Observational studyCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2020
Four early warning scores predict mortality in emergency surgical patients at University Teaching Hospital, Lusaka: a prospective observational study.
Observational study in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementing early warning systems for sepsis recognition in African healthcare settings: an Angolan perspective.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2026Article
- Performance Assessment of the Universal Vital Assessment Score vs Other Illness Severity Scores for Predicting Risk of In-Hospital Death Among Adult Febrile Inpatients in Northern Tanzania, 2016-2019.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Early Warning Scores in Patients with Suspected COVID-19 Infection in Emergency Departments.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Prehabilitation program for African sub-Saharan surgical patients is an unmet need.The Pan African medical journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe value of early warning scoring systems has been established in high-income countries. There is little evidence for their use in low-resource settings. We aimed to compare existing early warning scores to predict 30-day mortality.
methodsUniversity Teaching Hospital is a tertiary center in Lusaka, Zambia. Adult surgical patients, excluding obstetrics, admitted for > 24 hr were included in this prospective observational study. On days 1 to 3 of admission, we collected data on patient demographics, heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, oxygen administration, temperature, consciousness level, and mobility. Two-, three-, and 30-day mortality were recorded with their associated variables analyzed using area under receiver operating curves (AUROC) for the National Early Warning Score (NEWS); the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS); a modified Hypotension, Oxygen Saturation, Temperature, ECG, Loss of Independence (mHOTEL) score; and the Tachypnea, Oxygen saturation, Temperature, Alertness, Loss of Independence (TOTAL) score.
resultsData were available for 254 patients from March 2017 to July 2017. Eighteen (7.5%) patients died at 30 days. The four early warning scores were found to be predictive of 30-day mortality: MEWS (AUROC, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.88; P < 0.001), NEWS (AUROC 0.805; 95% CI, 0.688 to 0.92; P < 0.001), mHOTEL (AUROC 0.759; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.89, P < 0.001), and TOTAL (AUROC 0.782; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.90; P < 0.001).
conclusionsWe validated four scoring systems in predicting mortality in a Zambian surgical population. Further work is required to assess if implementation of these scoring systems can improve outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31598906What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.