Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score for predicting mortality in patients with sepsis in Vietnamese intensive care units: a multicentre, cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) Scores in predicting mortality among intensive care unit (ICU) patients with sepsis in a low-income and middle-income country. DESIGN: A multicentre, cross-sectional study. SETTING: A total of 15 adult ICUs throughout Vietnam. PARTICIPANTS: We included all patients aged ≥18 years who were admitted to ICUs for sepsis and who were still in ICUs from 00:00 to 23:59 of the specified study days (ie, 9 January, 3 April, 3 July and 9 October of the year 2019). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was hospital all-cause mortality (hospital mortality). We also defined the secondary outcome as all-cause deaths in the ICU (ICU mortality). RESULTS: Of 252 patients, 40.1% died in hospitals, and 33.3% died in ICUs. SOFA Score (areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC): 0.688 (95% CI 0.618 to 0.758); cut-off value≥7.5; PAUROC<0.001) and APACHE II Score (AUROC: 0.689 (95% CI 0.622 to 0.756); cut-off value ≥20.5; PAUROC<0.001) both had a poor discriminatory ability for predicting hospital mortality. However, the discriminatory ability for predicting ICU mortality of SOFA (AUROC: 0.713 (95% CI 0.643 to 0.783); cut-off value≥9.5; PAUROC<0.001) was fair and was better than that of APACHE II Score (AUROC: 0.672 (95% CI 0.603 to 0.742); cut-off value≥18.5; PAUROC<0.001). A SOFA Score≥8 (adjusted OR (AOR): 2.717; 95% CI 1.371 to 5.382) and an APACHE II Score≥21 (AOR: 2.668; 95% CI 1.338 to 5.321) were independently associated with an increased risk of hospital mortality. Additionally, a SOFA Score≥10 (AOR: 2.194; 95% CI 1.017 to 4.735) was an independent predictor of ICU mortality, in contrast to an APACHE II Score≥19, for which this role did not. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, SOFA and APACHE II Scores were worthwhile in predicting mortality among ICU patients with sepsis. However, due to better discrimination for predicting ICU mortality, the SOFA Score was preferable to the APACHE II Score in predicting mortality.Clinical trials registry - India: CTRI/2019/01/016898.

Predictive validity of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score for the mortality in patients with sepsis in Vietnamese intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: The simple scoring systems for predicting the outcome of sepsis in intensive care units (ICUs) are few, especially for limited-resource settings. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score in predicting the mortality of ICU patients with sepsis in Vietnam. METHODS: We did a multicenter cross-sectional study of patients with sepsis (≥18 years old) presenting to 15 adult ICUs throughout Vietnam on the specified days (i.e., 9th January, 3rd April, 3rd July, and 9th October) representing the different seasons of 2019. The primary and secondary outcomes were the hospital and ICU all-cause mortalities, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated to determine the discriminatory ability of the qSOFA score for deaths in the hospital and ICU. The cut-off value of the qSOFA scores was determined by the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Upon ICU admission, factors associated with the hospital and ICU mortalities were assessed in univariable and multivariable logistic models. RESULTS: Of 252 patients, 40.1% died in the hospital, and 33.3% died in the ICU. The qSOFA score had a poor discriminatory ability for both the hospital (AUROC: 0.610 [95% CI: 0.538 to 0.681]; cut-off value: ≥2.5; sensitivity: 34.7%; specificity: 84.1%; PAUROC = 0.003) and ICU (AUROC: 0.619 [95% CI: 0.544 to 0.694]; cutoff value: ≥2.5; sensitivity: 36.9%; specificity: 83.3%; PAUROC = 0.002) mortalities. However, multivariable logistic regression analyses show that the qSOFA score of 3 was independently associated with the increased risk of deaths in both the hospital (adjusted odds ratio, AOR: 3.358; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.756 to 6.422) and the ICU (AOR: 3.060; 95% CI: 1.651 to 5.671). CONCLUSION: In our study, despite having a poor discriminatory value, the qSOFA score seems worthwhile in predicting mortality in ICU patients with sepsis in limited-resource settings. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials registry-India: CTRI/2019/01/016898.

Validation of ratings on the six-item Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale obtained via the Simplified Negative and Positive Symptoms Interview among outpatients with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: The six-item Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS-6) is a measure of the severity of core symptoms of schizophrenia, which can be administered via the brief Simplified Negative and Positive Symptoms Interview (SNAPSI). A recent study has confirmed the validity of PANSS-6 ratings as derived by SNAPSI (PANSS-6SNAPSI) among inpatients with schizophrenia. AIMS: We aimed to test the validity of PANSS-6SNAPSI among outpatients with schizophrenia using PANSS-6 ratings extracted from the 30-item PANSS-30 as derived by the Structured Clinical Interview for the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS-6SCI-PANSS) as a gold standard reference. METHODS: PANSS-6SNAPSI and PANSS-6SCI-PANSS ratings were obtained at two time points by independent raters with established inter-rater reliability. Agreement between PANSS-6SNAPSI and PANSS-6SCI-PANSS ratings was estimated via intra-class coefficients (ICCs) and responsiveness over time was quantified using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients. Post hoc "leave-one-out" analyses were carried out, in which each rater in turn was excluded from the ICC calculations. RESULTS: Seventy-three outpatients with schizophrenia participated in the study (mean age: 38.3 years; 56% males). The ICC for PANSS-6SNAPSI versus PANSS-6SCI-PANSS was 0.67 [95%CI = 0.56-0.76] and the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient for responsiveness was 0.40 (p = 0.004). When data from a specific outlying rater were excluded, the ICC for PANSS-6SNAPSI versus PANSS-6SCI-PANSS was 0.75 [95% CI = 0.63-0.83] and the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient for responsiveness was 0.55 (p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: We found PANSS-6SNAPSI ratings to have acceptable clinical validity, suggesting that PANSS-6SNAPSI can be used for both inpatients and outpatients with schizophrenia.

