Social determinants of health and sepsis: a case-control study.

PURPOSE: We aimed to identify whether social determinants of health (SDoH) are associated with the development of sepsis and assess the differences between individuals living within systematically disadvantaged neighbourhoods compared with those living outside these neighbourhoods. METHODS: We conducted a single-centre case-control study including 300 randomly selected adult patients (100 patients with sepsis and 200 patients without sepsis) admitted to the emergency department of a large academic tertiary care hospital in Hamilton, ON, Canada. We collected data on demographics and a limited set of SDoH variables, including neighbourhood household income, smoking history, social support, and history of alcohol disorder. We analyzed study data using multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: The study included 100 patients with sepsis with a median [interquartile range (IQR)] age of 75 [58-84] yr and 200 patients without sepsis with a median [IQR] age of 72 [60-83] yr. Factors significantly associated with sepsis included arrival by ambulance, absence of a family physician, higher Hamilton Early Warning Score, and a recorded history of dyslipidemia. Important SDoH variables, such as individual or household income and race, were not available in the medical chart. In patients with SDoH available in their medical records, no SDoH was significantly associated with sepsis. Nevertheless, compared with their proportion of the Hamilton population, the rate of sepsis cases and sepsis deaths was approximately two times higher among patients living in systematically disadvantaged neighbourhoods. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed the lack of available SDoH data in electronic health records. Despite no association between the SDoH variables available and sepsis, we found a higher rate of sepsis cases and sepsis deaths among individuals living in systematically disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Including SDoH in electronic health records is crucial to study their effect on the risk of sepsis and to provide equitable care.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Nous avons cherché à déterminer si les déterminants sociaux de la santé (DSS) étaient associés à l'apparition de sepsis et à évaluer les différences entre les personnes vivant dans des quartiers systématiquement défavorisés et celles vivant à l'extérieur de ces quartiers. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude cas témoins monocentrique portant sur 300 patient·es adultes sélectionné·es au hasard (100 personnes atteintes de sepsis et 200 témoins sans sepsis) admis·es au service des urgences d'un grand hôpital universitaire de soins tertiaires à Hamilton, ON, Canada. Nous avons recueilli des données démographiques et un ensemble limité de variables de DSS, y compris le revenu des ménages du quartier, les antécédents de tabagisme, le soutien social et les antécédents de troubles liés à l'alcool. Nous avons analysé les données de l'étude à l'aide de modèles de régression logistique multivariés. RéSULTATS: L'étude a inclus 100 patient·es atteint·es de sepsis avec un âge médian [écart interquartile (ÉIQ)] de 75 [58-84] ans et 200 patient·es sans sepsis avec un âge médian [ÉIQ] de 72 [60-83] ans. Les facteurs significativement associés au sepsis comprenaient l'arrivée en ambulance, l'absence de médecin de famille, un score Hamilton Early Warning Score plus élevé et des antécédents enregistrés de dyslipidémie. D'importantes variables de DSS, telles que le revenu individuel et du ménage et la race, n'étaient pas disponibles dans le dossier médical. Chez les personnes dont les DSS étaient disponibles dans leur dossier médical, aucun DSS n'était significativement associé au sepsis. Néanmoins, comparativement à leur proportion dans la population de Hamilton, le taux de cas de sepsis et de décès dus au sepsis était environ deux fois plus élevé chez les personnes vivant dans des quartiers systématiquement défavorisés. CONCLUSION: Cette étude a révélé le manque de données disponibles sur les DSS dans les dossiers de santé électroniques. Bien qu'il n'y ait pas d'association entre les variables disponibles et le sepsis, nous avons constaté un taux plus élevé de cas de sepsis et de décès dus à la septicémie chez les personnes vivant dans des quartiers systématiquement défavorisés. L'inclusion des DSS dans les dossiers de santé électroniques est cruciale pour étudier leur effet sur le risque de sepsis et pour dispenser des soins équitables.

Intensive Care Unit Without Walls.

Critical illness is a continuum with different phases and trajectories. The "Intensive Care Unit (ICU) without walls" concept refers to a model whereby care is adjusted in response to the patient's needs, priorities, and preferences at each stage from detection, escalation, early decision making, treatment and organ support, followed by recovery and rehabilitation, within which all healthcare staff, and the patient are equal partners. The rapid response system incorporates monitoring and alerting tools, a multidisciplinary critical care outreach team and care bundles, supported with education and training, analytical and governance functions, which combine to optimise outcomes of critically ill patients, independent of location.

