序贯器官衰竭评估评分计算中的常见差异对使用败血症-3 标准进行败血症测量的影响:使用电子健康记录数据的回顾性分析。

IF 7.7 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Critical Care Medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-23 DOI:10.1097/CCM.0000000000006338
Mohammad Alrawashdeh, Michael Klompas, Chanu Rhee
{"title":"序贯器官衰竭评估评分计算中的常见差异对使用败血症-3 标准进行败血症测量的影响:使用电子健康记录数据的回顾性分析。","authors":"Mohammad Alrawashdeh, Michael Klompas, Chanu Rhee","doi":"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the impact of different methods of calculating Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores using electronic health record data on the incidence, outcomes, agreement, and predictive validity of Sepsis-3 criteria.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective observational study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Five Massachusetts hospitals.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Hospitalized adults, 2015 to 2022.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>None.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>We defined sepsis as a suspected infection (culture obtained and antibiotic administered) with a concurrent increase in SOFA score by greater than or equal to 2 points (Sepsis-3 criteria). Our reference SOFA implementation strategy imputed normal values for missing data, used Pa o2 /F io2 ratios for respiratory scores, and assumed normal baseline SOFA scores for community-onset sepsis. We then implemented SOFA scores using different missing data imputation strategies (averaging worst values from preceding and following days vs. carrying forward nonmissing values), imputing respiratory scores using Sp o2 /F io2 ratios, and incorporating comorbidities and prehospital laboratory data into baseline SOFA scores. Among 1,064,459 hospitalizations, 297,512 (27.9%) had suspected infection and 141,052 (13.3%) had sepsis with an in-hospital mortality rate of 10.3% using the reference SOFA method. The percentage of patients missing SOFA components for at least 1 day in the infection window was highest for Pa o2 /F io2 ratios (98.6%), followed by Sp o2 /F io2 ratios (73.5%), bilirubin (68.5%), and Glasgow Coma Scale scores (57.2%). Different missing data imputation strategies yielded near-perfect agreement in identifying sepsis (kappa 0.99). However, using Sp o2 /F io2 imputations yielded higher sepsis incidence (18.3%), lower mortality (8.1%), and slightly lower predictive validity for mortality (area under the receiver operating curves [AUROC] 0.76 vs. 0.78). For community-onset sepsis, incorporating comorbidities and historical laboratory data into baseline SOFA score estimates yielded lower sepsis incidence (6.9% vs. 11.6%), higher mortality (13.4% vs. 9.6%), and higher predictive validity (AUROC 0.79 vs. 0.75) relative to the reference SOFA implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Common variations in calculating respiratory and baseline SOFA scores, but not in handling missing data, lead to substantial differences in observed incidence, mortality, agreement, and predictive validity of Sepsis-3 criteria.</p>","PeriodicalId":10765,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1380-1390"},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Common Variations in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score Calculation on Sepsis Measurement Using Sepsis-3 Criteria: A Retrospective Analysis Using Electronic Health Record Data.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammad Alrawashdeh, Michael Klompas, Chanu Rhee\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006338\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the impact of different methods of calculating Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores using electronic health record data on the incidence, outcomes, agreement, and predictive validity of Sepsis-3 criteria.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective observational study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Five Massachusetts hospitals.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Hospitalized adults, 2015 to 2022.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>None.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>We defined sepsis as a suspected infection (culture obtained and antibiotic administered) with a concurrent increase in SOFA score by greater than or equal to 2 points (Sepsis-3 criteria). Our reference SOFA implementation strategy imputed normal values for missing data, used Pa o2 /F io2 ratios for respiratory scores, and assumed normal baseline SOFA scores for community-onset sepsis. We then implemented SOFA scores using different missing data imputation strategies (averaging worst values from preceding and following days vs. carrying forward nonmissing values), imputing respiratory scores using Sp o2 /F io2 ratios, and incorporating comorbidities and prehospital laboratory data into baseline SOFA scores. Among 1,064,459 hospitalizations, 297,512 (27.9%) had suspected infection and 141,052 (13.3%) had sepsis with an in-hospital mortality rate of 10.3% using the reference SOFA method. The percentage of patients missing SOFA components for at least 1 day in the infection window was highest for Pa o2 /F io2 ratios (98.6%), followed by Sp o2 /F io2 ratios (73.5%), bilirubin (68.5%), and Glasgow Coma Scale scores (57.2%). Different missing data imputation strategies yielded near-perfect agreement in identifying sepsis (kappa 0.99). However, using Sp o2 /F io2 imputations yielded higher sepsis incidence (18.3%), lower mortality (8.1%), and slightly lower predictive validity for mortality (area under the receiver operating curves [AUROC] 0.76 vs. 0.78). For community-onset sepsis, incorporating comorbidities and historical laboratory data into baseline SOFA score estimates yielded lower sepsis incidence (6.9% vs. 11.6%), higher mortality (13.4% vs. 9.6%), and higher predictive validity (AUROC 0.79 vs. 0.75) relative to the reference SOFA implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Common variations in calculating respiratory and baseline SOFA scores, but not in handling missing data, lead to substantial differences in observed incidence, mortality, agreement, and predictive validity of Sepsis-3 criteria.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10765,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Care Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1380-1390\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Care Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000006338\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000006338","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估使用电子健康记录数据计算序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分的不同方法对脓毒症-3标准的发生率、结果、一致性和预测有效性的影响:设计:回顾性观察研究:五家马萨诸塞州医院:干预措施:无:干预措施:无:我们将败血症定义为疑似感染(获得培养并使用抗生素),同时 SOFA 评分上升大于或等于 2 分(败血症-3 标准)。我们的 SOFA 参考实施策略对缺失数据进行了正常值估算,对呼吸系统评分使用了 Pao2/Fio2 比率,并假定社区发生的脓毒症的 SOFA 评分基线正常。然后,我们采用不同的缺失数据估算策略(平均前一天和后一天的最差值与结转非缺失值)实施 SOFA 评分,使用 Spo2/Fio2 比率估算呼吸评分,并将合并症和院前实验室数据纳入基线 SOFA 评分。在 1,064,459 例住院患者中,297,512 例(27.9%)疑似感染,141,052 例(13.3%)脓毒症,使用参考 SOFA 方法计算的院内死亡率为 10.3%。在感染窗口期至少 1 天内缺失 SOFA 成分的患者比例最高的是 Pao2/Fio2 比值(98.6%),其次是 Spo2/Fio2 比值(73.5%)、胆红素(68.5%)和格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分(57.2%)。不同的缺失数据估算策略在识别败血症方面几乎完全一致(kappa 0.99)。然而,使用 Spo2/Fio2 估算的脓毒症发病率较高(18.3%),死亡率较低(8.1%),预测死亡率的有效性略低(接收者操作曲线下面积 [AUROC] 0.76 对 0.78)。对于社区发生的败血症,将合并症和历史实验室数据纳入基线 SOFA 评分估计值可降低败血症发病率(6.9% 对 11.6%),提高死亡率(13.4% 对 9.6%),并提高预测有效性(接收器操作曲线下面积 0.79 对 0.75):结论:在计算呼吸系统和基线 SOFA 分数方面的常见差异,以及在处理缺失数据方面的常见差异,导致脓毒症-3 标准在观察到的发病率、死亡率、一致性和预测有效性方面存在巨大差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Impact of Common Variations in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score Calculation on Sepsis Measurement Using Sepsis-3 Criteria: A Retrospective Analysis Using Electronic Health Record Data.

