Downloaded from emj.bmj.com on July 11, 2012 - Published by group.bmj.

com

EMJ Online First, published on March 16, 2012 as 10.1136/emermed-2011-200760 Original article

Modied early warning score with rapid lactate level in critically ill medical patients: the ViEWS-L score
Sion Jo,1 Jae Baek Lee,1,2 Young Ho Jin,1,2 Tae Oh Jeong,1,2 Jae Chol Yoon,1 Yong Kyu Jun,1 Bo Young Park3
1 Department of Emergency Medicine, Research Institute of Clinical Medicine, Chonbuk National University Hospital, Jeonju, Korea 2 School of Medicine, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju, Korea 3 National Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center, Goyang si, Kyunggi do, Korea

Correspondence to Dr Jae Baek Lee, Department of Emergency Medicine, Chonbuk National University Hospital, 20 Gunji-ro, 634-18, Geumam-dong, Jeonju-si, Jeonlabuk-do 561-712, Republic of Korea; baeklee@jbnu.ac.kr Accepted 12 February 2012

ABSTRACT Objectives To examine whether the predictive value of the early warning score (EWS) could be improved by including rapid lactate levels, and to compare the modied EWS with the pre-existing risk scoring systems. Design Retrospective observational study in South Korea. Setting An urban, academic, tertiary hospital. Participants Consecutive adult patients who were admitted to the medical intensive care unit via the emergency department (ED). Outcome measures A newly developed EWSdthe VitalPAC EWS (ViEWS), was used in the present study. Lactate level, ViEWS and HOTEL score were obtained from patients at presentation to the ED, and APACHE II, SAPS II and SAPS III scores were obtained after admission. The area under curve of each risk scoring system for in-hospital, 1-week, 2-week and 4-week mortality was compared. Results 151 patients were enrolled and the mortality was 42.4%. The ViEWS-L score was calculated as follows: ViEWS-L scoreViEWS+lactate (mmol/l) according to the regression coefcient. The mean ViEWS-L score was 11.667.3. The ViEWS-L score had a better predictive value than the ViEWS score for hospital mortality (0.802 vs 0.742, p0.009), 1-week mortality (0.842 vs 0.707, p<0.001), 2-week mortality (0.827 vs 0.729, p<0.001) and 4-week mortality (0.803 vs 0.732, p0.003). The ViEWS-L score also had a better predictive value than the HOTEL and APACHE II scores. The predictive value of ViEWS-L was comparable with SAPS II and SAPS III. Conclusions The ViEWS-L score performed as well as or better than the pre-existing risk scoring systems in predicting mortality in critically ill medical patients who were admitted to the medical intensive care unit via the ED.

the EWS is supposed to increase the ability of the EWS to identify adult patients at risk for poor clinical outcomes when they present at the emergency department (ED). Pre-existing risk scoring systems, such as the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) and the simplied acute physiology score II (SAPS II), contain many parameters that must be measured during the rst day after admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and SAPS III contain parameters that must be measured during the rst hour after ICU admission. Therefore, it may be interesting to compare a modied EWS with rapid lactate levels, which is available in a few minutes, to these risk-scoring systems in critically ill medical patients. A recently introduced risk score, Hypotension, Oxygen saturation, low Temperature, ECG change and Loss of independence (HOTEL), was also compared with the modied EWS.13

Objectives
The aim of the present study was to address two main questions. First, can the modied EWS using lactate levels improve mortality predictions in critically ill medical patients admitted via the ED compared with the EWS alone? Second, can the modied EWS predict mortality better than the pre-existing risk-scoring systems?

METHODS Study design and setting

This retrospective, observational study was approved by the institutional review board of the study hospital and the requirement for consent was waived. The study was conducted in a 1000-bed, urban, academic, tertiary-care hospital in South Korea with an annual ED census of 34 000. The study hospital offers medical, surgical, coronary, neurological and paediatric ICUs. The medical ICU (MICU) in the study hospital has 14 beds, each bed equipped with a monitoring system and a mechanical ventilator. The ratio of patients to nurses is approximately 3:1. When patients present to the ED, triage nurses assess their vital signs, including systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, pulse rate, respiratory rate, body temperature, peripheral oxygen saturation and central nervous system status. Central nervous system status was recorded using the alert/verbal/painful/unresponsive scale. A complete history was taken and a full physical examination was performed by the attending

INTRODUCTION
The early warning score (EWS) was introduced to identify adult patients at risk for death early and to predict their clinical outcome.1e3 The EWS comprises only physiological variables and is regarded as a simple and fast bedside tool to assess adult patients. The chosen physiological variables are based on studies associated with physiological abnormalities and mortality,4e6 and the benets of the EWS are well established.7e9 In critically ill patients, hyperlactatemia is associated with increased risk of mortality.10e12 Additionally, lactate levels can be obtained in a few minutes using commercially available machines. Therefore, incorporating rapid lactate levels into
Jo CopyrightYH, et al. Emerg Med J (or their employer) 2012. Produced S, Lee JB, Jin Article author (2012). doi:10.1136/emermed-2011-200760

1 of by BMJ Publishing Group Ltd under licence. 7

Downloaded from emj.bmj.com on July 11, 2012 - Published by group.bmj.com

Original article
physician in the ED. Laboratory tests and radiological evaluations were conducted as necessary. Medical records were computerised after patients were discharged. (p<0.10) in the univariate analysis. Regression results are expressed as ORs with 95% CIs. To modify the ViEWS with lactate level we performed logistic regression analysis, setting hospital mortality as the outcome variable and the ViEWS score and lactate levels as predictor variables. In addition, we rounded regression coefcients in this model to the nearest integer. Modied ViEWS with lactate level was named as ViEWS-L score. The predictive values of the ViEWS and ViEWS-L score were tested using the areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves analysis. The SEM and p values for the ROC curves, and comparisons between them were calculated following the methods of Hanley and McNeil.16 17 The same area under the curve (AUC) method was used to compare ViEWS-L, HOTEL, APACHE II, SAPS II and SAPS III. Analyses were conducted using SPSS for Windows V.17.0 and SAS V.9.1 .

Selection of study sample

Consecutive adult patients older than 18 years who were admitted to the MICU via the ED between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2011 were included in the present study. We excluded patients whose medical records lacked one or more elements needed to establish a modied EWS, HOTEL, APACHE II, SAPS II or SAPS III score.

Main outcome measures and data sources

Demographics, clinical data, physical ndings and laboratory results at ED presentation were collected by trained abstractors following the guidelines recommended by Gilbert et al.14 Clinical and laboratory variables required to calculate the APACHE II, SAPS II and SAPS III scores after MICU admission were collected in the same manner. Survival status was determined from discharge records. The EWS used in this study is shown in table 1. The VitalPAC EWS (ViEWS) was chosen for the present study among many EWSs, which was recently developed and validated from the national database set.15 Urine output was not included in this version. Because the study hospital did not use ViEWS during the study period, ViEWS scores upon presentation to the ED were calculated based on the collected data. HOTEL scores upon presentation to the ED were also calculated in the same manner. The main outcomes were hospital mortality, 1-week, 2-week and 4-week mortality. Lactate levels were primarily measured using arterial blood, but venous blood lactate levels were also used. Lactate levels were measured using a Stat Prole Critical Care Xpress Analyser (Nova Biomedical, Waltham MA, USA). The measuring range for lactate in this machine is 0.3e20 mmol/l. Lactate levels that were reported out of range were excluded from the analysis.

RESULTS Patient characteristics

During the study period, 165 patients met the eligibility criteria. Among them, we excluded 14 patients whose medical records were insufcient to determine ViEWS-L score because of missing initial lactate level, while it was possible to determine other risk scores. A total of 151 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean age was 65.3617.2 years and 102 (67.5%) patients were men. The mortality rate was 42.4% (64/151). Hypertension was the most frequent comorbidity (43.0%) followed by diabetes mellitus (25.8%), malignancy (20.5%), stroke (13.9%), chronic liver disease (12.6%) and chronic kidney disease (11.9%). There were no signicant differences between survivors and nonsurvivors in most demographic characteristics, although chronic liver disease and malignancy were more frequent in non-survivors. Systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and peripheral O2 saturation were also signicantly lower in nonsurvivors (table 2). Sepsis caused greater mortality (65.6%) than non-septic conditions (34.4%). Pneumonia was the most frequent discharge diagnosis (53.0%), followed by acute renal failure (7.9%) and gastrointestinal bleeding (6.6%). In non-survivors, pneumonia was also the most frequent discharge diagnosis (54.7%), followed by gastrointestinal bleeding (9.4%), acute renal failure (6.2%), alcoholic ketoacidosis (4.7%) and portosystemic encephalopathy (4.7%). The details of patient diagnoses are displayed in table 3. The mean lactate level for the entire sample was 4.764.6 mmol/l, ranging from 0.3 to 19.8 mmol/l. The lactate level was signicantly higher in non-survivors (7.165.4 mmol/l vs 3.062.9 mmol/l, p<0.01). There were also signicant differences in white blood cell count, platelet levels, prothrombin

