Prehospital acute life-threatening cardiovascular disease in elderly: an observational, prospective, multicentre, ambulance-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to explore the association of demographic and prehospital parameters with short-term and long-term mortality in acute life-threatening cardiovascular disease by using a hazard model, focusing on elderly individuals, by comparing patients under 75 years versus patients over 75 years of age. DESIGN: Prospective, multicentre, observational study. SETTING: Emergency medical services (EMS) delivery study gathering data from two back-to-back studies between 1 October 2019 and 30 November 2021. Six advanced life support (ALS), 43 basic life support and five hospitals in Spain were considered. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients suffering from acute life-threatening cardiovascular disease attended by the EMS. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality from any cause within the first to the 365 days following EMS attendance. The main measures included prehospital demographics, biochemical variables, prehospital ALS techniques used and syndromic suspected conditions. RESULTS: A total of 1744 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The 365-day cumulative mortality in the elderly amounted to 26.1% (229 cases) versus 11.6% (11.6%) in patients under 75 years old. Elderly patients (≥75 years) presented a twofold risk of mortality compared with patients ≤74 years. Life-threatening interventions (mechanical ventilation, cardioversion and defibrillation) were also related to a twofold increased risk of mortality. Importantly, patients suffering from acute heart failure presented a more than twofold increased risk of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed the prehospital variables associated with the long-term mortality of patients suffering from acute cardiovascular disease. Our results provide important insights for the development of specific codes or scores for cardiovascular diseases to facilitate the risk of mortality characterisation.

Prehospital qSOFA, mSOFA, and NEWS2 performance for sepsis prediction: A prospective, multi-center, cohort study.

Background: Nowadays, there is no gold standard score for prehospital sepsis and sepsis-related mortality identification. The aim of the present study was to analyze the performance of qSOFA, NEWS2 and mSOFA as sepsis predictors in patients with infection-suspected in prehospital care. The second objective is to study the predictive ability of the aforementioned scores in septic-shock and in-hospital mortality. Methods: Prospective, ambulance-based, and multicenter cohort study, developed by the emergency medical services, among patients (n = 535) with suspected infection transferred by ambulance with high-priority to the emergency department (ED). The study enrolled 40 ambulances and 4 ED in Spain between 1 January 2020, and 30 September 2021. All the variables used in the scores, in addition to socio-demographic data, standard vital signs, prehospital analytical parameters (glucose, lactate, and creatinine) were collected. For the evaluation of the scores, the discriminative power, calibration curve and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used. Results: The mSOFA outperformed the other two scores for mortality, presenting the following AUCs: 0.877 (95%CI 0.841-0.913), 0.761 (95%CI 0.706-0.816), 0.731 (95%CI 0.674-0.788), for mSOFA, NEWS, and qSOFA, respectively. No differences were found for sepsis nor septic shock, but mSOFA's AUCs was higher than the one of the other two scores. The calibration curve and DCA presented similar results. Conclusion: The use of mSOFA could provide and extra insight regarding the short-term mortality and sepsis diagnostic, backing its recommendation in the prehospital scenario.

One-on-one comparison between qCSI and NEWS scores for mortality risk assessment in patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive value of the quick COVID-19 Severity Index (qCSI) and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) for 90-day mortality amongst COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted in adult patients transferred by ambulance to an emergency department (ED) with suspected COVID-19 infection subsequently confirmed by a SARS-CoV-2 test (polymerase chain reaction). We collected epidemiological data, clinical covariates (respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, level of consciousness and use of supplemental oxygen) and hospital variables. The primary outcome was cumulative all-cause mortality during a 90-day follow-up, with mortality assessment monitoring time points at 1, 2, 7, 14, 30 and 90 days from ED attendance. Comparison of performances for 90-day mortality between both scores was carried out by univariate analysis. RESULTS: From March to November 2020, we included 2,961 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients (median age 79 years, IQR 66-88), with 49.2% females. The qCSI score provided an AUC ranging from 0.769 (1-day mortality) to 0.749 (90-day mortality), whereas AUCs for NEWS ranging from 0.825 for 1-day mortality to 0.777 for 90-day mortality. At all-time points studied, differences between both scores were statistically significant (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients with SARS-CoV-2 can rapidly develop bilateral pneumonias with multiorgan disease; in these cases, in which an evacuation by the EMS is required, reliable scores for an early identification of patients with risk of clinical deterioration are critical. The NEWS score provides not only better prognostic results than those offered by qCSI at all the analyzed time points, but it is also better suited for COVID-19 patients.KEY MESSAGESThis work aims to determine whether NEWS is the best score for mortality risk assessment in patients with COVID-19.AUCs for NEWS ranged from 0.825 for 1-day mortality to 0.777 for 90-day mortality and were significantly higher than those for qCSI in these same outcomes.NEWS provides a better prognostic capacity than the qCSI score and allows for long-term (90 days) mortality risk assessment of COVID-19 patients.