TY - JOUR
T1 - Reporting SOFA in research
T2 - we should always present each of the SOFA subscores
AU - Putowski, Zbigniew
AU - Czok, Marcelina
AU - Polok, Kamil
AU - Guidet, Bertrand
AU - Jung, Christian
AU - Bruno, Raphael Romano
AU - de Lange, Dylan
AU - Leaver, Susannah
AU - Moreno, Rui
AU - Wernly, Bernhard
AU - Flaatten, Hans
AU - Szczeklik, Wojciech
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Via Medica. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - Background: The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score is the sum of 6 components, each representing one organ system with dysfunction classified on a 4-point scale. In research, usually by default, the total SOFA score is taken into account, but it may not reflect the severity of the condition of the individual organs. Often, these values are expected to predict mortality. Methods: In this study, we reanalysed 2 cohorts of critically ill elderly patients to explore the distribution of SOFA subscores and to assess the between-group differences. Both cohorts were adjusted to maintain similarity in terms of age and the primary cause of admission (respiratory cause). Results: In total, 910 (non-COVID-19 cohort) and 551 patients (COVID-19 cohort) were included in the analysis. Both cohorts were similar in terms of the total SOFA score (median 5 vs. 5 points); however, the groups differed significantly in 4/6 SOFA subscores (respiratory, neurological, cardiovascular, and coagulation subscores). Moreover, the cohorts had different fractions of organ failures (defined as a SOFA subscore ≥ 3). Conclusions: This analysis revealed significant differences in SOFA subscores between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 respiratory cohorts, highlighting the importance of considering individual organ dysfunction rather than relying solely on the total SOFA score when reporting organ dysfunction in clinical research.
AB - Background: The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score is the sum of 6 components, each representing one organ system with dysfunction classified on a 4-point scale. In research, usually by default, the total SOFA score is taken into account, but it may not reflect the severity of the condition of the individual organs. Often, these values are expected to predict mortality. Methods: In this study, we reanalysed 2 cohorts of critically ill elderly patients to explore the distribution of SOFA subscores and to assess the between-group differences. Both cohorts were adjusted to maintain similarity in terms of age and the primary cause of admission (respiratory cause). Results: In total, 910 (non-COVID-19 cohort) and 551 patients (COVID-19 cohort) were included in the analysis. Both cohorts were similar in terms of the total SOFA score (median 5 vs. 5 points); however, the groups differed significantly in 4/6 SOFA subscores (respiratory, neurological, cardiovascular, and coagulation subscores). Moreover, the cohorts had different fractions of organ failures (defined as a SOFA subscore ≥ 3). Conclusions: This analysis revealed significant differences in SOFA subscores between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 respiratory cohorts, highlighting the importance of considering individual organ dysfunction rather than relying solely on the total SOFA score when reporting organ dysfunction in clinical research.
KW - Aged
KW - COVID-19
KW - Hospital Mortality
KW - Hospitalization
KW - Humans
KW - Intensive Care Units
KW - Multiple Organ Failure/etiology
KW - Organ Dysfunction Scores
KW - Prognosis
KW - Retrospective Studies
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85182553167&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5114/ait.2023.134188
DO - 10.5114/ait.2023.134188
M3 - Article
C2 - 38282498
SN - 1642-5758
VL - 55
SP - 326
EP - 329
JO - ANAESTHESIOLOGY INTENSIVE THERAPY
JF - ANAESTHESIOLOGY INTENSIVE THERAPY
IS - 5
ER -