• Jingchao Luo, Wei Jiang, Li Weng, Jinmin Peng, Xiaoyun Hu, Chunyao Wang, Guangyun Liu, Huibin Huang, and Bin Du.
• Medical Intensive Care Unit, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 1 Shuai Fu Yuan, Beijing 100730, China; Department of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai 200032, China.
• J Crit Care. 2019 Jun 1; 51: 13-18.

PurposeTo prospectively assess the diagnostic value of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) scores for sepsis in ward patients with infections.Materials And MethodsConsecutive patients admitted with infection or developing infection during hospital stay were included. All variables for calculating qSOFA, SIRS, and SOFA scores were collected, and the maximum scores were determined until hospital discharge, death, or day 28, whichever occurred earlier. The primary outcome was sepsis at 28 days. Diagnostic and prognostic values were assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) with the conventional cutoff value of 2.ResultsOf 409 general ward patients, 146 patients and 371 patients met qSOFA and SIRS criteria, 229 patients developed sepsis. Although qSOFA score had a better overall diagnostic performance of sepsis (AUROC 0.75 vs. 0.69), it had a much lower sensitivity (53% vs. 98%) and higher specificity (87% vs. 18%) than SIRS score. In addition, qSOFA score had a better prognostic value than SIRS score (AUROC 0.86 vs. 0.67).ConclusionsNeither SIRS score nor qSOFA score could serve as an ideal screening tool for early identification sepsis, whereas qSOFA score might help to identify patients with higher risk of poor clinical outcome.Trial Registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02930070.Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.

12 keywords...

hide…