Key result
The Sepsis-3 definitions, particularly the qSOFA score, demonstrate poor sensitivity for early sepsis recognition compared to previous SIRS criteria, which may delay critical interventions.
The Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery raises concerns that the Sepsis-3 definitions and qSOFA score lack sensitivity for early sepsis recognition, potentially delaying crucial early interventions.
Sepsis-3 concerns advise cautious adoption in surgical infections; leaves open need for targeted validation studies.
The Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery appreciates the great effort of the task force who derived and validated the Sepsis-3 definitions and considers the new definitions an important step forward in the evolution of our understanding of sepsis. Nevertheless, more than a year after their publication, we have a few concerns regarding the use of the Sepsis-3 definitions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sartelli et al. (2018) conducted a review in Sepsis and Septic Shock. Sepsis-3 definitions (qSOFA and SOFA) vs. Sepsis-2 definitions (SIRS) was evaluated. The Sepsis-3 definitions, particularly the qSOFA score, demonstrate poor sensitivity for early sepsis recognition compared to previous SIRS criteria, which may delay critical interventions.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: