Rapid Emergency Medicine Score Research Articles

A newly developed, easy-to-use prehospital drug-derived score compared with three conventional scores: A prospective multicenter study.

The use of medications by emergency medical services (EMS) is increasing. Conventional scores are time-consuming and therefore difficult to use in an emergency setting. For early decision-making, an easy-to-use score based on the medications administered by the EMS may have prognostic value. The primary objective of this study was to develop the prehospital drug-derived score (PDDS) for 2-day mortality. A prospective, multicenter, ambulance-based cohort study was conducted in adults with undifferentiated acute diseases treated by EMS and transferred to the emergency department. Demographic data, prehospital diagnosis data, prehospital medication and variables for the calculation of the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS), and Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS) were collected. The PDDS was developed and validated, establishing three levels of risk of 2-day mortality. The predictive capability of each score was determined by the area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and compared using the Delong's test (p-value). A total of 6401 patients were included. The PDDS included age and the use of norepinephrine, analgesics, neuromuscular blocking agents, diuretics, antihypertensive agents, tranexamic acid, and bicarbonate. The AUROC of PDDS was .86 (95% CI: .816-.903) versus NEWS2 .866 (95% CI: .822-.911), p = .828; versus REMS .885 (95% CI: .845-.924), p = .311; versus RAPS .886 (95% CI: .846-.926), p = .335, respectively. The newly developed easy-to-use prehospital drug-derived PDDS score has an excellent predictive value of early mortality. The PDDS score was comparable to the conventional risk scores and therefore might serve as an alternative score in the prehospital emergency setting.

Comparison of Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events and Rapid Emergency Medicine Scores in In-Hospital Mortality of Patients Admitted to the Emergency Service and Diagnosed with Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Although there are many scoring systems for acute coronary syndromes, there is no suitable score for early risk stratification during initial medical contact with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients. The present study compared the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS), an easy-to-use scoring system in emergency departments, with the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score used for in-hospital mortality risk stratification of NSTEMI patients. The results were: (i) the REMS score outperformed the GRACE score in predicting the in-hospital mortality; (ii) in estimating in-hospital mortality, the sensitivity of the GRACE score was 88%, the specificity was 65%, while the sensitivity of the REMS score was 100% and the specificity was 76%; (iii) the AUC (Area Under Curve) value of the REMS score (AUC 0.89) was superior to the GRACE score (AUC 0.79) in the data obtained from Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) descriptive analysis, but not statistically significant (P > .05). We suggest that the REMS score can be used to predict in-hospital mortality in patients with NSTEMI.

Predictive ability of the REMS and HOTEL scoring systems for mortality in geriatric patients with pulmonary embolism

BackgroundPulmonary embolism (PE) is an important cause of mortality and morbidity in the geriatric population. We aimed to compare the ability of the pulmonary embolism severity index (PESI), rapid emergency medicine score (REMS), and hypotension, oxygen saturation, low temperature, electrocardiogram change, and loss of independence (HOTEL) to predict prognosis and intensive care requirement in geriatric patient with PE.ResultsThe median age of 132 patients was 77 (71–82) years. PESI was higher in the non-survivor group [132 (113–172)] (P =0.001). The median REMS was 8 (7–10), and it was higher in the non-survivor group [10 (7.5–12.0)] (p = 0.005). The median HOTEL score was 1 (0–2) in the whole cohort and 2 (1–3) in the non-survivor group, indicating significant difference compared to the survivor group (P = 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) values of HOTEL, REMS, and PESI were determined as 0.72, 0.65, and 0.71, respectively. For the prediction of intensive care requirement, the AUC values of HOTEL, REMS, and PESI were 0.76, 0.75, and 0.76, respectively, with no significant difference in pairwise comparisons (PESI vs. REMS: p = 0.520, HOTEL vs. PESI: P = 0.526, REMS vs. HOTEL: P = 0.669, overall test: P = 0.96, DeLong’s test). The risk ratios of HOTEL and PESI were parallel to each other [5.31 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.53–11.13) and 5.34 (95% CI: 2.36–12.08), respectively].ConclusionHOTEL and REMS were as successful as PESI in predicting short-term mortality and intensive care requirement in geriatric patients with PE. These scores are also more practical since they have fewer parameters than PESI.

