Comparison of quick Pitt to quick sofa and sofa scores for scoring of severity for patients with urinary tract infection

Quick Pitt (qPitt), which includes temperature, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, cardiac arrest, and mental status, is a new prognostic score derived from the Pitt Bacteremia score. The aim of our study is to compare qPitt with quick SOFA (qSOFA) and SOFA for scoring of severity in patient...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Madrazo M, Piles L, López-Cruz I, Alberola J, Eiros JM, Zaragoza R, Artero A
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2022
País:España
Recursos:Fundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO)
Repositorio:r-FISABIO. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica
OAI Identifier:oai:fisabio.fundanetsuite.com:p12606
Acesso em linha:https://fisabio.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/12606
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:Sepsis
Prognostic scores
Outcomes
Bacteremia
Pitt score
id ES_bb6b76e5f3bb2e84c9b647cb42ea1214
oai_identifier_str oai:fisabio.fundanetsuite.com:p12606
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison of quick Pitt to quick sofa and sofa scores for scoring of severity for patients with urinary tract infectionMadrazo MPiles LLópez-Cruz IAlberola JEiros JMZaragoza RArtero ASepsisPrognostic scoresOutcomesBacteremiaPitt scoreQuick Pitt (qPitt), which includes temperature, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, cardiac arrest, and mental status, is a new prognostic score derived from the Pitt Bacteremia score. The aim of our study is to compare qPitt with quick SOFA (qSOFA) and SOFA for scoring of severity in patients with urinary tract infection (UTI). Prospective observational study of patients diagnosed with UTI. Area under the ROC curve, sensibility, and specificity to predict 30-day mortality were calculated for qPitt, qSOFA and SOFA and compared. 382 UTI cases were analyzed. Thirty-day mortality (18.8% vs. 5.9%, p < 0.001) and longer hospital stay (6 [1-11] vs. 4 [1-7] days, p < 0.001) were associated with qPitt >= 2. However, qPitt had a worse performance to predict 30-day mortality compared to qSOFA and SOFA (AUROC 0.692 vs. 0.832 and 0.806, respectively, p = 0.010 and p = 0.041). The sensitivity of qPitt was lower than the sensitivity of qSOFA and SOFA (70.45 vs. 84.09 for both qSOFA and SOFA, p < 0.001), with a specificity lower than qSOFA and similar to SOFA (60.36 vs. 82.25 and 63.61, p < 0.001 and p = 0.742, respectively). Quick Pitt had moderate prognostic accuracy and performed worse than qSOFA and SOFA scores for predicting mortality in patients with UTI.SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL2022info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttps://fisabio.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/12606Internal and Emergency MedicineISSN: 18280447ISSNe: 19709366reponame:r-FISABIO. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científicainstname:Fundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO)Inglésinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:fisabio.fundanetsuite.com:p126062026-06-11T12:45:17Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of quick Pitt to quick sofa and sofa scores for scoring of severity for patients with urinary tract infection
title Comparison of quick Pitt to quick sofa and sofa scores for scoring of severity for patients with urinary tract infection
spellingShingle Comparison of quick Pitt to quick sofa and sofa scores for scoring of severity for patients with urinary tract infection
Madrazo M
Sepsis
Prognostic scores
Outcomes
Bacteremia
Pitt score
title_short Comparison of quick Pitt to quick sofa and sofa scores for scoring of severity for patients with urinary tract infection
title_full Comparison of quick Pitt to quick sofa and sofa scores for scoring of severity for patients with urinary tract infection
title_fullStr Comparison of quick Pitt to quick sofa and sofa scores for scoring of severity for patients with urinary tract infection
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of quick Pitt to quick sofa and sofa scores for scoring of severity for patients with urinary tract infection
title_sort Comparison of quick Pitt to quick sofa and sofa scores for scoring of severity for patients with urinary tract infection
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Madrazo M
Piles L
López-Cruz I
Alberola J
Eiros JM
Zaragoza R
Artero A
author Madrazo M
author_facet Madrazo M
Piles L
López-Cruz I
Alberola J
Eiros JM
Zaragoza R
Artero A
author_role author
author2 Piles L
López-Cruz I
Alberola J
Eiros JM
Zaragoza R
Artero A
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Sepsis
Prognostic scores
Outcomes
Bacteremia
Pitt score
topic Sepsis
Prognostic scores
Outcomes
Bacteremia
Pitt score
description Quick Pitt (qPitt), which includes temperature, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, cardiac arrest, and mental status, is a new prognostic score derived from the Pitt Bacteremia score. The aim of our study is to compare qPitt with quick SOFA (qSOFA) and SOFA for scoring of severity in patients with urinary tract infection (UTI). Prospective observational study of patients diagnosed with UTI. Area under the ROC curve, sensibility, and specificity to predict 30-day mortality were calculated for qPitt, qSOFA and SOFA and compared. 382 UTI cases were analyzed. Thirty-day mortality (18.8% vs. 5.9%, p < 0.001) and longer hospital stay (6 [1-11] vs. 4 [1-7] days, p < 0.001) were associated with qPitt >= 2. However, qPitt had a worse performance to predict 30-day mortality compared to qSOFA and SOFA (AUROC 0.692 vs. 0.832 and 0.806, respectively, p = 0.010 and p = 0.041). The sensitivity of qPitt was lower than the sensitivity of qSOFA and SOFA (70.45 vs. 84.09 for both qSOFA and SOFA, p < 0.001), with a specificity lower than qSOFA and similar to SOFA (60.36 vs. 82.25 and 63.61, p < 0.001 and p = 0.742, respectively). Quick Pitt had moderate prognostic accuracy and performed worse than qSOFA and SOFA scores for predicting mortality in patients with UTI.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://fisabio.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/12606
url https://fisabio.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/12606
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
publisher.none.fl_str_mv SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Internal and Emergency Medicine
ISSN: 18280447
ISSNe: 19709366
reponame:r-FISABIO. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica
instname:Fundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO)
instname_str Fundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO)
reponame_str r-FISABIO. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica
collection r-FISABIO. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869418024263483392
score 15.811543

Registos relacionados