Objectives: To assess the impact of different methods of calculating Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores using electronic health record data on the incidence, outcomes, agreement, and predictive validity of Sepsis-3 criteria.

Design: Retrospective observational study.

Setting: Five Massachusetts hospitals.

Patients: Hospitalized adults, 2015 to 2022.

Interventions: None.

Measurements and main results: We defined sepsis as a suspected infection (culture obtained and antibiotic administered) with a concurrent increase in SOFA score by greater than or equal to 2 points (Sepsis-3 criteria). Our reference SOFA implementation strategy imputed normal values for missing data, used Pa o2 /F io2 ratios for respiratory scores, and assumed normal baseline SOFA scores for community-onset sepsis. We then implemented SOFA scores using different missing data imputation strategies (averaging worst values from preceding and following days vs. carrying forward nonmissing values), imputing respiratory scores using Sp o2 /F io2 ratios, and incorporating comorbidities and prehospital laboratory data into baseline SOFA scores. Among 1,064,459 hospitalizations, 297,512 (27.9%) had suspected infection and 141,052 (13.3%) had sepsis with an in-hospital mortality rate of 10.3% using the reference SOFA method. The percentage of patients missing SOFA components for at least 1 day in the infection window was highest for Pa o2 /F io2 ratios (98.6%), followed by Sp o2 /F io2 ratios (73.5%), bilirubin (68.5%), and Glasgow Coma Scale scores (57.2%). Different missing data imputation strategies yielded near-perfect agreement in identifying sepsis (kappa 0.99). However, using Sp o2 /F io2 imputations yielded higher sepsis incidence (18.3%), lower mortality (8.1%), and slightly lower predictive validity for mortality (area under the receiver operating curves [AUROC] 0.76 vs. 0.78). For community-onset sepsis, incorporating comorbidities and historical laboratory data into baseline SOFA score estimates yielded lower sepsis incidence (6.9% vs. 11.6%), higher mortality (13.4% vs. 9.6%), and higher predictive validity (AUROC 0.79 vs. 0.75) relative to the reference SOFA implementation.

Conclusions: Common variations in calculating respiratory and baseline SOFA scores, but not in handling missing data, lead to substantial differences in observed incidence, mortality, agreement, and predictive validity of Sepsis-3 criteria.

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
Critical Care Medicine
Critical Care Medicine 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
5.70%
发文量
728
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Critical Care Medicine is the premier peer-reviewed, scientific publication in critical care medicine. Directed to those specialists who treat patients in the ICU and CCU, including chest physicians, surgeons, pediatricians, pharmacists/pharmacologists, anesthesiologists, critical care nurses, and other healthcare professionals, Critical Care Medicine covers all aspects of acute and emergency care for the critically ill or injured patient. Each issue presents critical care practitioners with clinical breakthroughs that lead to better patient care, the latest news on promising research, and advances in equipment and techniques.
×
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