Unveiling the performance of the prehospital Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (pREMS): How the predictive score impacts in-hospital outcomes in traumatic brain injury (TBI): A retrospective observational cohort study

IntroductionThis study aimed to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the prehospital rapid emergency medicine score (pREMS) for predicting the outcomes of hospitalized patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) who died, were discharged, were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), or were admitted to the operating room (OR) within 72 h.MethodsA retrospective cohort analysis was performed on a sample of 513 TBI patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) of Besat Hospital in 2023. Only patients of both sexes aged 18 years or older who were not pregnant and had adequate documentation of vital signs were included in the analysis. Patients who died during transport and patients who were transferred from other hospitals were excluded. The predictive power of the pREMS for each outcome was assessed by calculating the sensitivity and specificity curves and by analyzing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).ResultsThe mean pREMS scores for hospital discharge, death, ICU admission and OR admission were 11.97 ± 3.84, 6.32 ± 3.15, 8.24 ± 5.17 and 9.88 ± 2.02, respectively. pREMS accurately predicted hospital discharge and death (AOR = 1.62, P < 0.001) but was not a good predictor of ICU or OR admission (AOR = 1.085, P = 0.603). The AUROCs for the ability of the pREMS to predict outcomes in hospitalized TBI patients were 0.618 (optimal cutoff point = 7) for ICU admission and OR and 0.877 (optimal cutoff point = 9.5) for hospital discharge and death at 72 h.ConclusionThe results indicate that the pREMS, a new preclinical trauma score for traumatic brain injury, is a useful tool for prehospital risk stratification (RST) in TBI patients. The pREMS showed good discriminatory power for predicting in-hospital mortality within 72 h in patients with traumatic brain injury.

Validity of different scoring systems in prediction of intensive care unit admission and mortality in acute organophosphate poisoning.

Organophosphate compounds (OPCs) pose significant health risks, especially in developing countries with limited resources. Predicting outcomes in OPCs poisoning is crucial for guiding clinical management and reducing mortality rates. The aim of this study to evaluate the validity of different scoring systems Rapid Emergency Medicine Score, Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation Score, and Poison Severity Score in prediction of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality of acute OPCs poisoning patients. A cross-sectional study was conducted on 103 patients admitted to Xx Poison Control Center between May 2022 and June 2023. Scoring systems were applied at admission, and their performance in predicting the need for ICU admission and mortality was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Most patients survived (92.2%). Only 13.6% of the patients required ICU admission. Significant differences in median scores were observed between survivors and non-survivors and between patients requiring ICU admission and those who did not. Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score exhibited the highest discriminatory power for predicting both ICU admission (AUC=0.983) and mortality (AUC=0.999). The findings highlight the importance of utilizing scoring systems, particularly Multiple organ dysfunction score, for prediction of poor outcomes of acute OPCs poisoning.

Performance of 21 Early Warning System scores in predicting in-hospital deterioration among undifferentiated admitted patients managed by ambulance services

BackgroundThe optimal Early Warning System (EWS) scores for identifying patients at risk of clinical deterioration among those transported by ambulance services remain uncertain. This retrospective study compared the performance of...

Answer to comments on "Accuracy of Rapid Emergency Medicine Score and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score in predicting acute paraphenylenediamine poisoning adverse outcomes".

Answer to comments on "Accuracy of Rapid Emergency Medicine Score and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score in predicting acute paraphenylenediamine poisoning adverse outcomes".

Performance of several clinical scoring systems as predictors of adverse outcomes in acute exposure to toxic alcohols.

