Predictive Value of Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Open access Original research BMJ Open: first published as 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041882 on 15 March 2021. Downloaded from Predictive value of Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and Revised Trauma Score (RTS) for the short- term prognosis of emergency trauma patients: a retrospective study Zhejun Yu,1 Feng Xu,2 Du Chen 1 To cite: Yu Z, Xu F, Chen D. ABSTRACT Strengths and limitations of this study Predictive value of Modified Objectives This study aimed to assess the predictive Early Warning Score (MEWS) value of the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and ► To the best of our knowledge, no other study has and Revised Trauma Score (RTS) Revised Trauma Score (RTS) for emergency trauma for the short- term prognosis of done a statistical comparison of these two scoring patients who died within 24 hours. emergency trauma patients: a systems in the field of early emergency trauma. Design A retrospective, single- centred study. retrospective study. BMJ Open ► Focus on early decision- making and rational use Setting This study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in 2021;11:e041882. doi:10.1136/ of trauma scoring system, to improve early triage Southern China. bmjopen-2020-041882 efficiency. Participants A total of 1739 patients with acute trauma, ► The retrospective nature of the study was a limita- ► Prepublication history for aged 16 years or older who presented to the emergency this paper is available online. tion, as it was not conducted in real-time and was department from 1 November 2016 to 30 November 2019, To view these files, please visit limited by subjective differences in artificial statisti- were included. the journal online (http:// dx. doi. cal results and differences in recording time. Interventions none None. org/ 10. 1136/ bmjopen- 2020- ► The environment of emergency trauma may also Outcome 24- hour mortality was the primary outcome of 041882). affect the quality of vital signs recorded, leading to trauma. underestimation of the extent of the patient’s physi- ZY and FX contributed equally. Results 1739 patients were divided into the survival cal disorders and deterioration. group (1709 patients,98.27%), and the non- survival group http://bmjopen.bmj.com/ Received 29 June 2020 (30 patients,1.73%). Crude OR and adjusted OR of MEWS Revised 28 November 2020 were 1.99, 95% CI (1.73 to 2.29), and 2.00, 95% CI (1.74 Accepted 06 January 2021 to 2.31), p<0.001, respectively. Crude OR and adjusted OR of trauma centres are facing great challenges. of RTS were 0.62, 95% CI (0.55 to 0.69) and 0.61, 95% CI In all emergency rooms, especially in cases of (0.55 to 0.68), p<0.001, respectively. The area under overcrowding and understaffing, it is critical the curve of MEWS was significantly higher than that of to rapidly screen large numbers of patients, RTS (p=0.005): 0.927, 95% CI (0.914 to 0.939) vs 0.799, identify the critically ill patients as quickly and 95% CI (0.779 to 0.817). appropriately as possible, assess the severity of Conclusions Both MEWS and RTS were independent on September 27, 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. predictors of the short- term prognosis in emergency their condition and assign appropriate treat- trauma patients, MEWS had better predictive efficacy. ment priorities, and transfer them towards or intensive care unit (ICU). Although risk © Author(s) (or their stratification has been developed for selected employer(s)) 2021. Re- use INTRODUCTION emergency patient groups, few attempts have permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re- use. See rights In most developed countries, a regional been made to develop a generic risk- adjusted 3 4 and permissions. Published by trauma system has been developed to triage score for emergency patients. BMJ. and divert patients with traumatic injuries to In the last 30 years, different trauma scoring 1Division of Critical Care appropriate trauma centres. Recent studies systems have been developed, most of which Medicine, The First Affiliated have shown a 25% reduction of mortality rate incorporate anatomical or physiological Hospital of Soochow University, in traumatic injuries if the care was offered components or both.5–9 However, these scores Suzhou, China 1 2Division of Emergency at trauma centres. In China, multiple trauma are either too complicated to calculate and Medicine, The First Affiliated is the fifth- leading cause of death. Each year, have too many variables to meet the require- Hospital of Soochow University, more than 400 000 people die from motor ments of rapid risk stratification tools in the Suzhou, China vehicle accidents or industrial accidents, emergency environment, or they cannot be Correspondence to among which 1%–1.8% were multiorgan/ widely used due to the limitation of users and 2 2 10–12 Dr Du Chen; multisystem injuries. China’s regional trauma endotracheal intubation. Perhaps the sdfyycd@ suda. edu. cn system is not yet mature, and the management best- known indicators for assessing trauma Yu Z, et al. BMJ Open 2021;11:e041882. