In this study, Q-CRT/qSOFA combination had better sensitivity than the qSOFA score alone and better specificity than the SIRS score alone. The AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of Q-CRT/qSOFA combination were 0.82, 83%, and 81%, respectively. We then combined the Q-CRT and qSOFA score (Q-CRT/qSOFA combination) for sepsis screening. We found no statistically significant differences in the AUC between the scores. The AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of Q-CRT were 0.74, 58%, and 81%, respectively those for the qSOFA score were 0.83, 66%, and 100%, respectively those for the SIRS score were 0.61, 81%, and 40%, respectively, for SIRS score and those for the lactate concentration were 0.76, 72%, and 81%, respectively. Of the 75 enrolled patients, 48 had sepsis. The area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curve analyses and multivariate analyses were used to explore associations of the Q-CRT with the qSOFA score, SIRS score, and lactate concentration. This was a multicenter, observational, retrospective study of adult patients with suspected infection. This study was performed to compare the predictive ability of the quantitative capillary refill time (Q-CRT) as a new rapid index versus the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score and the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) score for sepsis screening in the emergency department.
Outcomes in emergent patients with suspected infection depend on how quickly clinicians evaluate the patients and start treatment.
0 kommentar(er)