Toxic alcohols are chemicals with common metabolic characteristics resulting in severe morbidities and mortalities. The current study aimed to assess the efficacy of six scoring systems: The Poison Severity Score (PSS), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS), Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS), and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) in stratifying the patients exposed to toxic alcohol based on liability of organ failure, prolonged hospital stay, and need for an antidote. A seven-year retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using medical records of adult patients admitted to a poison control center. About 42.6% were complicated with adverse outcomes. Methanol was the worst toxic alcohol and the only cause of blindness and death. About 27.1% of methanol-exposed patients suffered from acute kidney injury, 15.3% suffered from hemodynamic instability and neurological dysfunction, and 8.5% suffered from respiratory failure. An APACHE II score above 8 was the best predictor of unfavorable outcomes, exhibiting the highest area under the curve (0.972), followed by the SOFA score. The APACHE II score was praised for being the best discriminator of an expected prolonged hospital stay. Yet, the simple scores, including RAPS and REMS, showed good performance as unfavorable outcome predictors with no significant variations to PSS, APACHE II score, and SOFA scores. The current study concluded that though the APACHE II and SOFA scores were superior to others, the RAPS and REMS are good, simple, and effective alternatives, particularly when resources are restricted.

Prognostic accuracy of early warning scores for predicting serious illness and in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19.

A simple bedside triage tool is essential to stratify COVID-19 patients in the emergency department (ED). This study aimed to identify an early warning score (EWS) that could best predict the clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Data were obtained from medical records of 219 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 positive patients. We calculated 13 EWSs based on the admission characteristics of the patients. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to assess the performance of the scores in predicting serious illness and in-hospital mortality. The median patient age was 51 (38, 60) years, and 25 (11.4%) patients died. Among patients admitted with mild to moderate illness (n = 175), 61 (34.9%) developed serious illness. Modified National Early Warning Score (m-NEWS) (AUROC 0.766; 95% CI: 0.693, 0.839) and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) (AUROC 0.890; 95% CI: 0.818, 0.962) demonstrated the highest AUROC point estimates in predicting serious illness and in-hospital mortality, respectively. Both m-NEWS and REMS demonstrated good accuracy in predicting both the outcomes. However, no significant difference was found between m-NEWS (p = 0.983) and REMS (p = 0.428) as well as some other EWSs regarding the AUROCs in predicting serious illness and in-hospital mortality. We propose m-NEWS could be used as a triage score to identify COVID-19 patients at risk of disease progression and death especially in resource-poor settings because it has been explicitly developed for risk stratification of COVID-19 patients in some countries like China and Italy. However, this tool needs to be validated by further large-scale prospective studies.

Comparison of eight prehospital early warning scores in life-threatening acute respiratory distress: a prospective, observational, multicentre, ambulance-based, external validation study

A myriad of early warning scores (EWSs) exist, yet there is a need to identify the most clinically valid score to be used in prehospital respiratory assessments to estimate short-term and midterm mortality, intensive-care unit admission, and airway management in life-threatening acute respiratory distress. This is a prospective, observational, multicentre, ambulance-based, external validation study performed in 44 ambulance services and four hospitals across three Spanish provinces (ie, Salamanca, Segovia, and Valladolid). We identified adults (ie, those aged 18 years and older) discharged to the emergency department with suspected acute respiratory distress. The primary outcome was 2-day all-cause in-hospital mortality, for all the patients or according to prehospital respiratory conditions, including dyspnoea, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), COVID-19, other infections, and other conditions (asthma exacerbation, haemoptysis, and bronchoaspirations). 30-day mortality, intensive-care unit admission, and invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation were secondary outcomes. Eight EWSs, namely, the National Early Warning Score 2, the Modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score, the Rapid Acute Physiology Score, the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score, the CURB-65 Severity Score for Community-Acquired Pneumonia, the BAP-65 Score for Acute Exacerbation of COPD, the Quick COVID-19 Severity Index, and the Modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (mSOFA), were explored to determine their predictive validity through calibration, clinical net benefit as determined through decision curve analysis, and discrimination analysis (area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic [AUROC], compared with Delong's test). Between Jan 1, 2020, and Nov 31, 2022, 902 patients were enrolled. The global 2-day mortality rate was 87 (10%); in proportion to various respiratory conditions, the rates were 35 (40%) for dyspnoea, nine (10%) for COPD, 13 (15%) for COVID-19, 28 (32%) for other infections, and two (2%) for others conditions. mSOFA showed the best calibration, a higher net benefit, and the best discrimination (AUROC 0·911, 95% CI 0·86-0·95) for predicting 2-day mortality, and its discrimination was statistically significantly more accurate (p<0·0001) compared with the other scores. The performance of mSOFA for predicting 2-day mortality was higher than the other scores when considering the prehospital respiratory conditions, and was also higher for the secondary outcomes, except for non-invasive mechanical ventilation. Our results showed that mSOFA outperformed other EWSs. The inclusion of mSOFA in prehospital decision making will entail a quick identification of patients in acute respiratory distress at high risk of deterioration, allowing prioritisation of resources and patient care. Gerencia Regional de Salud, Public Health System of Castilla y León (GRS Spain). For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Incorporation of age into patient early warning scores significantly improves mortality prediction.