Spanish vs USA cohort comparison of prehospital trauma scores to predict short-term mortality.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate three prehospital early warning scores (EWSs): RTS, MGAP and MREMS, to predict short-term mortality in acute life-threatening trauma and injury/illness by comparing United States (US) and Spanish cohorts. METHODS: A total of 8,854 patients, 8,598/256 survivors/nonsurvivors, comprised the unified cohort. Datasets were randomly divided into training and test sets. Training sets were used to analyse the discriminative power of the scores in terms of the area under the curve (AUC), and the score performance was assessed in the test set in terms of sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), accuracy (ACC) and balanced accuracy (BAC). RESULTS: The three scores showed great discriminative power with AUCs>0.90, and no significant differences between cohorts were found. In the test set, RTS/MREMS/MGAP showed SE/SP/ACC/BAC values of 86.0/89.9/89.6/87.1%, 91.0/86.9/87.5/88.5%, and 87.7/82.9/83.4/85.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: All EWSs showed excellent ability to predict the risk of short-term mortality, independent of the country.

Clinician perspectives on how situational context and augmented intelligence design features impact perceived usefulness of sepsis prediction scores embedded within a simulated electronic health record.

OBJECTIVE: Obtain clinicians' perspectives on early warning scores (EWS) use within context of clinical cases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We developed cases mimicking sepsis situations. De-identified data, synthesized physician notes, and EWS representing deterioration risk were displayed in a simulated EHR for analysis. Twelve clinicians participated in semi-structured interviews to ascertain perspectives across four domains: (1) Familiarity with and understanding of artificial intelligence (AI), prediction models and risk scores; (2) Clinical reasoning processes; (3) Impression and response to EWS; and (4) Interface design. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using content and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Analysis revealed clinicians have experience but limited AI and prediction/risk modeling understanding. Case assessments were primarily based on clinical data. EWS went unmentioned during initial case analysis; although when prompted to comment on it, they discussed it in subsequent cases. Clinicians were unsure how to interpret or apply the EWS, and desired evidence on its derivation and validation. Design recommendations centered around EWS display in multi-patient lists for triage, and EWS trends within the patient record. Themes included a "Trust but Verify" approach to AI and early warning information, dichotomy that EWS is helpful for triage yet has disproportional signal-to-high noise ratio, and action driven by clinical judgment, not the EWS. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians were unsure of how to apply EWS, acted on clinical data, desired score composition and validation information, and felt EWS was most useful when embedded in multi-patient views. Systems providing interactive visualization may facilitate EWS transparency and increase confidence in AI-generated information.

Using the NEWS2 and ABCDE assessment to identify early signs of clinical deterioration.

Nurses may encounter deteriorating patients in their clinical practice, so they require an understanding of the early physiological signs of deterioration and a structured approach to patient assessment. This enables appropriate management and a timely response to the most life-threatening issues identified, such as a compromised airway. This article describes how nurses can use early warning scores and a structured patient assessment, using the ABCDE (airway, breathing, circulation, disability, exposure) framework, to identify early signs of deterioration and facilitate the timely escalation of patient care where necessary.

Safer and more efficient vital signs monitoring protocols to identify the deteriorating patients in the general hospital ward: an observational study.

