A Prospective Observational Comparative study Between qSOFA and SIRS Scores for Early Prediction of Sepsis Outcome in an Emergency Medicine Department , Kozhencherry, South Central Kerala,India

Abstract

Background

Sepsis remains a significant challenge in emergency medicine, with early identification crucial for improved

outcomes. The introduction of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score has sparked debate

about its efficacy compared to the traditional Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria in

predicting sepsis outcomes.

Objective

To compare the performance of qSOFA and SIRS scores in early prediction of sepsis outcomes in an Emergency

Medicine Department.

Methods

A prospective observational study was conducted on 63 patients aged 18-80 years presenting with suspected sepsis

at Muthoot Health Care, Kozhencherry. Patients were assessed using both qSOFA and SIRS criteria. Exclusion

criteria included pregnancy, terminal illness, and severe comorbidities. Participants were followed up to determine

final diagnosis and outcomes. Data analysis compared the effectiveness of qSOFA and SIRS in predicting sepsis

outcomes.

Results

The majority of participants (59.9%) were over 50 years old, with a slight male predominance (54%). qSOFA scores

of 0-1 were observed in 55.6% of patients, while 60.3% had SIRS scores of 3-4. The mean qSOFA and SIRS scores

were 1.59 and 2.75, respectively. A significant correlation was found between qSOFA scores and outcomes

(p=0.007). The in-hospital mortality rate was 30.2%.

Conclusion

While qSOFA demonstrated a slight advantage in predicting in-hospital mortality, SIRS showed higher sensitivity

in sepsis diagnosis. The study suggests that a combined approach using both scoring systems may provide a more

comprehensive assessment of patients with suspected sepsis in the emergency department setting. Further large

scale, multicenter studies are recommended to validate these findings across diverse populations.