JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Prognostic Accuracy of the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment for Mortality in Patients With Suspected Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Annals of Internal Medicine 2018 Februrary 21
BACKGROUND: The quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) has been proposed for prediction of mortality in patients with suspected infection.

PURPOSE: To summarize and compare the prognostic accuracy of qSOFA and the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria for prediction of mortality in adult patients with suspected infection.

DATA SOURCES: Four databases from inception through November 2017.

STUDY SELECTION: English-language studies using qSOFA for prediction of mortality (in-hospital, 28-day, or 30-day) in adult patients with suspected infection in the intensive care unit (ICU), emergency department (ED), or hospital wards.

DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently extracted data and assessed study quality using standard criteria.

DATA SYNTHESIS: Thirty-eight studies were included (n = 385 333). qSOFA was associated with a pooled sensitivity of 60.8% (95% CI, 51.4% to 69.4%) and a pooled specificity of 72.0% (CI, 63.4% to 79.2%) for mortality. The SIRS criteria were associated with a pooled sensitivity of 88.1% (CI, 82.3% to 92.1%) and a pooled specificity of 25.8% (CI, 17.1% to 36.9%). The pooled sensitivity of qSOFA was higher in the ICU population (87.2% [CI, 75.8% to 93.7%]) than the non-ICU population (51.2% [CI, 43.6% to 58.7%]). The pooled specificity of qSOFA was higher in the non-ICU population (79.6% [CI, 73.3% to 84.7%]) than the ICU population (33.3% [CI, 23.8% to 44.4%]).

LIMITATION: Potential risk of bias in included studies due to qSOFA interpretation and patient selection.

CONCLUSION: qSOFA had poor sensitivity and moderate specificity for short-term mortality. The SIRS criteria had sensitivity superior to that of qSOFA, supporting their use for screening of patients and as a prompt for treatment initiation.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42017075964).

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app