC) values for 28-day mortality prediction was obtained from COVID-GRAM (AUC: 0.935) and 4C mortality (AUC: 0.922) scores, while the lowest AUC values were calculated in SIRS (AUC: 0.756) and MEWS (AUC: 0.805).Conclusion: According to our results, COVID-GRAM may be the first-choice scoring system in the emergency department for predicting the 28-day mortality associated with COVID-19.","PeriodicalId":42529,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Bakirkoy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Bakirkoy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/bmj.galenos.2023.2022.7-10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Mortality prediction methods are still controversial about coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of the the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), Modified Early Warning score (MEWS), National Early Warning score, 4C mortality, and COVID-GRAM critical illness risk score (COVID-GRAM), scoring systems in predicting 28-day mortality in adult patients with COVID-19.Methods: This single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study included patients presenting to a pandemic hospital between November 2021 and December 2021. Inclusion criteria were patients aged 18 years or older, patients with positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction test, and thoracic computed tomography imaging. The receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to examine the diagnostic accuracy of the investigated scoring systems in predicting 28-day mortality. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS and MedCalc software packages. A p-value of <0.5 was considered statistically significant.Results: The study was conducted in 846 patients. The median age of the patients included in the study was 49 (36-75) years, and the rate of male patients was 46.3% (n=392). The rate of pneumonia detection was 85.1% (n=720). The hospitalization rate was 49.6% (n=420), the admission rate to the intensive care unit was 7.4% (n=63), and the 28-day mortality rate was 5.7% (n=48). The highest area under the curve (AUC) values for 28-day mortality prediction was obtained from COVID-GRAM (AUC: 0.935) and 4C mortality (AUC: 0.922) scores, while the lowest AUC values were calculated in SIRS (AUC: 0.756) and MEWS (AUC: 0.805).Conclusion: According to our results, COVID-GRAM may be the first-choice scoring system in the emergency department for predicting the 28-day mortality associated with COVID-19.
COVID-GRAM、4C死亡率、qSOFA、SIRS、NEWS和MEWS预测新冠肺炎死亡率的比较
目的:关于2019冠状病毒病(新冠肺炎)肺炎的死亡率预测方法仍存在争议。本研究旨在比较快速顺序器官衰竭评估、全身炎症反应综合征(SIRS)、改良早期预警评分(MEWS)、国家早期预警评分、4C死亡率和COVID-GRAM危重症风险评分(COVID-GRAM)评分系统预测成年COVID-19患者28天死亡率的有效性,回顾性观察性队列研究包括2021年11月至2021年12月期间在流行病医院就诊的患者。纳入标准为18岁或以上的患者、逆转录聚合酶链式反应检测呈阳性的患者和胸部计算机断层扫描成像。进行受试者操作特征分析,以检查所研究的评分系统在预测28天死亡率方面的诊断准确性。使用SPSS和MedCalc软件包进行统计分析。p值<0.5被认为具有统计学意义。结果:对846例患者进行了研究。纳入研究的患者中位年龄为49岁(36-75岁),男性患者的发病率为46.3%(n=392)。肺炎检出率为85.1%(n=720)。住院率为49.6%(n=420),重症监护室入院率为7.4%(n=63),28天死亡率为5.7%(n=48)。28天死亡率预测的最高曲线下面积(AUC)值来自COVID-GRAM(AUC:0.935)和4C死亡率(AUC=0.922)评分,而最低AUC值来自SIRS(AUC:0.756)和MEWS(AUC:8.805)。结论:根据我们的结果,COVID-GRAM可能是急诊科预测与新冠肺炎相关的28天死亡率的首选评分系统。
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
Medical Journal of Bakirkoy
Medical Journal of Bakirkoy MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信