Background: The frequency at which patients should have their vital signs (e.g. blood pressure, pulse, oxygen saturation) measured on hospital wards is currently unknown. Current National Health Service monitoring protocols are based on expert opinion but supported by little empirical evidence. The challenge is finding the balance between insufficient monitoring (risking missing early signs of deterioration and delays in treatment) and over-observation of stable patients (wasting resources needed in other aspects of care). Objective: Provide an evidence-based approach to creating monitoring protocols based on a patient's risk of deterioration and link these to nursing workload and economic impact. Design: Our study consisted of two parts: (1) an observational study of nursing staff to ascertain the time to perform vital sign observations; and (2) a retrospective study of historic data on patient admissions exploring the relationships between National Early Warning Score and risk of outcome over time. These were underpinned by opinions and experiences from stakeholders. Setting and participants: Observational study: observed nursing staff on 16 randomly selected adult general wards at four acute National Health Service hospitals. Retrospective study: extracted, linked and analysed routinely collected data from two large National Health Service acute trusts; data from over 400,000 patient admissions and 9,000,000 vital sign observations. Results: Observational study found a variety of practices, with two hospitals having registered nurses take the majority of vital sign observations and two favouring healthcare assistants or student nurses. However, whoever took the observations spent roughly the same length of time. The average was 5:01 minutes per observation over a 'round', including time to locate and prepare the equipment and travel to the patient area. Retrospective study created survival models predicting the risk of outcomes over time since the patient was last observed. For low-risk patients, there was little difference in risk between 4 hours and 24 hours post observation. Conclusions: We explored several different scenarios with our stakeholders (clinicians and patients), based on how 'risk' could be managed in different ways. Vital sign observations are often done more frequently than necessary from a bald assessment of the patient's risk, and we show that a maximum threshold of risk could theoretically be achieved with less resource. Existing resources could therefore be redeployed within a changed protocol to achieve better outcomes for some patients without compromising the safety of the rest. Our work supports the approach of the current monitoring protocol, whereby patients' National Early Warning Score 2 guides observation frequency. Existing practice is to observe higher-risk patients more frequently and our findings have shown that this is objectively justified. It is worth noting that important nurse-patient interactions take place during vital sign monitoring and should not be eliminated under new monitoring processes. Our study contributes to the existing evidence on how vital sign observations should be scheduled. However, ultimately, it is for the relevant professionals to decide how our work should be used. Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN10863045. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 17/05/03) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 6. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Patient recovery in hospital is tracked by measuring heart rate, blood pressure and other 'vital signs' and converting them into a score. These are 'observed' regularly by nursing staff so that deterioration can be spotted early. However, taking observations can disturb patients, and taking them too often causes extra work for staff. More frequent monitoring is recommended for higher scores, but evidence is lacking. To work out how often patients should be monitored, we needed to know how likely it is for patients to become more unwell between observations. We analysed over 400,000 patient records from two hospitals to understand how scores change with time. We looked at three of the most serious risks for patients in hospital. These risks are dying, needing intensive care or having a cardiac arrest. We also looked at the risk that a patient's condition would deteriorate significantly before their measurements were taken again. We identified early signs of deterioration and how changes in vital signs affected the risk of a patient's condition becoming worse. From this we calculated a maximum risk of deterioration. We then calculated different monitoring schedules that keep individual patients below this risk level. Some of those would consume less staff time than current National Health Service guidelines suggest. We also watched staff record patients' vital signs. We learnt it takes about 5 minutes to take these measurements from each patient. This information helped us calculate how costs would change if patients' vital signs were taken more or less often. We found that patients with a low overall score could have their vital signs monitored less often without being in danger of serious harm. This frees up nursing time so that patients with a higher score can be monitored more often. Importantly, this can be achieved without employing more staff.

Prehospital early warning scores for adults with suspected sepsis: the PHEWS observational cohort and decision-analytic modelling study.

