Abstract
Objectives We aimed to derive and validate a triage tool, based on clinical assessment alone, for predicting adverse outcome in acutely ill adults with suspected COVID-19 infection.
Methods We undertook a mixed prospective and retrospective observational cohort study in 70 emergency departments across the United Kingdom (UK). We collected presenting data from 22445 people attending with suspected COVID-19 between 26 March 2020 and 28 May 2020. The primary outcome was death or organ support (respiratory, cardiovascular, or renal) by record review at 30 days. We split the cohort into derivation and validation sets, developed a clinical score based on the coefficients from multivariable analysis using the derivation set, and the estimated discriminant performance using the validation set.
Results We analysed 11773 derivation and 9118 validation cases. Multivariable analysis identified that age, sex, respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure, oxygen saturation/inspired oxygen ratio, performance status, history of renal impairment, and respiratory distress were retained in analyses restricted to the ten or fewer predictors. We used findings from multivariable analysis and clinical judgement to develop a score based on the NEWS2 score, age, sex, and performance status. This had a c-statistic of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.79-0.81) in the validation cohort and predicted adverse outcome with sensitivity 0.98 (0.97-0.98) and specificity 0.38 (0.38-0.39) for scores above four points.
Conclusion A clinical score based on NEWS2, age, sex, and performance status predicts adverse outcome with good discrimination in adults with suspected COVID-19 and can be used to support decision-making in emergency care.
Registration ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN28342533, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN28342533
Competing Interest Statement
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: grant funding to their employing institutions from the National Institute for Health Research; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
Clinical Trial
ISRCTN28342533
Clinical Protocols
https://www.fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/11/46/07
https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/scharr/research/centres/cure/priest
http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN28342533
Funding Statement
The PRIEST study was funded by the United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme (project reference 11/46/07). The funder played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The North West - Haydock Research Ethics Committee gave a favourable opinion on the PAINTED study on 25 June 2012 (reference 12/NW/0303) and on the updated PRIEST study on 23rd March 2020. The Confidentiality Advisory Group of the Health Research Authority granted approval to collect data without patient consent in line with Section 251 of the National Health Service Act 2006.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I 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).
Yes
I 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.
Yes
Footnotes
s.goodacre{at}sheffield.ac.uk, b.d.thomas{at}sheffield.ac.uk, l.j.sutton{at}sheffield.ac.uk, m.bursnall{at}sheffield.ac.uk, e.lee{at}sheffield.ac.uk, m.bradburn{at}sheffield.ac.uk, a.loban{at}sheffield.ac.uk, s.waterhouse{at}sheffield.ac.uk, r.p.simmonds{at}sheffield.ac.uk, c.e.biggs{at}sheffield.ac.uk, c.marincowitz{at}sheffield.ac.uk, j.schutter{at}sheffield.ac.uk, s.l.connelly{at}sheffield.ac.uk, e.m.sheldon{at}sheffield.ac.uk, jamie.hall{at}sheffield.ac.uk, e.l.young{at}sheffield.ac.uk, andrew.bentley{at}manchester.ac.uk, kirsty.challen{at}lthtr.nhs.uk, c.fitzsimmons{at}nhs.net, Tim.Harris{at}bartshealth.nhs.uk, f.e.lecky{at}sheffield.ac.uk, andrew.lee{at}sheffield.ac.uk, I.maconochie{at}ic.ac.uk, darren.walter{at}manchester.ac.uk
Data Availability
Anonymised data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request