Statistical analysis
Normally distributed data are expressed as the mean6SD. Nonnormally distributed data are expressed as the median and IQR. Categorical variables are reported as percentages. Comparison of normally distributed data was performed using an independentsamples t-test. For non-normally distributed data, comparisons were performed using the ManneWhitney U test. For categorical data, the c2 test with a Yates correction for 232 tables was used. Results were considered signicant at a threshold of p<0.05 (two-tailed). Associations between the presence and absence of outcomes and each potential diagnostic determinant were rst quantied using univariate logistic regression analyses. Then, multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed for trend factors Table 1 VitalPAC early warning score (ViEWS) used in this study
3 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg) Pulse rate (bpm) Respiratory rate (bpm) Temperature (8C) Peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2, %) Inspired O2 Central nervous system #90 #8 #35.0 #84 2 91e100 #40 1 101e110 41e50 9e11 35.1e36.0 90e94

0 111e249 51e90 11e20 36.1e38.0 $95 Air Alert

1 $250 91e110

2 111e130 21e24 38.1e39.0

3 $131 $25 $39.1 Any O2 Voice Pain Unresponsive Total

Score ( ( ( ( ( ) ) ) ) )

85e89

()

()

2 of 7

Jo S, Lee JB, Jin YH, et al. Emerg Med J (2012). doi:10.1136/emermed-2011-200760

Downloaded from emj.bmj.com on July 11, 2012 - Published by group.bmj.com

Original article
Table 2 Baseline characteristics of enrolled patients
All Number Age Males, n (%) Comorbidity, n (%) Hypertension Diabetes mellitus Tuberculosis Dyslipidemia Chronic liver disease Chronic kidney disease COPD Asthma Congestive heart failure Coronary artery disease Stroke Malignancy Smoking Physiology Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg) Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg) Pulse rate (bpm) Respiratory rate (bpm) Body temperature (8C) SpO2 (%) Laboratory ndings at emergency department Lactate White blood cell Haemoglobin Platelet PT aPTT Sodium Potassium Blood urea nitrogen Creatinine Total-bilirubin Bicarbonate Albumin Risk scoring systems ViEWS ViEWS-L HOTEL APACHE II SAPS II SAPS III 151 (100) 65.3617.2 102 (67.5) 65 (43.0) 39 (25.8) 16 (10.6) 2 (1.3) 19 (12.6) 18 (11.9) 14 (9.3) 12 (7.9) 4 (2.6) 7 (4.6) 21 (13.9) 31 (20.5) 62 (41.1) 105.4638.5 65.2624.8 97.2631.3 22.468.3 36.761.2 86.6621.2 4.764.6 12.567.3 11.662.9 178.16103.8 1.460.9 41.2625.0 136.367.6 4.761.4 44.8645.7 2.863.9 2.064.9 18.967.8 3.260.8 6.964.1 11.667.3 1.961.1 25.069.4 60.7622.5 66.9615.9 Survivor 87 (57.6) 64.2618.3 56 (64.4) 40 (46.0) 23 (26.4) 12 (13.8) 1 (1.2) 5 (5.7) 13 (14.9) 8 (9.2) 9 (10.3) 3 (3.4) 5 (5.7) 15 (17.2) 7 (8.0) 35 (40.2) 117.1632.9 73.0619.4 98.0623.3 22.567.3 36.761.0 90.5614.5 3.062.9 13.667.5 11.962.9 197.76108.6 1.260.4 35.7615.1 136.967.0 4.661.3 45.3650.4 3.164.8 1.462.5 20.667.9 3.460.8 5.463.5 8.465.2 1.661.0 22.368.3 50.8618.4 60.1613.3 Non-survivor 64 (42.4) 66.7615.5 46 (71.9) 25 (39.1) 16 (25.0) 4 (6.3) 1 (1.6) 14 (21.9) 5 (7.8) 6 (9.4) 3 (4.7) 1 (1.6) 2 (3.1) 6 (9.4) 24 (37.5) 27 (42.2) 89.5640.0 54.5627.5 96.2639.8 22.369.6 36.761.3 81.3627.1 7.165.4 11.066.8 11.362.9 151.5691.0 1.861.3 48.6632.8 135.668.4 4.961.4 44.2638.6 2.462.3 2.966.8 16.567.1 3.060.7 8.964.1 16.067.5 2.361.2 28.669.7 74.1620.7 76.1614.5 p Value 0.39 0.33 0.40 0.84 0.14 0.83 <0.01 0.18 0.97 0.20 0.48 0.45 0.17 <0.01 0.81 <0.01 <0.01 0.72 0.92 0.93 <0.01 <0.01 0.03 0.27 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.33 0.31 0.88 0.25 0.07 <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