Background: Guidelines for sepsis recommend treating those at highest risk within 1 hour. The emergency care system can only achieve this if sepsis is recognised and prioritised. Ambulance services can use prehospital early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to prioritise patients for treatment or early assessment in the emergency department. Objectives: To determine the accuracy, impact and cost-effectiveness of using early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to identify sepsis requiring urgent treatment. Design: Retrospective diagnostic cohort study and decision-analytic modelling of operational consequences and cost-effectiveness. Setting: Two ambulance services and four acute hospitals in England. Participants: Adults transported to hospital by emergency ambulance, excluding episodes with injury, mental health problems, cardiac arrest, direct transfer to specialist services, or no vital signs recorded. Interventions: Twenty-one early warning scores used alongside paramedic diagnostic impression, categorised as sepsis, infection, non-specific presentation, or other specific presentation. Main outcome measures: Proportion of cases prioritised at the four hospitals; diagnostic accuracy for the sepsis-3 definition of sepsis and receiving urgent treatment (primary reference standard); daily number of cases with and without sepsis prioritised at a large and a small hospital; the minimum treatment effect associated with prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective, compared to no prioritisation, assuming willingness to pay £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Results: Data from 95,022 episodes involving 71,204 patients across four hospitals showed that most early warning scores operating at their pre-specified thresholds would prioritise more than 10% of cases when applied to non-specific attendances or all attendances. Data from 12,870 episodes at one hospital identified 348 (2.7%) with the primary reference standard. The National Early Warning Score, version 2 (NEWS2), had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve when applied only to patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection (0.756, 95% confidence interval 0.729 to 0.783) or sepsis alone (0.655, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.68). None of the strategies provided high sensitivity (> 0.8) with acceptable positive predictive value (> 0.15). NEWS2 provided combinations of sensitivity and specificity that were similar or superior to all other early warning scores. Applying NEWS2 to paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection with thresholds of > 4, > 6 and > 8 respectively provided sensitivities and positive predictive values (95% confidence interval) of 0.522 (0.469 to 0.574) and 0.216 (0.189 to 0.245), 0.447 (0.395 to 0.499) and 0.274 (0.239 to 0.313), and 0.314 (0.268 to 0.365) and 0.333 (confidence interval 0.284 to 0.386). The mortality relative risk reduction from prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective exceeded 0.975 for all strategies analysed. Limitations: We estimated accuracy using a sample of older patients at one hospital. Reliable evidence was not available to estimate the effectiveness of prioritisation in the decision-analytic modelling. Conclusions: No strategy is ideal but using NEWS2, in patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of infection or sepsis could identify one-third to half of sepsis cases without prioritising unmanageable numbers. No other score provided clearly superior accuracy to NEWS2. Research is needed to develop better definition, diagnosis and treatments for sepsis. Study registration: This study is registered as Research Registry (reference: researchregistry5268). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/136/10) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 16. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition in which an abnormal response to infection causes heart, lung or kidney failure. People with sepsis need urgent treatment. They need to be prioritised at the emergency department rather than waiting in the queue. Paramedics attempt to identify people with possible sepsis using an early warning score (based on simple measurements, such as blood pressure and heart rate) alongside their impression of the patient's diagnosis. They can then alert the hospital to assess the patient quickly. However, an inaccurate early warning score might miss cases of sepsis or unnecessarily prioritise people without sepsis. We aimed to measure how accurately early warning scores identified people with sepsis when used alongside paramedic diagnostic impression. We collected data from 71,204 people that two ambulance services transported to four different hospitals in 2019. We recorded paramedic diagnostic impressions and calculated early warning scores for each patient. At one hospital, we linked ambulance records to hospital records and identified who had sepsis. We then calculated the accuracy of using the scores alongside diagnostic impression to diagnose sepsis. Finally, we used modelling to predict how many patients (with and without sepsis) paramedics would prioritise using different strategies based on early warning scores and diagnostic impression. We found that none of the currently available early warning scores were ideal. When they were applied to all patients, they prioritised too many people. When they were only applied to patients whom the paramedics thought had infection, they missed many cases of sepsis. The NEWS2, score, which ambulance services already use, was as good as or better than all the other scores we studied. We found that using the NEWS2, score in people with a paramedic impression of infection could achieve a reasonable balance between prioritising too many patients and avoiding missing patients with sepsis.

Undertaking a neurological assessment.

Neurological observations are an essential aspect of assessment in patients with altered mental status and require the nurse to collect and analyse information using a validated assessment tool. Assessing a patient's pupil size and response is also an important element of a neurological assessment. This article summarises the pathophysiology of raised intracranial pressure and lists some of the conditions that may contribute to an alteration in a patient's mental status. The article details the use of two commonly used neurological assessment tools and the assessment of a patient's pupil size and response. The author also considers the challenges related to accurate recording of neurological observations.

Risk Prediction Models for Hospital Mortality in General Medical Patients: A Systematic Review.

Objective: To systematically review contemporary prediction models for hospital mortality developed or validated in general medical patients. Methods: We screened articles in five databases, from January 1, 2010, through April 7, 2022, and the bibliography of articles selected for final inclusion. We assessed the quality for risk of bias and applicability using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) and extracted data using the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) checklist. Two investigators independently screened each article, assessed quality, and extracted data. Results: From 20,424 unique articles, we identified 15 models in 8 studies across 10 countries. The studies included 280,793 general medical patients and 19,923 hospital deaths. Models included 7 early warning scores, 2 comorbidities indices, and 6 combination models. Ten models were studied in all general medical patients (general models) and 7 in general medical patients with infection (infection models). Of the 15 models, 13 were developed using logistic or Poisson regression and 2 using machine learning methods. Also, 4 of 15 models reported on handling of missing values. None of the infection models had high discrimination, whereas 4 of 10 general models had high discrimination (area under curve >0.8). Only 1 model appropriately assessed calibration. All models had high risk of bias; 4 of 10 general models and 5 of 7 infection models had low concern for applicability for general medical patients. Conclusion: Mortality prediction models for general medical patients were sparse and differed in quality, applicability, and discrimination. These models require hospital-level validation and/or recalibration in general medical patients to guide mortality reduction interventions.

