A Temperature- and Age-Adjusted Shock Index for Emergency Department Identification of Pediatric Sepsis - 20/09/23
Abstract |
Objective |
To empirically derive a novel temperature- and age-adjusted mean shock index (TAMSI) for early identification of sepsis and septic shock in children with suspected infection.
Methods |
We performed a retrospective cohort study of children aged 1 month to <18 years presenting to a single emergency department with suspected infection over a 10-year period. TAMSI was defined as (pulse rate – 10 × [temperature – 37])/(mean arterial pressure). The primary outcome was sepsis, and the secondary outcome was septic shock. In the two-thirds training set, we determined TAMSI cutoffs for each age group using a minimum sensitivity of 85% and Youden Index. In the one-third validation data set, we calculated test characteristics for the TAMSI cutoffs and compared them with those for the Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) tachycardia or systolic hypotension cutoffs.
Results |
In the sepsis validation data set, the sensitivity-targeting TAMSI cutoff yielded a sensitivity of 83.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 81.7% to 85.4%) and specificity of 42.8% (95% CI 42.4% to 43.3%) versus a sensitivity of 77.7% (95% CI 75.7% to 79.8%) and specificity of 60.0% (95% CI 59.5% to 60.4%) for PALS. For septic shock, the sensitivity-targeting TAMSI cutoff achieved a sensitivity of 81.3% (95% CI 75.2% to 87.4%) and a specificity of 83.5% (95% CI 83.2% to 83.8%) versus a sensitivity of 91.0% (95% CI 86.5% to 95.5%) and a specificity of 58.8% (95% CI 58.4% to 59.3%) for PALS. TAMSI yielded an increased positive likelihood ratio and similar negative likelihood ratio versus PALS.
Conclusions |
TAMSI achieved a similar negative likelihood ratio and improved positive likelihood ratio compared with PALS vital sign cutoffs for the prediction of septic shock, but it did not improve on PALS for sepsis prediction, among children with suspected infection.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
Please see page 495 for the Editor’s Capsule Summary of this article. |
|
Supervising editor: Kathy N. Shaw, MD, MSCE. Specific detailed information about possible conflict of interest for individual editors is available at editors. |
|
Author contributions: NG and ME conducted literature search. NG and ME helped design the study. NG, KM, MM, and ME collected data. NG conducted data analysis. NG, KM, MM, and ME conducted data interpretation. NG, KM, MM, and ME contributed to writing to manuscript. NG reviewed the article critically. NG takes responsibility for the paper as a whole. |
|
Authorship: All authors attest to meeting the four ICMJE.org authorship criteria: (1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND (2) Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND (3) Final approval of the version to be published; AND (4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. |
|
Funding and support: KM received funding through award K08HS026503 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. |
|
Readers: click on the link to go directly to a survey in which you can provide CS7QXM8 to Annals on this particular article. |
|
A podcast for this article is available at www.annemergmed.com. |
Vol 82 - N° 4
P. 494-502 - octobre 2023 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?