A comparison of qSOFA, SIRS and NEWS in predicting the accuracy of mortality in patients with suspected sepsis: A meta-analysis

PLOS ONE(2022)

引用 7|浏览1
暂无评分
摘要
ObjectiveTo identify and compare prognostic accuracy of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria, and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) to predict mortality in patients with suspected sepsis. MethodsThis meta-analysis followed accordance with the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases from establishment of the database to November 29, 2021. The pooled sensitivity and specificity with 95% CIs were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model (BRM). Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curves were generated to assess the overall prognostic accuracy. ResultsData of 62338 patients from 26 studies were included in this meta-analysis. qSOFA had the highest specificity and the lowest sensitivity with a specificity of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.76-0.86) and a sensitivity of 0.46 (95% CI: 0.39-0.53). SIRS had the highest sensitivity and the lowest specificity with a sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78-0.85) and a specificity 0.24 (95% CI: 0.19-0.29). NEWS had both an intermediate sensitivity and specificity with a sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.63-0.81) and a specificity 0.52 (95% CI: 0.39-0.65). qSOFA showed higher overall prognostic accuracy than SIRS and NEWS by comparing HSROC curves. ConclusionsAmong qSOFA, SIRS and NEWS, qSOFA showed higher overall prognostic accuracy than SIRS and NEWS. However, no scoring system has both high sensitivity and specificity for predicting the accuracy of mortality in patients with suspected sepsis.
更多
查看译文
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要