COVID-19: Asociación entre la clasificación de riesgo y el Modified Early Warning Score y los resultados hospitalarios / COVID-19: Association of risk classification with the Modified Early Warning Score and hospital outcomes / COVID-19: Associação da classificação de risco com o Modified Early Warning Score e os desfechos hospitalares

Objetivo: evaluar la asociación entre las categorías de clasificación de riesgo y el Modified Early Warning Score y los resultados de los pacientes con COVID-19 en el servicio de emergencia Método: estudio transversal, realizado con 372 pacientes hospitalizados con diagnóstico de COVID-19 atendidos en la Recepción con Clasificación de Riesgo en Urgencias. En este estudio, el Modified Early Warning Score de los pacientes se clasificó como sin y con deterioro clínico, de 0 a 4 y de 5 a 9, respectivamente. Se consideró que había deterioro clínico cuando presentaban insuficiencia respiratoria aguda, shock y paro cardiorrespiratorio. Resultados: el Modified Early Warning Score promedio fue de 3,34. En cuanto al deterioro clínico de los pacientes, se observó que en el 43% de los casos el tiempo de deterioro fue menor a 24 horas y que el 65,9% ocurrió en urgencias. El deterioro más frecuente fue la insuficiencia respiratoria aguda (69,9%) y el resultado fue alta hospitalaria (70,3%). Conclusión: los pacientes con COVID-19 que presentaban Modified Early Warning Score 4 se asociaron a las categorías de clasificación de riesgo urgente, muy urgente y emergente y tuvieron más deterioro clínico, como insuficiencia respiratoria y shock, y murieron, lo que demuestra que el Protocolo de Clasificación de Riesgo priorizó correctamente a los pacientes con riesgo vital.

Objective: to evaluate the association of the risk classification categories with the Modified Early Warning Score and the outcomes of COVID-19 patients in the emergency service Method: a crosssectional study carried out with 372 patients hospitalized with a COVID-19 diagnosis and treated at the Risk Classification Welcoming area from the Emergency Room. In this study, the patients' Modified Early Warning Score was categorized into without and with clinical deterioration, from 0 to 4 and from 5 to 9, respectively. Clinical deterioration was considered to be acute respiratory failure, shock and cardiopulmonary arrest Results: the mean Modified Early Warning Score was 3.34. In relation to the patients' clinical deterioration, it was observed that, in 43%, the time for deterioration was less than 24 hours and that 65.9% occurred in the Emergency Room. The most frequent deterioration was acute respiratory failure (69.9%) and the outcome was hospital discharge (70.3%). Conclusion: COVID-19 patients who had a Modified Early Warning Scores > 4 were associated with the urgent, very urgent and emergency risk classification categories, had more clinical deterioration, such as respiratory failure and shock, and evolved more to death, which shows that the Risk Classification Protocol correctly prioritized patients at risk of life.

Objetivo: avaliar a associação das categorias de classificação de risco com o Modified Early Warning Score e os desfechos dos pacientes com COVID-19 no serviço de emergência Método: estudo transversal, realizado com 372 pacientes internados com diagnóstico de COVID-19 atendidos no Acolhimento com Classificação de Risco no Pronto-Atendimento. Neste estudo, o Modified Early Warning Score dos pacientes foi categorizado em sem e com deterioração clínica, de 0 a 4 e de 5 a 9, respectivamente. Foram consideradas deteriorações clínicas a insuficiência respiratória aguda, choque e parada cardiorrespiratória. Resultados: o Modified Early Warning Score médio foi de 3,34. Em relação à deterioração clínica dos pacientes, observou-se que em 43% o tempo para deterioração foi menor de 24 horas e que 65,9% delas ocorreu no pronto-socorro. A deterioração mais frequente foi a insuficiência respiratória aguda (69,9%) e o desfecho foi o de alta hospitalar (70,3%). Conclusão: pacientes com COVID-19 que tiveram Modified Early Warning Score 4 foram associados às categorias da classificação de risco urgente, muito urgente e emergente e tiveram mais deterioração clínica, como a insuficiência respiratória e o choque, e evoluíram mais a óbito, o que demonstra que o Protocolo de Classificação de Risco priorizou corretamente os pacientes com risco de vida.