APACHE, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation; aPTT, activated partial thromboplastin time; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; ED, emergency department; HOTEL, Hypotension, Oxygen saturation, low Temperature, ECG change and Loss of independence; PT, prothrombin time; SAPS, simplied acute physiology score; SpO2, saturation of peripheral oxygen; ViEWS, vitalPAC early warning score; ViEWS-L, vitalPAC early warning score-lactate.

time, activated partial thromboplastin time, total bilirubin, HCO3 and albumin levels between survivors and non-survivors (table 3). The mean ViEWS for all patients was 6.964.1. The mean HOTEL score was 1.961.1, mean APACHE II score was 25.069.4, mean SAPS II score was 60.7622.5 and mean SAPS III score was 66.9615.9. All scores were signicantly higher in nonsurvivors than in survivors (p<0.01; table 1). The lactate level and ViEWS were signicant predictors for hospital mortality by univariate logistic regression analysis. Lactate remained signicant by multivariate logistic regression after controlling for cormorbid diseases, vital signs, laboratory markers and ViEWS (adjusted OR: 1.22, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.45, p0.021). Additionally, history of malignancy (adjusted OR:
Jo S, Lee JB, Jin YH, et al. Emerg Med J (2012). doi:10.1136/emermed-2011-200760

10.19, 95% CI 3.25 to 31.96, p<0.000) and white blood cell count (adjusted OR: 0.93, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.99, p0.034) were signicant predictive factors for hospital mortality by multivariate logistic regression (table 4).

Modication of ViEWS with lactate levels: ViEWS-L score

We designed the ViEWS-L score to improve the predictive value of the ViEWS by including lactate levels. On a logistic regression analysis with hospital mortality as the outcome variable and ViEWS and lactate levels as the predictor variables, the coefcient of ViEWS was 0.169 and that of lactate was 0.208. We rounded these coefcients up and ViEWS-L score was determined using the following formula: ViEWS-L score ViEWS + lactate (mmol/l). The mean ViEWS-L score for all patients was
3 of 7

Downloaded from emj.bmj.com on July 11, 2012 - Published by group.bmj.com

Original article
Table 3 Discharge diagnosis of enrolled patients
All (N[151) Septic cause Pneumonia Biliary sepsis Gastrointestinal tract sepsis Tuberculosis Urosepsis Septic arthritis Hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome Non-septic cause Acute renal failure Gastrointestinal tract bleeding Alcoholic ketoacidosis Hepatic encephalopathy Hepato-cellular carcinoma rupture Pancreatitis Thyroid storm Non-ketotic hyperosmolar coma Others 99 80 6 4 4 3 1 1 52 12 10 3 3 2 2 1 1 18 (65.6) (53.0) (4.0) (2.6) (2.6) (2.0) (0.7) (0.7) (34.4) (7.9) (6.6) (2.0) (2.0) (1.3) (1.3) (0.7) (0.7) (11.9) Survivor (N[87) 60 45 5 2 3 3 1 1 27 8 4 e e e 2 1 1 11 (69.0) (51.7) (5.7) (2.3) (3.4) (3.4) (1.7) (1.7) (31.0) (9.2) (4.6) Non-survivor (N[64) 39 35 1 2 1 e e e 25 4 6 3 3 2 e e e 7 (60.9) (54.7) (1.6) (3.1) (1.6) p Value 0.39 0.74 0.24 1.00 0.64 e e e 0.39 0.56 0.32 e e e e e e 0.80

(39.1) (6.2) (9.4) (4.7) (4.7) (3.1)

(2.3) (1.7) (1.7) (12.6)

(10.9)