Factors relating to mortality in septic patients in Vietnamese intensive care units from a subgroup analysis of MOSAICS II study.

Sepsis is the most common cause of in-hospital deaths, especially from low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aimed to investigate the mortality rate and associated factors from sepsis in intensive care units (ICUs) in an LMIC. We did a multicenter cross-sectional study of septic patients presenting to 15 adult ICUs throughout Vietnam on the 4 days representing the different seasons of 2019. Of 252 patients, 40.1% died in hospital and 33.3% died in ICU. ICUs with accredited training programs (odds ratio, OR: 0.309; 95% confidence interval, CI 0.122-0.783) and completion of the 3-h sepsis bundle (OR: 0.294; 95% CI 0.083-1.048) were associated with decreased hospital mortality. ICUs with intensivist-to-patient ratio of 1:6 to 8 (OR: 4.533; 95% CI 1.621-12.677), mechanical ventilation (OR: 3.890; 95% CI 1.445-10.474) and renal replacement therapy (OR: 2.816; 95% CI 1.318-6.016) were associated with increased ICU mortality, in contrast to non-surgical source control (OR: 0.292; 95% CI 0.126-0.678) which was associated with decreased ICU mortality. Improvements are needed in the management of sepsis in Vietnam such as increasing resources in critical care settings, making accredited training programs more available, improving compliance with sepsis bundles of care, and treating underlying illness and shock optimally in septic patients.

The efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has established efficacy in the treatment of unipolar depression and a growing evidence base in the treatment of bipolar depression. The objective of this study was to provide an estimate of the efficacy of rTMS in bipolar depression as an up to date synthesis of this literature is lacking. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the sham-controlled randomized controlled trial (RCT) literature examining rTMS in bipolar depression. Studies were included if they included participants with bipolar depression in both sham- and active arms. The primary outcome parameter was rate of clinical response, defined as a 50% reduction as compared to baseline, on an established depression rating scale. Quantitative synthesis was performed using the Maentel-Haenszel random-effects model. RESULTS: Data from a total of 274 patients from 14 studies were retained in the quantitative synthesis. The response rates were higher in rTMS compared to sham treatment (odds ratio (OR) = 2.72. 95%CI: 1.44-5.14). When stimulation protocols were analysed separately, statistically significant clinical response was only observed for high-frequency rTMS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (OR = 2.57, 95%CI: 1.17-5.66). LIMITATIONS: Most data was extracted from trials including very few participants with bipolar depression (predominantly unipolar depression samples). Large confirmatory RCTs of rTMS specifically for bipolar depression are lacking. CONCLUSION: rTMS seems effective in the treatment of bipolar depression, but dedicated and adequately powered RCTs are needed in order to firmly conclude that rTMS should be offered routinely for the treatment of bipolar depression.

Mechanical Ventilation Discontinuation Practices in Asia: A Multinational Survey.

Rationale: There are limited data on mechanical discontinuation practices in Asia. Objectives: To document self-reported mechanical discontinuation practices and determine whether there is clinical equipoise regarding protocolized weaning among Asian Intensive Care specialists. Methods: A survey using a validated questionnaire, distributed using a snowball method to Asian Intensive Care specialists. Results: Of the 2,967 invited specialists from 20 territories, 2,074 (69.9%) took part. The majority of respondents (60.5%) were from China. Of the respondents, 42% worked in intensive care units (ICUs) where respiratory therapists were present; 78.9% used a spontaneous breathing trial as the initial weaning step; 44.3% frequently/always used pressure support (PS) alone, 53.4% intermittent spontaneous breathing trials with PS in between, and 19.8% synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation with PS as a weaning mode. Of the respondents, 56.3% routinely stopped feeds before extubation, 71.5% generally followed a sedation protocol or guideline, and 61.8% worked in an ICU with a weaning protocol. Of these, 78.2% frequently always followed the protocol. A multivariate analysis involving a modified Poisson regression analysis showed that working in an ICU with a weaning protocol and frequently/always following it was positively associated with an upper-middle-income territory, a university-affiliated hospital, or in an ICU that employed respiratory therapists; and negatively with a low-income or lower-middle-income territory or a public hospital. There was no significant association with "in-house" intensivist at night, multidisciplinary ICU, closed ICU, or nurse-patient ratio. There was heterogeneity in agreement/disagreement with the statement, "evidence clearly supports protocolized weaning over nonprotocolized weaning." Conclusions: A substantial minority of Asian Intensive Care specialists do not wean patients in accordance with the best available evidence or current guidelines. There is clinical equipoise regarding the benefit of protocolized weaning.