Age is a critical factor for the assessment of patients attended by emergency medical services (EMSs). However, how age modifies early warning scores' (EWSs) predictive ability should be unveiled. To determine how age influences the performance of EWS [National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), VitalPAC-Early Warning Score (ViEWS), Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS) and modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (mREMS)] to predict 2-day mortality. The secondary objective was to determine the performance of EWSs at different age ranges. A prospective, observational study performed between November 2019 and July 2023. A multicenter, ambulance-based study, considering 38 basic life support units and six advanced life support units referring to four tertiary care hospitals. Eligible patients were adults recruited from among all phone requests for emergency assistance who were later evacuated to emergency departments. The primary outcome was 2-day in-hospital mortality (includes all-cause mortality). The main measures were demographical and vital signs needed for EWS calculation. A total of 8028 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria, with 7654 survivors and 374 non-survivors. Among age ranges, the 2-day mortality was 2.8% for the ≤44 years, 3.3% for the 45-64 years, 4.1% for the 65-74 years and 6.7% for the ≥75-year age group. The inclusion of age significantly improved the Area Under the Curve (AUC) in all the scores (P = 0.006 for non-age-adjusted mREMS, P = 0.001 for NEWS2, P = 0.002 for ViEWS, P = 0.028 for RAPS, all compared with their counterparts with age). Our results demonstrated that the incorporation of age into the EWS improved the performance of the scores. These results will allow the EMS to improve patient management and resource optimization by including an easy-to-obtain variable.

Comparison of Early Warning Scores in Determining the Prognosis of COVID-19 Patients.

Tocompare the effectiveness of early warning score systems in predicting 30-day poor outcomes in Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) patients admitted to the emergency department. Descriptivestudy. Place and and Duration of the Study: Fatih Sultan Mehmet Education and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkiye, from March 2020 to March 2021. The patients who presented to the emergency department, diagnosed with COVID-19 and tested positive for polymerase chain reaction were analysed. The study included the calculation of the rapid emergency medicine score, risk stratification in the emergency department in acutely ill older patients score, 4C mortality score, and modified early warning score for the patients. These scores were then compared in terms of their ability to predict adverse outcomes, defined as intensive care admission and/or mortality. During the study period, 10,281 COVID-19 patients were admitted to the emergency department. Out of them, 1,826 patients were included in the study. There were 159 (8.7%) cases with poor outcomes. The risk stratification in the emergency department in acutely ill older patients Score was the most successful in poor prognosis. Based on the findings of this study, the risk stratification in the emergency department in acutely ill older patients score demonstrated greater efficacy compared to other early warning scores in identifying patients diagnosed with COVID-19 who had an early indication of a poor prognosis. Early warning score, 4C mortality score, REMS, Rise-up score, MEWS, Emergency department, COVID-19.