11.667.3. Figure 1 displays the number of patients and mortality in each of the four groups classied by cut-off scores of 5, 10 or 15. The group with a score below ve contained 30 patients with a mortality rate of 13.3%. The group with a score Table 4 Logistic regression analysis for hospital mortality
Unadjusted OR Age Male Hypertension Diabetes mellitus Tuberculosis Dyslipidemia Chronic liver disease Chronic kidney disease COPD Asthma Congestive heart failure Coronary artery disease Stroke Malignancy Smoking Systolic blood pressure Diastolic blood pressure Pulse rate Respiratory rate Body temperature SpO2 Lactate White blood cell Haemoglobin Platelet PT aPTT Sodium Potassium Blood urea nitrogen Creatinine Total-bilirubin Bicarbonate Albumin ViEWS 1.00 1.41 0.75 0.93 0.59 1.37 4.60 0.48 1.02 0.43 0.44 0.53 0.50 6.86 1.08 0.98 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.01 0.98 1.30 0.95 0.94 1.00 4.40 1.03 0.98 1.13 1.00 0.95 1.10 0.93 0.56 1.26 95% CI 0.99 0.70 0.39 0.44 0.20 0.08 1.56 0.16 0.34 0.11 0.05 0.10 0.18 2.72 0.56 0.97 0.95 0.99 0.96 0.77 0.96 1.16 0.90 0.84 0.99 1.77 1.01 0.94 0.89 0.99 0.86 0.98 0.89 0.36 1.14 to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to 1.03 2.85 1.45 1.94 1.71 22.24 13.52 1.43 3.10 1.64 4.37 2.82 1.36 17.27 2.09 0.99 0.98 1.01 1.04 1.34 1.00 1.46 1.00 1.05 1.00 10.92 1.05 1.02 1.44 1.01 1.04 1.24 0.97 0.89 1.39

between 5 and 10 contained 47 patients with a mortality rate of 23.4%. The group with a score between 10 and 15 contained 33 patients with a mortality rate of 48.5%. The group with a score above 15 contained 41 patients with a mortality rate of 80.5%.

p Value 0.387 0.331 0.397 0.842 0.329 0.827 0.006 0.189 0.970 0.215 0.487 0.456 0.173 <0.000 0.809 <0.000 <0.000 0.721 0.917 0.929 0.016 <0.000 0.036 0.270 0.008 0.001 0.007 0.330 0.307 0.881 0.265 0.113 0.002 0.013 <0.000

Adjusted OR

95% CI

p Value

2.70

0.53 to 13.67

0.229

10.19 1.03 0.95

3.25 to 31.96 0.96 to 1.07 0.89 to 1.01

<0.000 0.202 0.104

1.00 1.22 0.93 1.00 1.87 1.00

0.97 to 1.03 1.03 to 1.45 0.87 to 0.99 1.00 to 1.00 0.64 to 5.49 0.96 to 1.04

0.797 0.021 0.034 0.979 0.252 0.967

0.97 0.62 1.11

0.90 to 1.05 0.28 to 1.37 0.97 to 1.28

0.453 0.238 0.127

aPTT, activated partial thromboplastin time; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; SpO2, Saturation of peripheral oxygen; PT, prothrombin time; ViEWS, vitalPAC early warning score.

4 of 7

Jo S, Lee JB, Jin YH, et al. Emerg Med J (2012). doi:10.1136/emermed-2011-200760

Downloaded from emj.bmj.com on July 11, 2012 - Published by group.bmj.com

Original article
(unselected or mixed) critically ill medical patients compared with ViEWS alone. Furthermore, the performance of the ViEWSL score was comparable with or better than several pre-existing, validated risk scoring systems, such as the HOTEL, APACHE II, SAPS II and SAPS III scores. Researchers have developed risk-scoring tools for patients presenting to the ED. Previous studies have shown that physiological data collected at presentation can be used to predict mortality without requiring laboratory data.5 8 18 However, one review reported that scores based on physiological data were not adequate (AUC $0.800) in consecutive patients in medical assessment unit).19 Scoring systems based on combined physiological and laboratory data have also been introduced.20 21 However, these scoring systems may be too time complex and time consuming to rapidly identify patients at risk in the ED. Recently, Kellett et al introduced the HOTEL score showing AUC of 86.5% for the derivation group and 85.4% for the validation group for early mortality between 15 min and 24 h after admission in the mixed medical emergent cohort.13 Otherwise, the usefulness of pre-existing risk-scoring systems such as the SAPS II or APACHE II has been evaluated.22e24 These scoring systems are moderately to highly accurate for predicting hospital mortality in patients presenting to the ED, with ROC values ranging from 0.72 to 0.91. However, these scoring systems may not be useful in a broad clinical setting, particularly because they require the inclusion of many variables that are not available instantly. In the UK, EWSs and the recently developed version, ViEWS, are widely used to identify patients at risk in clinical settings.15 25 ViEWS includes only six physiological variables, all of which can be measured within a few minutes, allowing for rapid recognition of patients at risk. An additional parameter, lactate levels can also be assessed within a few minutes from as little as 60 ml of whole blood using commercially available machines. Therefore, the ViEWS-L score can also be determined in a few minutes. Simplicity, speed and ease-of-use of the ViEWS-L score are substantial merits over other scoring systems. Because the ViEWS-L score performed better than or similar to pre-existing risk scoring systems, ViEWS-L may be promising as a reliable and rapid risk scoring system for critically ill medical adult patients upon presentation to the ED. We suggest that the ViEWS-L may be used to modify ED treatment and to assess treatment response; however, more data is required to verify this use. Elevated blood lactate is common in critically ill patients and is associated with adverse outcomes. In a study performed by Khosravani et al hyperlactatemia dened by a lactate level >2 mmol/l was an independent factor associated with mortality in 12 000 critically ill adult patients, admitted to the ICUs of a regional healthcare system.10 Although subgroup analyses based on diagnosis or ICU category are not performed in this study, what is important is that hyperlactatemia is associated with increased mortality in a large mixed cohort of medical and surgical patients. Recent studies suggest that hyperlactatemia is a sensitive indicator of mortality in critically ill patients suffering from multiple diseases including sepsis, coronary or cerebral vascular disease and trauma.26 27 Using lactate as a parameter to determine the patients general status may be feasible for multiple disease states. Previously validated risk scoring systems in critically ill patients such as APACHE II, SAPS II and SAPS III score, were comparable or inferior in performance with the ViEWS-L score in this study, even though they contain more variables, possibly because of treatment during the ED stay. Nowadays, EDs play a major role in treating critically ill patients because they
5 of 7

