4.6 Article

Poison severity score and sequential organ failure assessment score: Carbon monoxide poisoning prognosis

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212025

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose We aimed to examine the utility of the Poison Severity Score (PSS) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score as early prognostic predictors of short-term outcomes in patients with carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning. We hypothesized that both the PSS and the SOFA score would be useful prognostic tools. Methods This was retrospective observational study of patients with CO poisoning who presented to the emergency department and were admitted for more than 24 hours. We calculated PSS, the initial SOFA score, a second (2nd) SOFA score, and a 24-hour delta SOFA score. The primary outcome was reported as the cerebral performance category (CPC) scale score at discharge. We classified those with CPC 1-2 as the good outcome group and those with CPC 3-5 as the poor outcome group. Results This study included 192 patients: 174 (90.6%) belonged to the good outcome group, whereas 18 (9.4%) belonged to the poor outcome group. The PSS (1.00 [0.00, 1.00] vs 3.00 [3.00, 3.00], p < 0.001), initial SOFA (1.00 [0.00, 2.00] vs 4.00 [3.25, 6.00], p < 0.001), 2nd SOFA score (0.00 [0.00, 1.00] vs 4.00 [3.00, 7.00], p < 0.001), and 24-hour delta SOFA score (-1.00 [-1.00, 0.00] vs 0.00 [-1.00, 1.00], p = 0.047) of the good outcome group were significantly higher than those of the poor outcome group. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for PSS and the initial SOFA and 2nd SOFA scores were 0.977 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.944-0.993), 0.945 (95% CI 0.903-0.973), and 0.978 (95% CI 0.947-0.994), respectively. Conclusion The PSS, initial SOFA score, and 2nd SOFA score predict acute poor outcome accurately in patients with CO poisoning.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available