Deep Learning-Based Early Warning Score for Predicting Clinical Deterioration in General Ward Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients who are admitted to hospitals are at high risk of short-term deterioration due to treatment-related or cancer-specific complications. A rapid response system (RRS) is initiated when patients who are deteriorating or at risk of deteriorating are identified. This study was conducted to develop a deep learning-based early warning score (EWS) for cancer patients (Can-EWS) using delta values in vital signs. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all oncology patients who were admitted to the general ward between 2016 and 2020. The data were divided into a training set (January 2016-December 2019) and a held-out test set (January 2020-December 2020). The primary outcome was clinical deterioration, defined as the composite of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and unexpected intensive care unit (ICU) transfer. RESULTS: During the study period, 19,739 cancer patients were admitted to the general wards and eligible for this study. Clinical deterioration occurred in 894 cases. IHCA and unexpected ICU transfer prevalence was 1.77 per 1000 admissions and 43.45 per 1000 admissions, respectively. We developed two models: Can-EWS V1, which used input vectors of the original five input variables, and Can-EWS V2, which used input vectors of 10 variables (including an additional five delta variables). The cross-validation performance of the clinical deterioration for Can-EWS V2 (AUROC, 0.946; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.943-0.948) was higher than that for MEWS of 5 (AUROC, 0.589; 95% CI, 0.587-0.560; p < 0.001) and Can-EWS V1 (AUROC, 0.927; 95% CI, 0.924-0.931). As a virtual prognostic study, additional validation was performed on held-out test data. The AUROC and 95% CI were 0.588 (95% CI, 0.588-0.589), 0.890 (95% CI, 0.888-0.891), and 0.898 (95% CI, 0.897-0.899), for MEWS of 5, Can-EWS V1, and the deployed model Can-EWS V2, respectively. Can-EWS V2 outperformed other approaches for specificities, positive predictive values, negative predictive values, and the number of false alarms per day at the same sensitivity level on the held-out test data. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed and validated a deep learning-based EWS for cancer patients using the original values and differences between consecutive measurements of basic vital signs. The Can-EWS has acceptable discriminatory power and sensitivity, with extremely decreased false alarms compared with MEWS.

Evaluating the performance of the National Early Warning Score in different diagnostic groups.

BACKGROUND: The National Early Warning Score (NEWS) is used in hospitals across the UK to detect deterioration of patients within care pathways. It is used for most patients, but there are relatively few studies validating its performance in groups of patients with specific conditions. METHODS: The performance of NEWS was evaluated against 36 other Early Warning Scores, in 123 patient groups, through use of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve technique, to compare the abilities of each Early Warning Score to discriminate an outcome within 24hrs of vital sign recording. Outcomes evaluated were death, ICU admission, or a combined outcome of either death or ICU admission within 24 hours of an observation set. RESULTS: The National Early Warning Score 2 performs either best or joint best within 120 of the 123 patient groups evaluated and is only outperformed in prediction of unanticipated ICU admission. When outperformed by other Early Warning Scores in the remaining 3 patient groups, the performance difference was marginal. CONCLUSIONS: Consistently high performance indicates that NEWS is a suitable early warning score to use for all diagnostic groups considered by this analysis, and patients are not disadvantaged through use of NEWS in comparison to any of the other evaluated Early Warning Scores.

Systems of Care Delivery and Optimization in the Postoperative Care Wards.

A third of all patients are at risk for a serious adverse event, including death, in the first month after undergoing a major surgery. Most of these events will occur within 24 hours of the operation but are unlikely to occur in the operating room or postanesthesia care unit. Most opioid-induced respiratory depression events in the postoperative period resulted in death (55%) or anoxic brain injury (22%). A future state of mature artificial intelligence and machine learning will improve situational awareness of acute clinical deterioration, minimize alert fatigue, and facilitate early intervention to minimize poor outcomes.

Development and validation of the early warning system scores ontology.

BACKGROUND: Clinical early warning scoring systems, have improved patient outcomes in a range of specializations and global contexts. These systems are used to predict patient deterioration. A multitude of patient-level physiological decompensation data has been made available through the widespread integration of early warning scoring systems within EHRs across national and international health care organizations. These data can be used to promote secondary research. The diversity of early warning scoring systems and various EHR systems is one barrier to secondary analysis of early warning score data. Given that early warning score parameters are varied, this makes it difficult to query across providers and EHR systems. Moreover, mapping and merging the parameters is challenging. We develop and validate the Early Warning System Scores Ontology (EWSSO), representing three commonly used early warning scores: the National Early Warning Score (NEWS), the six-item modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) to overcome these problems. METHODS: We apply the Software Development Lifecycle Framework-conceived by Winston Boyce in 1970-to model the activities involved in organizing, producing, and evaluating the EWSSO. We also follow OBO Foundry Principles and the principles of best practice for domain ontology design, terms, definitions, and classifications to meet BFO requirements for ontology building. RESULTS: We developed twenty-nine new classes, reused four classes and four object properties to create the EWSSO. When we queried the data our ontology-based process could differentiate between necessary and unnecessary features for score calculation 100% of the time. Further, our process applied the proper temperature conversions for the early warning score calculator 100% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: Using synthetic datasets, we demonstrate the EWSSO can be used to generate and query health system data on vital signs and provide input to calculate the NEWS, six-item MEWS, and qSOFA. Future work includes extending the EWSSO by introducing additional early warning scores for adult and pediatric patient populations and creating patient profiles that contain clinical, demographic, and outcomes data regarding the patient.