The Predictive Power of Rapid Acute Physiology Score and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score in Mortality Risk of Diabetic Ketoacidosis Patients

The Predictive Power of Rapid Acute Physiology Score and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score in Mortality Risk of Diabetic Ketoacidosis Patients

Performance of severity indices for admission and mortality of trauma patients in the intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundLittle is known about the performance of severity indices for indicating intensive care and predicting mortality in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of trauma patients. This study aimed to compare the performance of severity indices to predict trauma patients’ ICU admission and mortality.MethodsA retrospective cohort study which analyzed the electronic medical records of trauma patients aged ≥ 18 years, treated at a hospital in Brazil, between 2014 and 2017. Physiological [Revised Trauma Score (RTS), New Trauma Score (NTS) and modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (mREMS)], anatomical [Injury Severity Score (ISS) and New Injury Severity Score (NISS)] and mixed indices [Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), New Trauma and Injury Severity Score (NTRISS), Base-deficit Injury Severity Score (BISS) and Base-deficit and New Injury Severity Score (BNISS)] were compared in analyzing the outcomes (ICU admission and mortality) using the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics Curves (AUC–ROC).ResultsFrom the 747 trauma patients analyzed (52.5% female; mean age 51.5 years; 36.1% falls), 106 (14.2%) were admitted to the ICU and 6 (0.8%) died in the unit. The ISS (AUC 0.919) and NISS (AUC 0.916) had better predictive capacity for ICU admission of trauma patients. The NISS (AUC 0.949), TRISS (AUC 0.909), NTRISS (AUC 0.967), BISS (AUC 0.902) and BNISS (AUC 0.976) showed excellent performance in predicting ICU mortality.ConclusionsAnatomical indices showed excellent predictive ability for admission of trauma patients to the ICU. The NISS and the mixed indices had the best performances regarding mortality in the ICU.

Impact of emergency medicine clinical pharmacist practitioner-driven sepsis antibiotic interventions

BackgroundThe 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines recommend administration of antimicrobials within the first hour of recognition of sepsis. Over the last decade, several studies have demonstrated improved time-to-antibiotic administration and antibiotic appropriateness when a pharmacist was involved in the care of patients with sepsis. To our knowledge, no studies evaluating the appropriate use of antibiotics in sepsis driven entirely by an Emergency Medicine (EM) Clinical Pharmacist Practitioner (CPP) have been published. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of an EM CPP-driven protocol on antimicrobial interventions in patients with sepsis in the emergency department (ED). MethodsThis was a retrospective comparison of patients with sepsis for whom antimicrobials were ordered in the ED without pharmacist intervention to patients whose antimicrobials were ordered by an EM CPP via a sepsis consult to pharmacy. An EM CPP reviewed individual patient profiles for pertinent historical admissions, culture data, and allergy profiles to guide antimicrobial selection for the suspected source of infection and entered orders under their scope of practice with formal documentation in the electronic medical record (EMR). The primary objective of this study was to compare the rates of appropriate empiric antibiotic utilization in septic patients admitted from the ED pre- and post-protocol implementation. Secondary endpoints included the following, broadening of ED-initiated empiric antibiotics on hospital admission, time-to-antibiotic administration, in-hospital mortality, Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) association with in-hospital mortality, and hospital length of stay. ResultsA total of 144 patients were included: 80 patients prescribed antibiotics without pharmacist intervention and 64 prescribed antibiotics by an EM CPP. Appropriate empiric antibiotic selection in the ED improved from 57.5% (46/80) to 86% (55/64) with EM CPP intervention (difference 28.5%; p < 0.01). Time-to-first antibiotic administration decreased by 64 min (p < 0.01). Administration of antibiotics within 60 min, broadening of antibiotics on admission, hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality did not significantly differ across groups. ConclusionsIn this small, single-center study, an EM Clinical Pharmacist Practitioner-driven protocol for patients with sepsis in the emergency department improved the rate of appropriate empiric antimicrobial selection and time-to-antibiotic administration.

Comparison of different scores as predictors of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit admission in acute theophylline poisoning.

