The predictive value of variables measurable in the ambulance and the development of the Predict Sepsis screening tools: a prospective cohort study

Ulrika Margareta Wallgren, Jan Sjölin, Hans Järnbert-Pettersson, Lisa Kurland, Ulrika Margareta Wallgren, Jan Sjölin, Hans Järnbert-Pettersson, Lisa Kurland

Abstract

Background: Despite sepsis being a time critical condition with a high mortality, it is often not identified in a timely fashion. The aim of the current study was to create a screening tool based on bedside measurable variables predictive of sepsis among ambulance patients with infection according to clinical judgment by ambulance personnel.

Methods: Prospective cohort study of 551 adult patients presenting with suspected infection, performed in the ambulance setting of Stockholm during 2017-2018. 18 variables were measured in the ambulance (8 keywords related to medical history, 6 vital signs, 4 point-of-care blood tests, in addition to age, gender, and comorbidity. Logistic regression, area under the curve (AUC) and classification trees were used to study the association with sepsis. The AUC, sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios were used to evaluate the predictive ability of sepsis screening models.

Results: The six variables with the strongest association with sepsis were: systolic blood pressure ≤ 100 mmHg, temperature > 38.5 °C, GCS < 15, lactate > 4 mmol/L, gastrointestinal symptoms, and a history of acute altered mental status. These were combined into the Predict Sepsis screening tool 1, with a sensitivity of 0.90, specificity 0.41, AUC 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.81, PPV 0.52, and NPV 0.86. Combining a history of acute altered mental status with GCS < 15 and excluding lactate in the Predict Sepsis screening tool 2 did not noticeably affect the AUC. In addition, the AUCs of these models did not differ noticeably when compared to a model including vital signs alone, with novel calculated cut-offs; the Predict Sepsis screening tool 3.

Conclusions: Systolic blood pressure ≤ 100 mmHg, temperature > 38.5 °C, GCS < 15, lactate > 4 mmol/L, gastrointestinal symptoms, and a history of acute altered mental status demonstrated the strongest association with sepsis. We present three screening tools to predict sepsis with similar sensitivity. The results indicated no noticeable increase of predictive ability by including symptom-variables and blood tests to a sepsis screening tool in the current study population.

Trial registration: NCT03249597.

Keywords: Emergency care; Emergency medical services; Prehospital; Screening; Sepsis.

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declare that they have no conflicting interests. UW and LK are members of the Swedish national working group for sepsis and LK is chair of the Swedish national working group for emergency medicine.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart of inclusion and exclusion. ED = Emergency Department, PV=Predictive value, LR = Likelihood ratio, AUC = Area under the receiver operating curve
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Classification treeα presenting the variables which, at each step, had the strongest association with sepsis*. GCS = Glasgow Coma Scale, Temp = Temperature, SBP=Systolic Blood Pressure, HR = Heart Rate, SpO2 = Saturation of peripheral Oxygen, CHAID = Chi-square Automatic Interaction Detector. αThe CHAID algorithm was used to build the tree. *among 551 adult patients with infection according to clinical judgment by ambulance personnel and documentation of to determine whether the patient had sepsis or not. The prevalence of sepsis is bolded and calculated based on the total number of patients in each node (n). Darker blue filling of the box indicates a keyword reflecting medical history. Interpretation; example: “Of the 115 patients with a decreased level of consciousness (GCS<15), 67% had sepsis. If the patients also had fever (Temp>38.0°C), the prevalence of sepsis increased to 86% of the 65 in this group”. All Bonferroni-adjusted values were < 0.05 for all nodes
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
ROC curves for models based on variable groups and combinations of these. ROC = Receiver Operating Characteristic, POCs = point-of-care blood tests. Only variables significantly associated with sepsis in the univariable analysis are included in the models
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
The Predict Sepsis screening tools. The Predict Sepsis screening tools are developed for adult, non-trauma patients with suspected infection according to clinical judgment by ambulance personnel