Figure 1 The distribution of ViEWS-L score and associated hospital mortality of enrolled patients.ViEWS-L, vitalPAC early warning scorelactate.

ViEWS versus ViEWS-L score

The predictive values of the ViEWS and ViEWS-L score for hospital mortality, 1-week mortality, 2-week mortality and 4-week mortality were compared. The ViEWS-L score was superior to the ViEWS for all outcomes (gure 2). The AUCs of the ViEWS and ViEWS-L score for hospital mortality were 0.742 and 0.802 (p0.009), 0.707 and 0.842 (p<0.001) for 1-week mortality, 0.729 versus 0.827 (p<0.001) for 2-week mortality and 0.732 versus 0.803 (p0.003) for 4-week mortality, respectively.

ViEWS-L score versus HOTEL, APACHE II, SAPS II and SAPS III score
The predictive value of the ViEWS-L score was compared with other pre-existing risk scores (gure 2). The predictive value of the ViEWS-L score was superior to the HOTEL score for all four outcomes (0.802 and 0.662, p<0.001 for hospital mortality; 0.842 and 0.675, p<0.001 for 1-week mortality; 0.827 and 0.669, p<0.001 for 2-week mortality; 0.803 and 0.659, p0.003 for 4-week mortality, respectively). The predictive value of the ViEWS-L score was also superior to the APACHE II score for all four outcomes (0.802 and 0.689, p0.024 for hospital mortality; 0.842 and 0.715, p0.024 for 1-week mortality; 0.827 and 0.687, p0.013 for 2-week mortality; 0.803 and 0.671, p0.010 for 4week mortality, respectively). The SAPS II score was comparable with ViEWS-L score in predicting mortality for all four outcomes (0.802 and 0.799, p0.944 for hospital mortality; 0.842 and 0.832, p0.843 for 1-week mortality; 0.827 and 0.805, p0.660 for 2-week mortality; 0.803 and 0.782, p0.649 for 4-week mortality). The SAPS III score was also comparable with ViEWS-L score in predicting mortality for all four outcomes (0.802 and 0.803, p0.972 for hospital mortality; 0.842 and 0.815, p0.568 for 1-week mortality; 0.827 and 0.801, p0.578 for 2-week mortality; 0.803 and 0.790, p0.766 for 4-week mortality, respectively).

DISCUSSION
We demonstrated that modied ViEWS with rapid lactate levels (ViEWS-L) exhibited improved ability to predict mortality in
Jo S, Lee JB, Jin YH, et al. Emerg Med J (2012). doi:10.1136/emermed-2011-200760

Downloaded from emj.bmj.com on July 11, 2012 - Published by group.bmj.com

Original article
Figure 2 Comparison of area of under the receiver operating characteristic curve of risk scoring systems for each mortality outcome. Data was presented with 95% CIs and p value was noted compared with the ViEWS-L score. APACHE, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation; AUC, area under curve; HOTEL, Hypotension, Oxygen saturation, low Temperature, ECG change and Loss of independence; SAPS, simplied acute physiology score; ViEWS-L, vitalPAC early warning score-lactate.

contain laboratory and radiological facilities. Additionally, hospital occupancy, including ICU occupancy, is increasing. Therefore, treating critically ill patients during an ED stay becomes substantial. Consequently, in many cases the severity of an illness may change from the time the patients present to the ED to the time they are admitted to the ICU. If appropriate treatment is provided in the ED, the severity of critically ill patients would improve by the time they are admitted to the ICU. Thus, the APACHE II, SAPS II and SAPS III scores, which are calculated at ICU admission, may be less sensitive in predicting hospital mortality than the ViEWS-L score.

