Skip to main content
SearchLoginLogin or Signup

Reviews of "The utility of established prognostic scores in COVID-19 hospital admissions: a multicentre prospective evaluation of CURB-65, NEWS2, and qSOFA"

Reviewers: Michael Meisner (Städt. Krankenhaus Dresden-Neustadt) • Kapil Gururangan (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai)

Published onAug 25, 2020
Reviews of "The utility of established prognostic scores in COVID-19 hospital admissions: a multicentre prospective evaluation of CURB-65, NEWS2, and qSOFA"
key-enterThis Pub is a Review of
The utility of established prognostic scores in COVID-19 hospital admissions: a multicentre prospective evaluation of CURB-65, NEWS2, and qSOFA
Description

INTRODUCTION The COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing yet, due to the lack of a COVID-19 specific tool, clinicians must use pre-existing illness severity scores for initial prognostication. However, the validity of such scores in COVID-19 is unknown. METHODS The North West Collaborative Organization for Respiratory Research (NW-CORR) performed a multi-centre prospective evaluation of adult patients admitted to hospital with confirmed COVID-19 during a two-week period in April 2020. Clinical variables measured as part of usual care at presentation to hospital were recorded, including the CURB-65, NEWS2, and qSOFA scores. The primary outcome of interest was 30-day mortality. RESULTS Data were collected for 830 people with COVID-19 admitted across 7 hospitals. By 30 days, a total of 300 (36.1%) had died and 142 (17.1%) had been in ICU. All scores underestimated mortality compared to their original validation in non-COVID-19 populations, and overall prognostic performance was generally poor. Among the 9low risk9 categories (CURB-65<2, NEWS2<5, qSOFA<2) 30-day mortality was 16.7%, 32.9% and 21.4%, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression identified features of respiratory compromise rather than circulatory collapse as most relevant prognostic variables. CONCLUSION All existing prognostic scores evaluated here underestimated adverse outcomes and performed sub-optimally in the COVID-19 setting. New prognostic tools including a focus on features of respiratory compromise rather than circulatory collapse are needed. We provide a baseline set of variables which are relevant to COVID-19 outcomes and may be used as a basis for developing a bespoke COVID-19 prognostication tool.

To read the original manuscript, click the link above.

Summary of Reviews: This robust analysis is novel and of high interest for the medical community. This study informs how new prognostic scores should be created to more accurately guide clinical decision-making in patients with COVID-19.

Reviewer 1 (Michael Meisner)

Reviewer 2 (Kapil Gururangan) | 📘📘📘📘📘

RR:C19 Strength of Evidence Scale Key

📕 ◻️◻️◻️◻️ = Misleading

📙📙 ◻️◻️◻️ = Not Informative

📒📒📒 ◻️◻️ = Potentially Informative

📗📗📗📗◻️ = Reliable

📘📘📘📘📘 = Strong

To read the reviews, click the links below.

Comments
0
comment
No comments here
Why not start the discussion?