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041882 1 Open access BMJ Open: first published as 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041882 on 15 March 2021. Downloaded from severity and potential consequences are the Revised analysis, our study explored early triage indicators appli- Trauma Score (RTS), Injury Severity Score (ISS) and cable to trauma patients in the emergency room. Trauma Score- Injury Severity Scores (TRISS). Based on current research in the field of trauma, RTS remains the most widely used scoring system. RTS has been widely METHODS recognised for clinical decision making. Several articles Study design have evaluated the performance of RTS in the emergency A retrospective, single- centred study was conducted in the room as a triage and prediction tool. It can be used as an ED of a comprehensive tertiary hospital in Suzhou, China emergency department (ED) diagnostic tool to identify to evaluate the predictive value of MEWS and RTS for the patients with severe trauma.13–15 It is important to note short- term prognosis of emergency trauma patients. Since that these scores are not warning scores, but severity the data collected are essential for the diagnosis and clin- indicators.16 ical follow- up of patients, it is not considered necessary to Based on the need for a simple, fast and effective obtain informed consent from patients. Ensure patients’ trauma classification tool, the Modified Early Warning anonymity. Score (MEWS) is a qualified warning system. MEWS is Setting and participants a bedside assessment tool, and each of its variables can We retrospectively analysed the clinical data of 1739 be easily and quickly calculated. MEWS, combining with patients with acute trauma who were treated in the emer- vital signs and consciousness, covers the respiratory, gency room of The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow circulatory and nervous systems, and reflects the overall University (a comprehensive tertiary adult hospital) from situation of patients with the simplest and most direct 1 November 2016 to 30 November 2019. The observation score. MEWS has been developed for use in wards and endpoint was death within 24 hours. Our study used an ICU/high dependency units patients as an early warning electronic medical record system to collect data for retro- system for adverse events in the hospital. It is also used spective analysis. Our data were recorded by attending to predict mortality and admissions to emergency rooms, nurses and doctors at the time of patients’ presentation but it is not a disease- specific score. Previous studies have to the ED. Because this was a short- term prognosis study, shown that MEWS is a good predictor of the prognosis we did not conduct telephone follow- up on the patient’s 17 18 of emergency trauma patients, yet other studies put survival status. Figure 1 shows the flow diagram of the 19 this conclusion in controversy. However, very few studies study. Inclusion criteria were: clear history of trauma, analysed patients with early trauma in the emergency final diagnosis of acute injury examined by imaging; age room. Our study evaluated the predictive value of MEWS not younger than 16 years; complete clinical and medical and RTS on 24- hour mortality among emergency trauma history. The following exclusion criteria were used: patients. Through retrospective chart review and data under 16 years of age;discharged from the ED before http://bmjopen.bmj.com/ on September 27, 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. Figure 1 Flow chart of the study procedure. ED, emergency department. 2 Yu Z, et al. BMJ Open 2021;11:e041882. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041882 Open access BMJ Open: first published as 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041882 on 15 March 2021. Downloaded from 13 Table 1 Coding of the Revised Trauma Score (RTS) severity (table 1). Table 1 shows the components of, and scores for, each individual aspect of the RTS. Glasgow Systolic blood Respiratory rate The MEWS is widely used in the clinical setting as RTS Coma Scale pressure (mm Hg) (breaths/min) a quantified scoring system based on HR (beats per 4 13–15 >89 10–29 minute), SBP (mm Hg), RR(cycles per minute), T (°C) 3 9–12 76–89 >29 and Alert, responds to Voice, responds to Pain, Unre- 2 6–8 50–75 6–9 sponsive (AVPU). As reported previously, the AVPU is 1 4–5 1–49 1–5 estimated from the GCS as follows: A=14–15, V=9–13, p=4–8, U=3.20–22 The corresponding score, ranging from 0 3 0 0 0 to 3, for each variable is shown in table 2. In contrast to RTS, a higher MEWS indicates a worse state of patients. termination of emergency treatment; patients dead on Statistical analysis arrival; multiple referrals for patients who have under- Shapiro- Wilk test was used to test the normality of contin- gone emergency treatment and patients with incomplete uous variables.