急诊脓毒症患者基于sofa的脓毒症-3与脓毒症-2鉴别及预后预测的准确性比较

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Emergency Medicine International Pub Date : 2025-02-11 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1155/emmi/1762179
Yi-Jie Zhang, Wei Fang, Zhen Wang
{"title":"急诊脓毒症患者基于sofa的脓毒症-3与脓毒症-2鉴别及预后预测的准确性比较","authors":"Yi-Jie Zhang, Wei Fang, Zhen Wang","doi":"10.1155/emmi/1762179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> To evaluate the value of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, a Sepsis-3 criterion, for identification and prognosis prediction among adult patients with sepsis in the emergency department (ED) compared with the Sepsis-2. <b>Methods:</b> Adult patients with suspected sepsis presenting to the ED were retrospectively identified via Sepsis-2/Sepsis-3 criteria. The vital signs, laboratory test results, etc., were collected, and the SOFA/quick SOFA (qSOFA) scores and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) were calculated accordingly. ROC curves were generated to evaluate mortality prediction accuracy. <b>Results:</b> Among the 481 patients included, 288/339 met the Sepsis-2/Sepsis-3 criteria, respectively, with moderate between-protocol consistency (Kappa = 0.507, <i>p</i> < 0.001; concordance = 77.3%); 115 patients (23.9%) died in hospital or within 28 days. SOFA/qSOFA scores and NEWS were significantly greater in the sepsis and death groups (<i>p</i> < 0.001), but there was no between-group difference for Sepsis-2/Sepsis-3. The temperature (T) and respiratory rate (RR) increased in the death group, whereas the systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreased. The usefulness of the SOFA score (AUC = 0.644) for predicting mortality was lower than that of qSOFA score (AUC = 0.716) and NEWS (AUC = 0.718), which could be improved (AUC = 0.701-0.721) by combining with two/three of variables (T, RR, and SBP). <b>Conclusion:</b> Compared with Sepsis-2, Sepsis-3 identified more patients with sepsis and was suitable for ED use. The SOFA score had lower mortality prediction accuracy than the qSOFA score and NEWS, which could be significantly improved by combining with two/three variables (T, RR, and SBP).</p>","PeriodicalId":11528,"journal":{"name":"Emergency Medicine International","volume":"2025 ","pages":"1762179"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11835471/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of the Identification and Prognosis Prediction of SOFA-Based Sepsis-3 for Septic Patients in the Emergency Department Compared With Sepsis-2.\",\"authors\":\"Yi-Jie Zhang, Wei Fang, Zhen Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/emmi/1762179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> To evaluate the value of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, a Sepsis-3 criterion, for identification and prognosis prediction among adult patients with sepsis in the emergency department (ED) compared with the Sepsis-2. <b>Methods:</b> Adult patients with suspected sepsis presenting to the ED were retrospectively identified via Sepsis-2/Sepsis-3 criteria. The vital signs, laboratory test results, etc., were collected, and the SOFA/quick SOFA (qSOFA) scores and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) were calculated accordingly. ROC curves were generated to evaluate mortality prediction accuracy. <b>Results:</b> Among the 481 patients included, 288/339 met the Sepsis-2/Sepsis-3 criteria, respectively, with moderate between-protocol consistency (Kappa = 0.507, <i>p</i> < 0.001; concordance = 77.3%); 115 patients (23.9%) died in hospital or within 28 days. SOFA/qSOFA scores and NEWS were significantly greater in the sepsis and death groups (<i>p</i> < 0.001), but there was no between-group difference for Sepsis-2/Sepsis-3. The temperature (T) and respiratory rate (RR) increased in the death group, whereas the systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreased. The usefulness of the SOFA score (AUC = 0.644) for predicting mortality was lower than that of qSOFA score (AUC = 0.716) and NEWS (AUC = 0.718), which could be improved (AUC = 0.701-0.721) by combining with two/three of variables (T, RR, and SBP). <b>Conclusion:</b> Compared with Sepsis-2, Sepsis-3 identified more patients with sepsis and was suitable for ED use. The SOFA score had lower mortality prediction accuracy than the qSOFA score and NEWS, which could be significantly improved by combining with two/three variables (T, RR, and SBP).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11528,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Emergency Medicine International\",\"volume\":\"2025 \",\"pages\":\"1762179\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11835471/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Emergency Medicine International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/emmi/1762179\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergency Medicine International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/emmi/1762179","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较脓毒症-3评分与脓毒症-2评分在急诊科(ED)成年脓毒症患者鉴别及预后预测中的价值。方法:通过脓毒症-2/脓毒症-3标准对出现ED的疑似脓毒症的成年患者进行回顾性鉴定。收集患者生命体征、实验室检测结果等,计算SOFA/quick SOFA (qSOFA)评分和国家预警评分(NEWS)。制作ROC曲线评价死亡率预测的准确性。结果:纳入的481例患者中,分别有288/339例符合败血症-2/败血症-3标准,方案间一致性中等(Kappa = 0.507, p < 0.001;一致性= 77.3%);115例(23.9%)患者在医院或28天内死亡。脓毒症组和死亡组的SOFA/qSOFA评分和NEWS均显著升高(p < 0.001),但脓毒症2/脓毒症3组间无差异。死亡组体温(T)和呼吸频率(RR)升高,收缩压(SBP)降低。SOFA评分(AUC = 0.644)预测死亡率的有效性低于qSOFA评分(AUC = 0.716)和NEWS评分(AUC = 0.718),合并两/三变量(T、RR和SBP)可提高SOFA评分预测死亡率的有效性(AUC = 0.701-0.721)。结论:与脓毒症-2相比,脓毒症-3可识别更多脓毒症患者,适合用于ED。SOFA评分对死亡率的预测准确度低于qSOFA评分和NEWS,结合T、RR、SBP等2 / 3变量可显著提高SOFA评分对死亡率的预测准确度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accuracy of the Identification and Prognosis Prediction of SOFA-Based Sepsis-3 for Septic Patients in the Emergency Department Compared With Sepsis-2.

