RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Predicting the need for escalation of care or death from repeated daily clinical observations and laboratory results in patients with SARS-CoV-2 during 2020: a retrospective population-based cohort study from the United Kingdom
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.12.14.20248181
DO 10.1101/2020.12.14.20248181
A1 Colin J Crooks
A1 Joe West
A1 Andrew Fogarty
A1 Joanne R Morling
A1 Matthew J Grainge
A1 Sherif Gonem
A1 Mark Simmonds
A1 Andrea Race
A1 Irene Juurlink
A1 Steve Briggs
A1 Simon Cruikshank
A1 Susan Hammond-Pears
A1 Timothy R Card
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/16/2020.12.14.20248181.abstract
AB Objectives Currently used prognostic tools for patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection are based on clinical and laboratory parameters measured at a single point in time, usually on admission. We aimed to determine how dynamic changes in clinical and laboratory parameters relate to SARS-CoV-2 prognosis.Design retrospective, observational cohort study using routinely collected clinical data to model the dynamic change in prognosis of SARS-CoV-2.Setting a single, large hospital in England.Participants all patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 admitted to Nottingham University Hospitals (NUH) NHS Trust, UK from 1st February 2020 until 30th November 2020.Main outcome measures Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, death and discharge from hospital.Statistical Methods We split patients into 1st (admissions until 30th June) and 2nd (admissions thereafter) waves. We incorporated all clinical observations, blood tests and other covariates from electronic patient records and follow up until death or 30 days from the point of hospital discharge. We modelled daily risk of admission to ICU or death with a time varying Cox proportional hazards model.Results 2,964 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 were included. Of 1,374 admitted during the 1st wave, 593 were eligible for ICU escalation, and 466 had near complete ascertainment of all covariates at admission. Our validation sample included 1,590 confirmed cases, of whom 958 were eligible for ICU admission. Our model had good discrimination of daily need for ICU admission or death (C statistic = 0.87 (IQR 0.85-0.90)) and predicted this daily prognosis better than previously published scores (NEWS2, ISCARIC 4C). In validation in the 2nd wave the score overestimated escalation (calibration slope 0.55), whilst retaining a linear relationship and good discrimination (C statistic = 0.88 (95% CI 0.81 −0.95)).Conclusions A bespoke SARS-CoV-2 escalation risk prediction score can predict need for clinical escalation better than a generic early warning score or a single estimation of risk at admission.What is already known on this topic SARS-CoV-2 is a recently emerged viral infection, which presents typically with flu like symptoms, can have severe sequelae and has caused a pandemic during 2020.A number of risk factors for poor outcomes including obesity, age and comorbidity have been recognized.Risk scores have been developed to stratify risk of poor outcome for patients with SARS-CoV-2 at admission, but these do not take account of dynamic changes in severity of disease on a daily basis.What this study adds We have developed a dynamic risk score to predict escalation to ICU or death within the next 24 hours.Our score has good discrimination between those who will and not require ICU admission (or die) in both our derivation and validation cohorts.Our bespoke SARS-CoV-2 escalation risk prediction score can predict need for clinical escalation better than a generic early warning score or a single estimation of risk at admission.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialNCT04473105Funding StatementThis work was funded by Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Nottingham. Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust also sponsored the study. Neither organisation beyond their employees who are the authors had any role in the design, analysis, interpretation, writing up or submission of this work. All data was collected originally during routine clinical care in Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Approval for this work was granted via an Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust Clinical Effectiveness Team audit (reference: 20-153C), the NUH Caldicott Guardian, Data Protection Impact Assessment (reference: 436) and as a research study (ethics approval) via the NHS Health Research Authority (HRA) Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) (reference: 282490). The HRA confirmed that individual patient consent was not required for this work. All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe individual data used in this study, under the information governance and HRA IRAS approvals, are unable to be shared beyond NUH Hospitals NHS Trust.