Theophylline is commonly used to control respiratory diseases, especially in developing countries. Theophylline has a narrowed therapeutic index, and its toxicity is associated with morbidity and mortality. Physicians should be aware of the early prediction of the need for intensive care unit admission (ICU) and mechanical ventilation (MV). This study aimed to assess the power of the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and Simple Clinical Score (SCS) in predicting the need for ICU admission and/or MV in acute theophylline-poisoned patients. This cross-sectional study included 58 patients with acute theophylline poisoning who were admitted to our Poison Control Center from the 1st of July 2022 to the 31st of January 2023. The REMS, MEWS and SCS were calculated for all patients on arrival at the hospital. The area under the curve (AUC) and receiver operating characteristics were tested to compare scores. The median values of all studied scores were significantly high among patients who needed MV and/or ICU admission. The AUC of SCS was >0.9, with a sensitivity of 92.9% and specificity of 90.9% for the prediction of ICU admission. Meanwhile, MEWS was an excellent predictor of the need for MV (AUC=0.996, 95% CI=0.983-1.000). We recommend using SCS as an early predictor for ICU admission in acute theophylline-poisoned patients. However, MEWS could effectively predict MV requirements in acute theophylline-poisoned patients.

Prehospital physiological parameters related illness severity scores can accurately discriminate the severe/critical state in adult patients with COVID-19

Background Whether the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) can effectively discriminate the severe/critical state of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at the prehospital stage remains unknown. We aimed to assess the performance of NEWS2 in rapidly discriminating severe/critical COVID-19 and its relationship with prehospital medical services. Methods Six illness severity scores of 414 patients were calculated at the prehospital stage. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to explore the ability of these scores to discriminate severe/critical patients from mild/moderate patients. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate independent predictors associated with severe/critical state. Results The age, numbers of comorbidities, prehospital care workload, consumption of medical human resources, and illness severity scores of severe/critical patients were higher than those of mild/moderate patients (p < 0.05). When NEWS2 scores >2, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 93.5%, 90.7%, 74.1%, and 98.0%, respectively. The C-statistic of NEWS2 (0.963) was higher than that of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (0.680, p < 0.001), CRB-65 (0.879, p < 0.001), Rapid Acute Physiology Score (0.692, p < 0.001), and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (0.879, p < 0.001). NEWS2 was positively correlated with the numbers of prehospital treatment measures (r = 0.732, p < 0.001), numbers of medical staff (r = 0.615, p < 0.001), and total transport time (r = 0.595, p < 0.001). Age ≥65 years (OR = 5.43, p = 0.016), hypertension (OR = 5.39, p < 0.001), active malignancy (OR = 5.94, p = 0.005), and NEWS2 scores >2 (OR = 124.88, p < 0.001) were independent predictors to discriminate severe/critical patients. Oxygen saturation (SpO2) (OR =1.87, p < 0.001) was the unique independent predictor to discriminate false positive patients from true positive patients. Conclusions Prehospital NEWS2 can accurately and rapidly discriminate severe/critical COVID-19 during the Omicron variant wave. High levels of NEWS2 indicate an increase in prehospital care workload and consumption of medical human resources.

The prognostic value of rapid risk scores among patients with community-acquired pneumonia : Aretrospective cohort study.

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is afrequent reason for emergency department (ED) presentations. Various risk scores have been validated in the management of CAP and are recommended for daily practice. The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance of the rapid risk scores (the rapid acute physiology score (RAPS), the rapid emergency medicine score (REMS), the Worthing physiological scoring system (WPS), CURB-65 and CRB-65) among patients with CAP. This retrospective cohort study was conducted in the ED of atertiary hospital between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2019. Patients aged ≥ 18years and diagnosed with CAP were included. Patients who were transferred from another center or with missing records were excluded. Demographic information, vital signs, level of consciousness, laboratory results, and outcomes were recorded. Atotal of 2057 patients were included in the final analysis. The 30-day mortality of the patients was 15.2% (n = 312). The WPS achieved the most successful results for all three outcomes, 30-day mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mechanical ventilation (MV) needs (area under the curve, AUC 0.810, 0.918, and 0.910, respectively; p < 0.001). In the prediction of mortality, RAPS, REMS, CURB-65, and CRB-65 had a moderate overall performance (AUC 0.648, 0.752, 0.778, and 0.739, respectively). In the prediction of ICU admission and MV needs, RAPS, REMS, CURB-65, and CRB-65 had moderate to good overall performance (AUC at ICU admission 0.793, 0.873, 0.829, and 0.810; AUC for MV needs 0.759, 0.892, 0.754, and 0.738, respectively). Advanced age, lower levels of mean arterial pressure and peripheral oxygen saturation, presence of active malignancy and cerebrovascular disease, and ICU admission were associated with mortality (p < 0.05). The WPS outperformed other risk scores in patients with CAP and can be used safely. The CRB-65 can be used to discriminate critically ill patients with CAP due to its high specificity. The overall performances of the scores were satisfactory for all three outcomes.