Early Warning Scores to Support Continuous Wireless Vital Sign Monitoring for Complication Prediction in Patients on Surgical Wards: Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Wireless vital sign sensors are increasingly being used to monitor patients on surgical wards. Although early warning scores (EWSs) are the current standard for the identification of patient deterioration in a ward setting, their usefulness for continuous monitoring is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the usability and predictive value of high-rate EWSs obtained from continuous vital sign recordings for early identification of postoperative complications and compares the performance of a sensor-based EWS alarm system with manual intermittent EWS measurements and threshold alarms applied to individual vital sign recordings (single-parameter alarms). METHODS: Continuous vital sign measurements (heart rate, respiratory rate, blood oxygen saturation, and axillary temperature) collected with wireless sensors in patients on surgical wards were used for retrospective simulation of EWSs (sensor EWSs) for different time windows (1-240 min), adopting criteria similar to EWSs based on manual vital signs measurements (nurse EWSs). Hourly sensor EWS measurements were compared between patients with (event group: 14/46, 30%) and without (control group: 32/46, 70%) postoperative complications. In addition, alarms were simulated for the sensor EWSs using a range of alarm thresholds (1-9) and compared with alarms based on nurse EWSs and single-parameter alarms. Alarm performance was evaluated using the sensitivity to predict complications within 24 hours, daily alarm rate, and false discovery rate (FDR). RESULTS: The hourly sensor EWSs of the event group (median 3.4, IQR 3.1-4.1) was significantly higher (P<.004) compared with the control group (median 2.8, IQR 2.4-3.2). The alarm sensitivity of the hourly sensor EWSs was the highest (80%-67%) for thresholds of 3 to 5, which was associated with alarm rates of 2 (FDR=85%) to 1.2 (FDR=83%) alarms per patient per day respectively. The sensitivity of sensor EWS-based alarms was higher than that of nurse EWS-based alarms (maximum=40%) but lower than that of single-parameter alarms (87%) for all thresholds. In contrast, the (false) alarm rates of sensor EWS-based alarms were higher than that of nurse EWS-based alarms (maximum=0.6 alarm/patient/d; FDR=80%) but lower than that of single-parameter alarms (2 alarms/patient/d; FDR=84%) for most thresholds. Alarm rates for sensor EWSs increased for shorter time windows, reaching 70 alarms per patient per day when calculated every minute. CONCLUSIONS: EWSs obtained using wireless vital sign sensors may contribute to the early recognition of postoperative complications in a ward setting, with higher alarm sensitivity compared with manual EWS measurements. Although hourly sensor EWSs provide fewer alarms compared with single-parameter alarms, high false alarm rates can be expected when calculated over shorter time spans. Further studies are recommended to optimize care escalation criteria for continuous monitoring of vital signs in a ward setting and to evaluate the effects on patient outcomes.

Head-to-head comparison of six warning scores to predict mortality and clinical impairment in COVID-19 patients in emergency department.

The aim was to evaluate the ability of six risk scores (4C, CURB65, SEIMC, mCHOSEN, QuickCSI, and NEWS2) to predict the outcome of patients with COVID-19 during the sixth pandemic wave in Spain. A retrospective observational study was performed to review the electronic medical records in patients ≥ 18 years of age who consulted consecutively in an emergency department with COVID-19 diagnosis throughout 2 months during the sixth pandemic wave. Clinical-epidemiological variables, comorbidities, and their respective outcomes, such as 30-day in-hospital mortality and clinical deterioration risk (a combined outcome considering: mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, and/or 30-day in-hospital mortality), were calculated. The area under the curve for each risk score was calculated, and the resulting curves were compared by the Delong test, concluding with a decision curve analysis. A total of 626 patients (median age 79 years; 49.8% female) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Two hundred and ninety-three patients (46.8%) had two or more comorbidities. Clinical deterioration risk criteria were present in 10.1% (63 cases), with a 30-day in-hospital mortality rate of 6.2% (39 cases). Comparison of the results showed that score 4C presented the best results for both outcome variables, with areas under the curve for mortality and clinical deterioration risk of 0.931 (95% CI 0.904-0.957) and 0.871 (95% CI 0.833-0.910) (both p < 0.001). The 4C Mortality Score proved to be the best score for predicting mortality or clinical deterioration risk among patients with COVID-19 attended in the emergency department in the following 30 days.