References

    1. Mouncey PR, Osborn TM, Power GS, Harrison DA, Sadique MZ, Grieve RD, et al. Trial of early, goal-directed resuscitation for septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(14):1301–1311. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1500896.
    1. Yealy DM, Kellum JA, Huang DT, Barnato AE, Weissfeld LA, Pike F, et al. A randomized trial of protocol-based care for early septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(18):1683–1693. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1401602.
    1. Peake SL, Delaney A, Bailey M, Bellomo R, Cameron PA, Cooper DJ, et al. Goal-directed resuscitation for patients with early septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(16):1496–1506. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1404380.
    1. Wang HE, Weaver MD, Shapiro NI, Yealy DM. Opportunities for emergency medical services care of sepsis. Resuscitation. 2010;81(2):193–197. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.11.008.
    1. Studnek JR, Artho MR, Garner CL Jr, Jones AE. The impact of emergency medical services on the ED care of severe sepsis. Am J Emerg Med. 2010.
    1. Wallgren UM, Castren M, Svensson AE, Kurland L. Identification of adult septic patients in the prehospital setting: a comparison of two screening tools and clinical judgment. Eur J Emerg Med. 2014;21(4):260–265. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000084.
    1. Wallgren UM, Antonsson VE, Castren MK, Kurland L. Longer time to antibiotics and higher mortality among septic patients with non-specfic presentations -a cross sectional study of emergency department patients indicating that a screening tool may improve identification. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2016;24(1):1.
    1. Bayer O, Schwarzkopf D, Stumme C, Stacke A, Hartog CS, Hohenstein C, et al. An early warning scoring system to identify septic patients in the Prehospital setting: the PRESEP score. Acad Emerg Med. 2015;22(7):868–871. doi: 10.1111/acem.12707.
    1. Polito CC, Isakov A, Yancey AH, 2nd, Wilson DK, Anderson BA, Bloom I, et al. Prehospital recognition of severe sepsis: development and validation of a novel EMS screening tool. Am J Emerg Med. 2015;33(9):1119–1125. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.04.024.
    1. Robson W, Nutbeam T, Daniels R. Sepsis: a need for prehospital intervention? Emerg Med J. 2009;26(7):535–538. doi: 10.1136/emj.2008.064469.
    1. Suffoletto B, Frisch A, Prabhu A, Kristan J, Guyette FX, Callaway CW. Prediction of serious infection during prehospital emergency care. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2011;15(3):325–330. doi: 10.3109/10903127.2011.561411.
    1. Wallgren UM, Bohm KEM, Kurland L. Presentations of adult septic patients in the prehospital setting as recorded by emergency medical services: a mixed methods analysis. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017;25(1):23. doi: 10.1186/s13049-017-0367-z.
    1. Huttunen R, Syrjanen J, Vuento R, Hurme M, Huhtala H, Laine J, et al. Plasma level of soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor as a predictor of disease severity and case fatality in patients with bacteraemia: a prospective cohort study. J Intern Med. 2011;270(1):32–40. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02363.x.
    1. Linder A, Arnold R, Boyd JH, Zindovic M, Zindovic I, Lange A, et al. Heparin-binding protein measurement improves the prediction of severe infection with organ dysfunction in the emergency department. Crit Care Med. 2015;43(11):2378–2386. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001265.
    1. Ulf Kanfjäll CaSAA. Annual ambulance assignments Samariten Ambulans AB Stockholm: Samariten Ambulans AB; 2019.
    1. Årsrapport 2017 Prehospitala verksamheter i SLL Sect. 4.1 and 6.2 (2017).
    1. Folkmängd i riket, län och kommuner 31 mars 2018 och befolkningsförändringar 1 januari–31 mars 2018 [Internet] Statistiska centralbyrån (SCB) 2018.
    1. Hälso och Sjukvårdsförvaltningen RS. Akutmottagningsbesök (exkl barnakut och psykakut): : Hälso och Sjukvårdsförvaltningen, Region Stockholm; 2018.
    1. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373–383. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8.
    1. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D, Bauer M, et al. The third international consensus definitions for Sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3) JAMA. 2016;315(8):801–810. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0287.
    1. Swedish Intensive Care registry (Svenska intensivvårdsregistret, SIR) [Web page]. 2015 [updated 2015-05-20 Available from: .
    1. Beräkning av FiO2 vid syrgastillförsel med mask eller kateter [Internet] Svenska intensivvårdsregsitret. 2018.
    1. Peduzzi PCJ, Kemper E, Holford TR, Feinstein AR. A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49(12):1373–1379. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00236-3.
    1. Lowry R. VassarStats; Clinical Research Calculators, Calculator 1 [cited 2019. Available from: .
    1. Physicians RCo . National Early Warning Score (NEWS) 2: Standardising the assessment of acute-illness severity in the NHS. Updated report of a working party. London: Royal College of Physicians; 2017.
    1. Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB, Dellinger RP, Fein AM, Knaus WA, et al. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM consensus conference committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest. 1992;101(6):1644–1655. doi: 10.1378/chest.101.6.1644.
    1. Kass G. An exploratory technique for investigating large quantitative of categorical data. 1980.
    1. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191–4.
    1. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig L, et al. STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Clin Chem. 2015;61(12):1446–1452. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2015.246280.
    1. Singer AJ, Taylor M, Domingo A, Ghazipura S, Khorasonchi A, Thode HC, Jr, et al. Diagnostic characteristics of a clinical screening tool in combination with measuring bedside lactate level in emergency department patients with suspected sepsis. Acad Emerg Med. 2014;21(8):853–857. doi: 10.1111/acem.12444.
    1. Moran JL, Santamaria J. Reconsidering lactate as a sepsis risk biomarker. PLoS One. 2017;12(10):e0185320. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185320.
    1. Henriksen DP, Laursen CB, Jensen TG, Hallas J, Pedersen C, Lassen AT. Incidence rate of community-acquired sepsis among hospitalized acute medical patients-a population-based survey. Crit Care Med. 2015;43(1):13–21. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000611.
    1. Seymour CW, Kennedy JN, Wang S, Chang CH, Elliott CF, Xu Z, et al. Derivation, Validation, and Potential Treatment Implications of Novel Clinical Phenotypes for Sepsis. JAMA. 2019.
    1. Levy MM, Fink MP, Marshall JC, Abraham E, Angus D, Cook D, et al. 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS international Sepsis definitions conference. Crit Care Med. 2003;31(4):1250–1256. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000050454.01978.3B.

Source: PubMed

3
購読する