The Predictive Value of mREMS and NTS Scores in the Hospital Outcomes of Elderly Patients With a Traffic Accident

Objectives: To investigate the predictive value of two novel scores, including the modified rapid emergency medicine score (mREMS) and new trauma score (NTS), in the outcome of hospitalized elderly patients with traffic injuries. Design: Descriptive-analytical cross-sectional study. Setting(s): Tabriz, the capital of East Azerbaijan province, northwestern Iran. Participants: Over 65 years old patients being injured in traffic accidents were included in the current study and divided into three groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the predictive value of mREMS and NTS scores in elderly patients with traffic accidents. Outcome measures: NTS is based on a revision of the revised trauma score (RTS) parameters, which includes replacing the Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score with the GCS code and the number of breaths per minute with blood oxygen saturation (SpO2 ). The mREMS includes age, systolic blood pressure (SBS), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), SpO2 , and GCS. Results: Totally, 243 elderlies with road traffic injuries were enrolled in this study. The mREMS score in male patients showed a significant difference, and the odds ratio (OR) in these patients was 1.5 (95% confidence interval [CI]=1.15-1.95, P&lt;0.05). Based on the results, the NTS significantly differed in male patients, and the OR in these patients was 0.97 (95% CI=0.95- 0.99, P&lt;0.05). The NTS had similar discrimination to mREMS in the prediction of elderly patients’ severity of trauma (hospitalization or discharge). In cut-off point 7.5, the sensitivity of mREMS and specificity were 71% and 53%, respectively. In cut-off point 216, the sensitivity and specificity of NTS were 84% and 47%, respectively. Conclusions: mREMS and NTS have a moderate degree of predictive usefulness for older patients who have sustained many traumas. It is advised that this problem should be further assessed accurately by a thorough investigation.

Comparison of Six Scoring Systems for Predicting In-hospital Mortality among Patients with SARS-COV2 Presenting to the Emergency Department.

The study aimed to compare the prognostic accuracy of six different severity-of-illness scoring systems for predicting in-hospital mortality among patients with confirmed SARS-COV2 who presented to the emergency department (ED). The scoring systems assessed were worthing physiological score (WPS), early warning score (EWS), rapid acute physiology score (RAPS), rapid emergency medicine score (REMS), national early warning score (NEWS), and quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA). A cohort study was conducted using data obtained from electronic medical records of 6,429 confirmed SARS-COV2 patients presenting to the ED. Logistic regression models were fitted on the original severity-of-illness scores to assess the models' performance using the Area Under the Curve for ROC (AUC-ROC) and Precision-Recall curves (AUC-PR), Brier Score (BS), and calibration plots were used to assess the models' performance. Bootstrap samples with multiple imputations were used for internal validation. The mean age of the patients was 64 years (IQR:50-76) and 57.5% were male. The WPS, REMS, and NEWS models had AUROC of 0.714, 0.705, and 0.701, respectively. The poorest performance was observed in the RAPS model, with an AUROC of 0.601. The BS for the NEWS, qSOFA, EWS, WPS, RAPS, and REMS was 0.18, 0.09, 0.03, 0.14, 0.15, and 0.11 respectively. Excellent calibration was obtained for the NEWS, while the other models had proper calibration. The WPS, REMS, and NEWS have a fair discriminatory performance and may assist in risk stratification for SARS-COV2 patients presenting to the ED. Generally, underlying diseases and most vital signs are positively associated with mortality and were different between the survivors and non-survivors. Rahmatinejad Z, Hoseini B, Reihani H, Hanna AA, Pourmand A, Tabatabaei SM, et al. Comparison of Six Scoring Systems for Predicting In-hospital Mortality among Patients with SARS-COV2 Presenting to the Emergency Department. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(6):416-425.