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.

Comparing Continuous with Periodic Vital Sign Scoring for Clinical Deterioration Using a Patient Data Model.

To evaluate a minute-by-minute monitoring algorithm against a periodic early warning score (EWS) in detecting clinical deterioration and workload. Periodic EWSs suffer from large measurement intervals, causing late detection of deterioration. This might be prevented by continuous vital sign monitoring with a real-time algorithm such as the Visensia Safety Index (VSI). This prospective comparative data modeling cohort study (NCT04189653) compares continuous algorithmic alerts against periodic EWS in continuous monitored medical and surgical inpatients. We evaluated sensitivity, frequency, number of warnings needed to evaluate (NNE) and time of initial alert till escalation of care (EOC): Rapid Response Team activation, unplanned ICU admission, emergency surgery, or death. Also, the percentage of VSI alerting minutes was compared between patients with or without EOC. In 1529 admissions continuous VSI warned for 55% of EOC (95% CI: 45-64%) versus 51% (95% CI: 41-61%) by periodic EWS. NNE for VSI was 152 alerts per detected EOC (95% CI: 114-190) compared to 21 (95% CI: 17-28). It generated 0.99 warnings per day per patient compared to 0.13. Time from detection score till escalation was 8.3 hours (IQR: 2.6-24.8) with VSI versus 5.2 (IQR: 2.7-12.3) hours with EWS (P=0.074). The percentage of warning VSI minutes was higher in patients with EOC than in stable patients (2.36% vs 0.81%, P<0.001). Although sensitivity of detection was not significantly improved continuous vital sign monitoring shows potential for earlier alerts for deterioration compared to periodic EWS. A higher percentage of alerting minutes may indicate risk for deterioration.

Early warning scores and trigger recommendations must be used with care in older home nursing care patients: Results from an observational study.

AIMS: To explore modified early warning scores (MEWSs) and deviating vital signs among older home nursing care patients to determine whether the MEWS trigger recommendations were adhered to in cases of where registered nurses (RNs) suspected acute functional decline. DESIGN: Prospective observational study with a descriptive, explorative design. METHODS: Participants were included from April 2018 to February 2019. Demographic, health-related and clinical data were collected over a 3-month period. RESULTS: In all, 135 older patients participated. Median MEWS (n = 444) was 1 (interquartile range (IQR) 1-2). Frequently deviating vital signs were respiratory (88.8%) and heart rate (15.3%). Median habitual MEWS (n = 51) was 1 (IQR 0-1). Deviating vital signs were respiratory (72.5%) and heart rate (19.6%). A significant difference between habitual MEWS and MEWS recorded in cases of suspected functional decline was found (p = 0.002). MEWS' trigger recommendations were adhered to in 68.9% of all MEWS measurements.

Evaluation of Early Warning Scores on In-Hospital Mortality in COVID-19 Patients: A Tertiary Hospital Study from Taiwan.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a global pandemic. Early warning scores (EWS) are used to identify potential clinical deterioration, and this study evaluated the ability of the Rapid Emergency Medicine score (REMS), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), and Modified EWS (MEWS) to predict in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients. This study retrospectively analyzed data from COVID-19 patients who presented to the emergency department and were hospitalized between 1 May and 31 July 2021. The area under curve (AUC) was calculated to compare predictive performance of the three EWS. Data from 306 COVID-19 patients (61 ± 15 years, 53% male) were included for analysis. REMS had the highest AUC for in-hospital mortality (AUC: 0.773, 95% CI: 0.69-0.85), followed by NEWS (AUC: 0.730, 95% CI: 0.64-0.82) and MEWS (AUC: 0.695, 95% CI: 0.60-0.79). The optimal cut-off value for REMS was 6.5 (sensitivity: 71.4%; specificity: 76.3%), with positive and negative predictive values of 27.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Computing REMS for COVID-19 patients who present to the emergency department can help identify those at risk of in-hospital mortality and facilitate early intervention, which can lead to better patient outcomes.