LIMITATIONS
The results of this study must be interpreted considering some limitations. First, the number of enrolled patients was small.
6 of 7

However, despite the small sample size, there were statistical differences in each measure of mortality, suggesting that a similar larger multicentre study including a broader range of patients is warranted. Second, some patients were excluded from the study because their initial lactate levels on presentation to the ED were unavailable. Excluding these patients may have biased the results of our analyses. Originally, ViEWS and other EWSs were designed for use in the general ward, where abnormal scores resulted in escalation of care. The present study is based on data from critically ill medical patients already admitted to the ICU. The lack of a comparison group of patients who were not admitted to the ICU is a major limitation to using ViEWS-L score to determine whether to admit patients to the ICU from the ED. Therefore, we cannot suggest any ViEWS-L score cut-off for ICU
Jo S, Lee JB, Jin YH, et al. Emerg Med J (2012). doi:10.1136/emermed-2011-200760

Downloaded from emj.bmj.com on July 11, 2012 - Published by group.bmj.com

Original article
REFERENCES

What is known on this topic

< The VitalPAC Early Warning Score (ViEWS) is used at the

1. 2.

bedside to stratify risk in some countries. < Previous risk scoring systems, such as acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II), simplied acute physiology score II (SAPS II) and SAPS III scores, have limitations to apply rapidly for critically ill medical patients presenting to the emergency department. < Rapid assessment of lactate levels are supposed to enhance the predictive value of the ViEWS.

3. 4.

5.

6. 7.

What this study adds

< We designed the ViEWS-L score by modifying the ViEWS to

8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

include rapid lactate level. < The ViEWS-L score performed as well as or better than previous risk scoring systems for predicting mortality in critically ill medical patients.

admission. Our next study, which will enrol all critically ill patients who visited the ED, may be able to provide this information. Additionally, the result of this study must be interpreted carefully because outcome of this study is mortality, not necessity of some critical intervention or triage accuracy. While the APACHE II or SAPS II scores were devised for quality assurance, the ViEWS and HOTEL scores were developed for triage purposes. The result of this study does not mean that the ViEWS-L score is better than the ViEWS or HOTEL scores to identify patients for immediate intervention or to triage patients presenting to the ED.

13.

14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

CONCLUSION
A modied ViEWS with rapid lactate level (ViEWS-L) was better able to predict values for hospital, 1-, 2- and 4-week mortality than the ViEWS alone in critically ill medical patients. Furthermore, the ViEWS-L score was a better predictor of mortality than the HOTEL and APACHE II scores, and was comparable with the SAPS II and SAPS III scores.
Contributors Conception and design: SJ and JBL. Analysis and interpretation: SJ and BP. Drafting the manuscript for important intellectual content: SJ. Review: YHJ, TOJ, JCY and YKJ. Final approval: SJ and JBL. Competing interests None. Patient consent This is a retrospective chart review study and waiver of patient consent was given by the institutional review board of the study hospital. Ethics approval The study was approved by the institutional review board of Chonbuk National University Hospital. Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

