Journal article
Predicting mortality in febrile adults: comparative performance of the MEWS, qSOFA, and UVA scores using prospectively collected data among patients in four health-care sites in sub-Saharan Africa and South-Eastern Asia
- Abstract:
-
Background
Clinical severity scores can identify patients at risk of severe disease and death, and improve patient management. The modified early warning score (MEWS), the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and the Universal Vital Assessment (UVA) were developed as risk-stratification tools, but they have not been fully validated in low-resource settings where fever and infectious diseases are frequent reasons for health care seeking. We assessed the performance of MEWS, qSOFA, and UVA in predicting mortality among febrile patients in the Lao PDR, Malawi, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe.
Methods
We prospectively enrolled in- and outpatients aged ≥ 15 years who presented with fever (≥37.5 °C) from June 2018–March 2021. We collected clinical data to calculate each severity score. The primary outcome was mortality 28 days after enrolment. The predictive performance of each score was determined using area under the receiver operating curve (AUC).
Findings
A total of 2797 participants were included in this analysis. The median (IQR) age was 32 (24–43) years, 38% were inpatients, and 60% (1684/2797) were female. By the time of follow-up, 7% (185/2797) had died. The AUC (95% CI) for MEWS, qSOFA and UVA were 0.67 (0.63–0.71), 0.68 (0.64–0.72), and 0.82 (0.79–0.85), respectively. The AUC comparison found UVA outperformed both MEWS (p < 0.001) and qSOFA (p < 0.001).
Interpretation
We showed that the UVA score performed best in predicting mortality among febrile participants by the time follow-up compared with MEWS and qSOFA, across all four study sites. The UVA score could be a valuable tool for early identification, triage, and initial treatment guidance of high-risk patients in resource-limited clinical settings. Funding
- Publication status:
- Published
- Peer review status:
- Peer reviewed
Actions
Access Document
- Files:
-
-
(Preview, Version of record, pdf, 748.1KB, Terms of use)
-
- Publisher copy:
- 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102856
Authors
Contributors
+ Blacksell, SD
- Institution:
- University of Oxford
- Division:
- MSD
- Department:
- NDM
- Sub department:
- Tropical Medicine
- Role:
- Contributor
- ORCID:
- 0000-0001-6576-726X
et al.
+ Medical Research Council
More from this funder
- Funder identifier:
- https://ror.org/03x94j517
- Grant:
- MR/S004793/1
+ Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
More from this funder
- Funder identifier:
- https://ror.org/037wke960
- Publisher:
- Elsevier
- Journal:
- EClinicalMedicine More from this journal
- Volume:
- 77
- Article number:
- 102856
- Place of publication:
- England
- Publication date:
- 2024-10-04
- Acceptance date:
- 2024-09-11
- DOI:
- EISSN:
-
2589-5370
- Pmid:
-
39416389
- Language:
-
English
- Keywords:
- Pubs id:
-
2038191
- Local pid:
-
pubs:2038191
- Deposit date:
-
2025-04-04
- ARK identifier:
Terms of use
- Copyright holder:
- Lal et al.
- Copyright date:
- 2024
- Rights statement:
- © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
- Licence:
- CC Attribution (CC BY)
If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record