Risk factors of sepsis among patients with qSOFA<2 in the emergency department
Name:
Shibata-Manuscript.pdf
Size:
857.3Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Accepted Manuscript
Author
Shibata, JunichiroOsawa, Itsuki
Ito, Honoka
Soeno, Shoko
Hara, Konan
Sonoo, Tomohiro
Nakamura, Kensuke
Goto, Tadahiro
Affiliation
Department of Economics, University of ArizonaIssue Date
2021-12
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
Elsevier BVCitation
Shibata, J., Osawa, I., Ito, H., Soeno, S., Hara, K., Sonoo, T., Nakamura, K., & Goto, T. (2021). Risk factors of sepsis among patients with qSOFA<2 in the emergency department. American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 50, 699–706.Rights
© 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Objective: Studies have suggested that qSOFA can be used for early detection of sepsis immediately upon arrival at the emergency department (ED). Despite this, little is known about the risk factors associated with the subsequent diagnosis of sepsis among patients with qSOFA<2 in the ED. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study using ED data from a large tertiary medical center in Japan, 2018–2020. We included adult patients (aged ≥18 years) presenting to the ED with suspected infection (e.g., having a fever) and qSOFA<2. We identified patients who developed sepsis based on the Sepsis-3 criteria, and compared patient characteristics (e.g., demographics, vital signs upon the initial triage, chief complaint, and comorbidities) between patients who developed sepsis or not. Additionally, we identified the potential risk factors of sepsis among patients with qSOFA<2 using a multivariable logistic regression model. Results: We identified 151 (7%) patients who developed sepsis among 2025 adult patients with suspected infection and qSOFA<2. Compared with patients who did not develop sepsis, patients who developed sepsis were likely to be older and have vital signs suggestive of imminent sepsis (e.g., high respiratory rate). In the multivariable logistic regression model, the potential risk factors of sepsis among patients with qSOFA<2 were older age (adjusted OR, 1.92 [95%CI 1.19–3.19]), vital signs suggestive of imminent sepsis (e.g., adjusted OR of altered mental status, 3.50 [95%CI 2.25–5.50]), receipt of oxygen therapy upon arrival at the ED (adjusted OR, 1.91 [95%CI 1.38–2.26]), chief complaint of sore throat (adjusted OR, 2.15 [95%CI 1.08–4.13]), and the presence of comorbid diabetes mellitus, ischemic heart disease, and chronic kidney disease (e.g., adjusted OR of diabetes mellitus, 1.47 [95%CI 1.10–1.96]). On the contrary, chief complaint of abdominal and chest pain were associated with a lower risk of sepsis (e.g., adjusted OR of abdominal pain, 0.26 [95%CI 0.14–0.45]). Conclusions: We found that older age, vital signs prognosticating sepsis, and the presence of some comorbidities were the potential risk factors of sepsis in patients with qSOFA<2. These potential risk factors could be useful to efficiently recognize patients who might develop sepsis in the ED.Note
12 month embargo; available online: 27 September 2021ISSN
0735-6757Version
Final accepted manuscriptae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.ajem.2021.09.035