Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35065617›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2022

Comparison of different sepsis scoring systems and pathways: qSOFA, SIRS, Shapiro criteria and CEC SEPSIS KILLS pathway in bacteraemic and non-bacteraemic patients presenting to the emergency department.

Rebecca Sparks, Arisa Harada, Ruchir Chavada, Christopher Trethewy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Role of Neutrophil Gelatinase-associated Lipocalin (NGAL) and Other Clinical Parameters as Predictors of Bacterial Sepsis in Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department with Fever.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rebecca SparksDepartment of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, NSW Health Pathology-Central Coast, Gosford, Australia. Rebecca.Sparks@health.nsw.gov.au.
Arisa HaradaDepartment of Medicine, Gosford Hospital, Gosford, Australia.
Ruchir ChavadaDepartment of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, NSW Health Pathology-Central Coast, Gosford, Australia.
Christopher TrethewyEmergency Department, Gosford Hospital, Gosford, Australia.
Central Coast Local Health District · AUGosford Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBacteraemia is associated with high morbidity and mortality, with delayed antibiotic treatment associated with poorer outcomes. Early identification is challenging, but clinically important. Multiple scoring systems have been developed to identify individuals in the broader categories of sepsis. We designed this study to assess the performance of existing scoring systems and pathways-CEC SEPSIS KILLS pathway (an Australian sepsis care package), quick sequential organ failure score (qSOFA), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and the Shapiro criteria.

methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study performed in two metropolitan hospitals in NSW, consisting of adult patients (> 18 years) with positive blood cultures containing a true pathogen and patients matched by age without positive blood cultures. Performance (sensitivity, specificity, and mortality prediction) of recognised sepsis and bacteraemia criteria and pathways-qSOFA, SIRS, Shapiro criteria and CEC SEPSIS KILLS pathway in the first 4 h following ED triage was assessed.

resultsThere were 251 patients in each cohort. Sepsis-related mortality was higher in the bacteraemic group (OR 0.4, p = 0.03). Of the criteria studied, the modified Shapiro criteria had the highest sensitivity (88%) with modest specificity (37.85%), and qSOFA had the highest specificity (83.67%) with poor sensitivity (19.82%). SIRS had reasonable sensitivity (82.07%), with poor sensitivity (20.72%). The CEC SEPSIS pathway sensitivity of 70.1% and specificity of 71.1%. The SEPSIS KILLS was activated on only 14% of bacteraemic patients.

conclusionThe performance of all scoring systems and pathways was suboptimal in the identification of patients at risk of bacteraemia presenting to the emergency department.

Indexed as

BacteremiaSepsisAdultAustraliaEmergency Service, HospitalHospital MortalityHumansOrgan Dysfunction ScoresPrognosisRetrospective StudiesROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificitySystemic Inflammatory Response SyndromeBacteraemiaSepsisSepsis in emergency departmentSepsis scoring systems

Identifiers

PMID35065617
PMCPMC8783440
OpenAlexW4226107831

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.