Morgan RM, Williams F, Wright MM. An early warning scoring system for detecting developing critical illness. Clin Intensive Care 1997;8:100. Wright MM, Stenhouse CW, Morgan RJ. Early detection of patients at risk (PART). Anaesthesia 2000;55:391e2. Groarke JD, Gallagher J, Stack J, et al. Use of an admission early warning score to predict patient morbidity and mortality and treatment success. Emerg Med J 2008;25:803e6. Kause J, Smith G, Prytherch D, et al. A comparison of antecedents to cardiac arrests, deaths and emergency intensive care admissions in Australia and New Zealand, and the United Kingdomethe ACADEMIA study. Resuscitation 2004;62:275e82. Duckitt RW, Buxton-Thomas R, Walker J, et al. Worthing physiological scoring system: derivation and validation of a physiological early-warning system for medical admissions. An observational, population-based single-centre study. Br J Anaesth 2007;98:769e74. Harrison GA, Jacques T, McLaws ML, et al. Combinations of early signs of critical illness predict in-hospital death-the SOCCER study (signs of critical conditions and emergency responses). Resuscitation 2006;71:327e34. Subbe CP, Kruger M, Rutherford P, et al. Validation of a modied early warning score in medical admissions. Q J Med 2001;94:521e6. Paterson R, MacLeod DC, Thetford D, et al. Prediction of in-hospital mortality and length of stay using an early warning scoring system: clinical audit. Clin Med 2006;6:281e4. Brabrand M, Folkestad L, Clausen NG, et al. Risk scoring systems for adults admitted to the emergency department: a systematic review. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2010;18:8. Khosravani H, Shahpori R, Stelfox HT, et al. Occurrence and adverse effect on outcome of hyperlactatemia in the critically ill. Crit Care 2009;13:R90. Cerovi O, Golubovi V, Spec-Marn A, et al. Relationship between injury severity c c and lactate levels in severely injured patients. Intensive Care Med 2003;29:1300e5. Nguyen HB, Rivers EP, Knoblich BP, et al. Early lactate clearance is associated with improved outcome in severe sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med 2004;32:1637e42. Kellett J, Deane B, Gleeson M. Derivation and validation of a score based on hypotension, oxygen saturation, low temperature, ECG changes and Loss of independence (HOTEL) that predicts early mortality between 15 min and 24 h after admission to an acute medical unit. Resuscitation 2008;78:52e8. Gilbert EH, Lowenstein SR, Koziol-McLain J, et al. Chart reviews in emergency medicine research: where are the methods? Ann Emerg Med 1996;27:305e8. Prytherch DR, Smith GB, Schmidt PE, et al. ViEWSetowards a national early warning score for detecting adult inpatient deterioration. Resuscitation 2010;81:932e7. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982;143:29e36. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 1983;148:839e43. Kellett J, Deane B. The simple clinical score predicts mortality for 30 days after admission to an acute medical unit. QJM 2006;99:771e81. Smith GB, Prytherch DR, Schmidt PE, et al. Review and performance evaluation of aggregate weighted track and trigger systems. Resuscitation 2008;77:170e9. Froom P, Shimoni Z. Prediction of hospital mortality rates by admission laboratory tests. Clin Chem 2006;52:325e8. Prytherch DR, Sirl JS, Schmidt P, et al. The use of routine laboratory data to predict in-hospital death in medical admissions. Resuscitation 2005;66:203e7. Cosentini R, Folli C, Cazzaniga M, et al. Usefulness of simplied acute physiology score II in predicting mortality in patients admitted to an emergency medicine ward. Intern Emerg Med 2009;4:241e7. Jones AE, Fitch MT, Kline JA. Operational performance of validated physiologic scoring systems for predicting in-hospital mortality among critically ill emergency department patients. Crit Care Med 2005;33:974e8. Olsson T, Lind L. Comparison of the rapid emergency medicine score and APACHE II in nonsurgical emergency department patients. Acad Emerg Med 2003;10:1040e8. NICE Clinical Guidelines, No. 50. Acutely Ill Patients in Hospital : Recognition of and Response to Acute Illness in Adults in Hospital. Centre for Clinical Practice at NICE (UK). London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (UK) ; 2007 Jul. Paladino L, Sinert R, Wallace D, et al. The utility of base decit and arterial lactate in differentiating major from minor injury in trauma patients with normal vital signs. Resuscitation 2008;77:363e8. Bannon MP, ONeill CM, Martin M, et al. Central venous oxygen saturation, arterial base decit, and lactate concentration in trauma patients. Am Surg 1995;61:738e45.

PAGE fraction trail=7

Jo S, Lee JB, Jin YH, et al. Emerg Med J (2012). doi:10.1136/emermed-2011-200760

7 of 7

Downloaded from emj.bmj.com on July 11, 2012 - Published by group.bmj.com

Modified early warning score with rapid lactate level in critically ill medical patients: the ViEWS-L score
Sion Jo, Jae Baek Lee, Young Ho Jin, et al. Emerg Med J published online March 16, 2012

doi: 10.1136/emermed-2011-200760

Updated information and services can be found at:

http://emj.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/15/emermed-2011-200760.full.html

These include:

References P<P Email alerting service

This article cites 26 articles, 7 of which can be accessed free at:

http://emj.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/15/emermed-2011-200760.full.html#ref-list-1

Published online March 16, 2012 in advance of the print journal. Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article. Sign up in the box at the top right corner of the online article.

Topic Collections

Articles on similar topics can be found in the following collections Adult intensive care (132 articles)

Notes

Advance online articles have been peer reviewed, accepted for publication, edited and typeset, but have not not yet appeared in the paper journal. Advance online articles are citable and establish publication priority; they are indexed by PubMed from initial publication. Citations to Advance online articles must include the digital object identifier (DOIs) and date of initial publication.

To request permissions go to:

http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

To order reprints go to:

http://journals.bmj.com/cgi/reprintform

To subscribe to BMJ go to:

http://group.bmj.com/subscribe/