Aim: To evaluate the value of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, a Sepsis-3 criterion, for identification and prognosis prediction among adult patients with sepsis in the emergency department (ED) compared with the Sepsis-2. Methods: Adult patients with suspected sepsis presenting to the ED were retrospectively identified via Sepsis-2/Sepsis-3 criteria. The vital signs, laboratory test results, etc., were collected, and the SOFA/quick SOFA (qSOFA) scores and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) were calculated accordingly. ROC curves were generated to evaluate mortality prediction accuracy. Results: Among the 481 patients included, 288/339 met the Sepsis-2/Sepsis-3 criteria, respectively, with moderate between-protocol consistency (Kappa = 0.507, p < 0.001; concordance = 77.3%); 115 patients (23.9%) died in hospital or within 28 days. SOFA/qSOFA scores and NEWS were significantly greater in the sepsis and death groups (p < 0.001), but there was no between-group difference for Sepsis-2/Sepsis-3. The temperature (T) and respiratory rate (RR) increased in the death group, whereas the systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreased. The usefulness of the SOFA score (AUC = 0.644) for predicting mortality was lower than that of qSOFA score (AUC = 0.716) and NEWS (AUC = 0.718), which could be improved (AUC = 0.701-0.721) by combining with two/three of variables (T, RR, and SBP). Conclusion: Compared with Sepsis-2, Sepsis-3 identified more patients with sepsis and was suitable for ED use. The SOFA score had lower mortality prediction accuracy than the qSOFA score and NEWS, which could be significantly improved by combining with two/three variables (T, RR, and SBP).

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
Emergency Medicine International
Emergency Medicine International EMERGENCY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
187
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊介绍: Emergency Medicine International is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that provides a forum for doctors, nurses, paramedics and ambulance staff. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies related to prehospital care, disaster preparedness and response, acute medical and paediatric emergencies, critical care, sports medicine, wound care, and toxicology.
×
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