SIRS, SOFA, qSOFA, and NEWS in the diagnosis of sepsis and prediction of adverse outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundWe compared Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) for sepsis diagnosis and adverse outcomes prediction.MethodsClinical studies that used SIRS, SOFA, qSOFA, and NEWS for sepsis diagnosis and prognosis assessment were included. Data were extracted, and meta-analysis was performed for outcome measures, including sepsis diagnosis, in-hospital mortality, 7/10/14-day mortality, 28/30-day mortality, and ICU admission.ResultsFifty-seven included studies showed good overall quality. Regarding sepsis prediction, SIRS demonstrated high sensitivity (0.85) but low specificity (0.41), qSOFA showed low sensitivity (0.42) but high specificity (0.98), and NEWS exhibited high sensitivity (0.71) and specificity (0.85). For predicting in-hospital mortality, SOFA demonstrated the highest sensitivity (0.89) and specificity (0.69). In terms of predicting 7/10/14-day mortality, SIRS exhibited high sensitivity (0.87), while qSOFA had high specificity (0.75). For predicting 28/30-day mortality, SOFA showed high sensitivity (0.97) but low specificity (0.14), whereas qSOFA displayed low sensitivity (0.41) but high specificity (0.88).ConclusionsNEWS independently demonstrates good diagnostic capability for sepsis, especially in high-income countries. SOFA emerges as the optimal choice for predicting in-hospital mortality and can be employed as a screening tool for 28/30-day mortality in low-income countries.