Prognostic Accuracy of qSOFA, SIRS, and EWSs for In-hospital Mortality in Emergency Department

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

3274 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2021-12-12

Study Completion Date

2023-09-11

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Early identification of a patient with infection who may develop sepsis is of utmost importance. Unfortunately, this remains elusive because no single clinical measure or test can reflect complex pathophysiological changes in patients with sepsis. However, multiple clinical and laboratory parameters indicate impending sepsis and organ dysfunction. Screening tools using these parameters can help identify the condition, such as SIRS, quick SOFA (qSOFA), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), or Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS). The 2016 SCCM/ESICM task force recommended using qSOFA, while the 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign strongly recommended against its use compared with SIRS, NEWS, or MEWS as a single screening tool for sepsis or septic shock. We hypothesised that qSOFA has greater prognostic accuracy than SIRS and EWS (NEWS/NEWS2/MEWS).

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

REDS SCORE VERSUS qSOFA SCORE to Predict Mortality in Patients With Suspected Sepsis

NCT07271329

Sepsis in ED Patients

NOT_YET_RECRUITING

MEWS, qSOFA and Physiological Parameters Combination in the Emergency Room

NCT05584098

Sepsis

COMPLETED NA

Field Paramedic Application of Sepsis Triage

NCT03870789

Sepsis

UNKNOWN

Delta qSOFA for Risk Stratification in Emergency Infected Patients

NCT02926664

Sepsis

COMPLETED

Implementation of a qSOFA Score in the Emergency Department

NCT04568746

Sepsis

COMPLETED NA

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Over the past decade, medical advances in sepsis continued to focus on sepsis as a prevalent condition that accounts for 10% of admissions to intensive care units (ICUs) and is associated with a 10-20% in-hospital mortality rate. Standardised protocols and physician awareness have significantly improved survival, but mortality rates remain between 20% and 36%, with \~270,000 deaths annually in the United States. However, of patients with sepsis, 80% are treated in an emergency department (ED), and the remainder develops sepsis during hospitalisation with other conditions. In 2016, the Society of Critical Care Medicine/European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (SCCM/ESICM) task force redefined sepsis based on organ dysfunction and mortality prediction. Sepsis now is defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by dysregulated host response to infection. This definition emphasises the complexity of the disease that cannot be explained by infection or body response to it. Acute change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score ≥2 indicates sepsis-related organ dysfunction, a predictor of excess in-hospital mortality. Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) and "severe sepsis" terms were omitted from the most recent definition. SIRS has been criticised for its poor specificity, while "severe sepsis" may underestimate sepsis's seriousness. A subset of patients may develop septic shock with underlying profound organ dysfunction and excess mortality. Clinically, septic shock is defined as persistent hypotension requiring vasopressors to maintain mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mm Hg and serum lactate level ≥ 2 mmol/L (18 mg/dL) despite adequate volume resuscitation. Early identification of a patient with infection who may develop sepsis is of utmost importance. Unfortunately, this remains elusive because no single clinical measure or test can reflect complex pathophysiological changes in patients with sepsis. However, multiple clinical and laboratory parameters indicate impending sepsis and organ dysfunction. Screening tools using these parameters can help identify the condition, such as SIRS, quick SOFA (qSOFA), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), or Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS). The 2016 SCCM/ESICM task force recommended using qSOFA, while the 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign strongly recommended against its use compared with SIRS, NEWS, or MEWS as a single screening tool for sepsis or septic shock. We hypothesised that qSOFA has greater prognostic accuracy than SIRS and EWS (NEWS/NEWS2/MEWS).

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Sepsis Septic Shock

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

PROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Positive qSOFA

Adult patients with suspected infection and a qSOFA score ≥ 2 at the triage in the ED who are planned for hospitalization