Dataset Information

Is qSOFA Suitable for Early Diagnosis of Sepsis Among Bacteremia Patients in Emergency Departments? Time for a Reappraisal of Sepsis-3 Criteria

ABSTRACT: Background: For early recognition of patients with sepsis, quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) was proposed by Sepsis-3 criteria as initial sepsis identification outside of intensive care units. However, the new definition has subsequently led to controversy and prompted much discussion for delayed treatment efforts. We aimed to validate Sepsis-3 criteria on bacteremia patients by investigating prognostic impacts of inappropriate administration of empirical antimicrobial therapy (EAT) and delayed source control (SC) compared to Sepsis-2 criteria. Methods: In the multicenter cohort of adults with community-onset bacteremia in emergency departments (EDs), adverse effects of delayed treatment efforts on 30-day mortality were examined in septic and non-septic patients by fulfilling the Sepsis-2 or Sepsis-3 criteria using the Cox regression model after adjusting independent determinants of mortality. Results: Of the 3,898 total adults, septic patients accounted for 92.8% (3,619 patients) by Sepsis-2 criteria (i.e., SIRS criteria). Using Sepsis-3 criteria, 1,827 (46.9%) patients were diagnosed with early sepsis (i.e., initial qSOFA scores ≥ 2) in EDs and 2,622 (67.3%) with sepsis during hospitalization (i.e., increased SOFA scores of ≥ 2 from ED arrival). The prognostic impacts of inappropriate EAT or delayed SC (for complicated bacteremia) were both significant in septic patients with fulfilling the Sepsis-2 or Sepsis-3 (i.e., SOFA) criteria, respectively. Meanwhile, these delayed treatment efforts trivially impact prognoses of non-septic patients recognized by the Sepsis-2 or Sepsis-3 (i.e., SOFA) definitions. Notably, prognostic effects of inappropriate EAT or delayed SC were disclosed for septic patients in EDs, specifically those with qSOFA scores of ≥ 2, and prognostic impacts of delayed treatment efforts remained significant for patients initially recognized early as being non-septic (i.e., initial qSOFA scores of <2). Conclusions: For patients with community-onset bacteremia, inappropriate EAT and delayed SC might result in unfavorable outcomes of patients early identified as being non-septic on ED arrival based on the qSOFA scores (by Sepsis-3 criteria). Accordingly, a more prudent diagnosis of sepsis adopted among bacteremia patients in the ED is necessary.

SUBMITTER: Lee C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8563787 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the daily practice of two emergency departments (ED) in the Netherlands, where systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score are used differently as screening tools for culture-positive sepsis.DesignA prospective cross-sectional multicentre study.SettingTwo EDs at two European clinical teaching hospitals in the Netherlands.Participants760 patients with suspected infection who met SIRS criteria or had a qualifying qSOFA score who were treated at two EDs in the Netherlands from 1 January to 1 March 2018 were included.MethodsSIRS criteria and qSOFA score were calculated for each patient. The first hospital treated the patients who met SIRS criteria following the worldwide Surviving Sepsis Campaign protocol. At the second hospital, only patients who met the qualifying qSOFA score received this treatment. Therefore, patients could be divided into five groups: (1) SIRS+, qSOFA-, not treated according to protocol (reference group); (2) SIRS+, qSOFA-, treated according to protocol; (3) SIRS+, qSOFA+, treated according to protocol; (4) SIRS-, qSOFA+, not treated according to protocol; (5) SIRS-, qSOFA+, treated according to protocol.Primary and secondary outcome measuresTo prove culture-positive sepsis was present, cultures were used as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission.Results98.9% met SIRS criteria and 11.7% met qSOFA score. Positive predictive values of SIRS criteria and qSOFA score were 41.2% (95% CI 37.4% to 45.2%) and 48.1% (95% CI 37.4% to 58.9%), respectively. HRs were 0.79 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.56, p=0.500), 3.42 (95% CI 1.82 to 6.44, p<0.001), 18.94 (95% CI 2.48 to 144.89, p=0.005) and 4.97 (95% CI 1.44 to 17.16, p=0.011) for groups 2-5, respectively.ConclusionqSOFA score performed as well as SIRS criteria for identifying culture-positive sepsis and performed significantly better for predicting in-hospital mortality and ICU admission. This study shows that SIRS criteria are no longer necessary and recommends qSOFA score as the standard for identifying culture-positive sepsis in the ED.Trial registration numberNL8315.

Project description:Background:The initial presentation of sepsis in the emergency department (ED) is difficult to distinguish from other acute illnesses based upon similar clinical presentations. A new blood parameter, a measurement of increased monocyte volume distribution width (MDW), may be used in combination with other clinical parameters to improve early sepsis detection. We sought to determine if MDW, when combined with other available clinical parameters at the time of ED presentation, improves the early detection of sepsis. Methods:A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical data available during the initial ED encounter of 2158 adult patients who were enrolled from emergency departments of three major academic centers, of which 385 fulfilled Sepsis-2 criteria, and 243 fulfilled Sepsis-3 criteria within 12?h of admission. Sepsis probabilities were determined based on MDW values, alone or in combination with components of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) or quick sepsis-related organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score obtained during the initial patient presentation (i.e., within 2?h of ED admission). Results:Abnormal MDW (>?20.0) consistently increased sepsis probability, and normal MDW consistently reduced sepsis probability when used in combination with SIRS criteria (tachycardia, tachypnea, abnormal white blood count, or body temperature) or qSOFA criteria (tachypnea, altered mental status, but not hypotension). Overall, and regardless of other SIRS or qSOFA variables, MDW >?20.0 (vs. MDW ??20.0) at the time of the initial ED encounter was associated with an approximately 6-fold increase in the odds of Sepsis-2, and an approximately 4-fold increase in the odds of Sepsis-3. Conclusions:MDW improves the early detection of sepsis during the initial ED encounter and is complementary to SIRS and qSOFA parameters that are currently used for this purpose. This study supports the incorporation of MDW with other readily available clinical parameters during the initial ED encounter for the early detection of sepsis. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03145428. First posted May 9, 2017. The first subjects were enrolled June 19, 2017, and the study completion date was January 26, 2018.

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, there is a lack of clear definition for neonatal sepsis. The Pediatric Committee of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) developed consensus criteria to ensure a standardization for neonatal sepsis definition. However, there is no evidence supporting the accuracy of the EMA sepsis criteria in neonatal sepsis diagnosis. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EMA sepsis criteria for proven neonatal sepsis.MethodsA multicenter prospective cohort study was conducted from October 2015 to November 2018. Infants with a gestational age over 34th weeks, diagnosed with clinical sepsis and received antibiotics according to the EMA criteria or experienced neonatologists' opinion were included. Blood culture or multiplex real time-PCR or 16S-rRNA positive infants were accepted as "proven sepsis". The predictive performance of EMA criteria for proven sepsis was evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve measures of receiver operator characteristic curves. Data-mining methods were used for further analysis.ResultsAmong the 245 included infants, the EMA criteria were positive in 97 infants (39.6%), while proven sepsis was diagnosed in 113 infants (46.1%). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the EMA criteria for proven sepsis were 44.2% (95%CI: 34.9-53.9), 64.4% (95%CI: 55.6-72.5), 55.1% (95%CI: 46.6-59.4) respectively. None of the clinical and laboratory parameters had sufficient performance individually in terms of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy measures. The diagnostic performance was similar when different clinical findings were added to the EMA sepsis criteria or assessment of the score was interpreted in different ways.ConclusionsResults highlighted that clinician opinion and standard laboratory tests are limited in the neonatal sepsis diagnosis. The EMA criteria also did not efficiently meet the diagnostic accuracy measures for neonatal sepsis. A predictive sepsis definition and rapid bedside point-of care tests are urgently needed.

Dataset Information

Is qSOFA Suitable for Early Diagnosis of Sepsis Among Bacteremia Patients in Emergency Departments? Time for a Reappraisal of Sepsis-3 Criteria

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets