Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Performance of NEWS2, RETTS, clinical judgment and the Predict Sepsis screening tools with respect to identification of sepsis among ambulance patients with suspected infection: a prospective cohort study.
Wallgren, Ulrika M; Sjölin, Jan; Järnbert-Pettersson, Hans; Kurland, Lisa.
Afiliação
  • Wallgren UM; Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institutet, Södersjukhuset, Sjukhusbacken 10, 118 83, Stockholm, Sweden.
  • Sjölin J; Fisksätra Vårdcentral (Primary Health Care Center), Fisksätra torg 20, 133 41, Saltsjöbaden, Sweden.
  • Järnbert-Pettersson H; Department of Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Campus USÖ, Södra Grev Rosengatan 32, 701 12, Örebro, Sweden.
  • Kurland L; Department of Medical Sciences, Akademiska Sjukhuset, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med ; 29(1): 144, 2021 Sep 30.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34593001
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

There is little evidence of which sepsis screening tool to use in the ambulance setting. The primary aim of the current study was to compare the performance of NEWS2 (National Early Warning score 2) and RETTS (Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System) with respect to identification of sepsis among ambulance patients with clinically suspected infection. The secondary aim was to compare the performance of the novel Predict Sepsis screening tools with that of NEWS2, RETTS and clinical judgment.

METHODS:

Prospective cohort study of 323 adult ambulance patients with clinically suspected infection, transported to hospitals in Stockholm, during 2017/2018. The sensitivity, specificity, and AUC (Area Under the receiver operating Curve) were calculated and compared by using McNemar´s test and DeLong's test.

RESULTS:

The prevalence of sepsis in the current study population was 44.6% (144 of 323 patients). No significant difference in AUC was demonstrated between NEWS2 ≥ 5 and RETTS ≥ orange. NEWS2 ≥ 7 demonstrated a significantly greater AUC than RETTS red. The Predict Sepsis screening tools ≥ 2 demonstrated the highest sensitivity (range 0.87-0.91), along with RETTS ≥ orange (0.83), but the lowest specificity (range 0.39-0.49). The AUC of NEWS2 (0.73) and the Predict Sepsis screening tools (range 0.75-0.77) was similar.

CONCLUSIONS:

The results indicate that NEWS2 could be the better alternative for sepsis identification in the ambulance, as compared to RETTS. The Predict Sepsis screening tools demonstrated a high sensitivity and AUCs similar to that of NEWS2. However, these results need to be interpreted with caution as the Predict Sepsis screening tools require external validation. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03249597. Registered 15 August 2017-Retrospectively registered, https//clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03249597 .
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ambulâncias / Sepse Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ambulâncias / Sepse Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article