REDS SCORE VERSUS qSOFA SCORE to Predict Mortality in Patients With Suspected Sepsis

NCT07271329 | Not Yet Recruiting

• 1 other identifier: Reds score versus qSOFA score
• Study Type: observational
• Target: 80
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Our goal in this work is to compare the predictive accuracy of the REDS score versus qSOFA in identifying in-hospital mortality among ED patients with suspected sepsis and improving outcomes in ED patients.

Conditions

Sepsis in ED Patients

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Primary outcome

  primary outcome will be mortality during the 30 day follow-up

  30 day

Study Arms (1)

Patients will be randomly assigned to two groups: 1) Group A 2)Group B

Patients will be randomly assigned to two groups: 1. Group A: Initial vital signs upon arrival at ED triage to evaluate the REDS score \[ Time Frame: Timepoint 0 (ED triage) Age: ≥ 65 years old (1 point) Altered Mental State: (1 point) \[from 1-15\] Respiratory Rate: ≥22 breaths/min (1point ) \[yes or not\] Systolic Blood Pressure: ≤100 mm Hg (1 point) \[yes or not\] Serum Albumin: ≤27 g/L (1 point) \[yes or not\] INR: ≥1.3 (1 point)\[yes or not\] Lactate: 2.1-3.9 mmol/L (1 point), ≥4 mmol/L (3 points) Refractory Hypotension: (2 points for lactate ≤2 mmol/L, 3 points for lactate \>2 mmol/L) will be assessed to evaluate the REDS score. 2. Group B: Initial vital signs upon arrival at ED triage to evaluate the qSOFA score \[ Time Frame: Timepoint 0 (ED triage) \] . * Respiratory rate per minute * Mental status * Systolic blood pressure.

Device: Sphygmomanometer

Interventions

Sphygmomanometer DEVICE

Mercury sphygmomanometer for measuring blood pressure

Patients will be randomly assigned to two groups: 1) Group A 2)Group B

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years+
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Our goal in this work is to compare the predictive accuracy of the REDS score versus qSOFA in identifying in-hospital mortality among ED patients with suspected sepsis and improving outcomes in ED patients.

You may qualify if:

• Adults ≥ 18 y presented to the ED with suspected or confirmed infection, both sex qSOFA criterion met on arrival ≥ 2

You may not qualify if:

• Patient less than 18 years Incomplete vital sign records upon ED arrival Pregnant patients Those with DNR state Immune compromised patient as leukemia

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Assiut University: lead

Study Sites (1)

Assiut

Asyut, Abo Tig, 71641, Egypt

Location

MeSH Terms

Interventions

Sphygmomanometers

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Diagnostic Equipment; Equipment and Supplies

Study Officials

• Mohamed Anwar, Consultant of Anathesia ICU

  Assiut University

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

• Haitham Mohammed Ahmed, Lecturer of Anesthesia,ICU

  Assiut University

  STUDY DIRECTOR

Central Study Contacts

Mostafa Nageh mohamed, M.B.B. Ch

CONTACT

+01119618014; mostafanageh999@gmail.com

Bassant said Mousa Associate Prof of Emergency department Faculty of medicine, Study Principal Investigator

CONTACT

01227062927

Study Design

• Study Type: observational
• Observational Model: COHORT
• Time Perspective: PROSPECTIVE
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Resident at Emergency Department

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: November 28, 2025
• First Posted: December 9, 2025
• Study Start: December 1, 2025
• Primary Completion (Estimated): November 15, 2026
• Study Completion (Estimated): December 15, 2026
• Last Updated: December 9, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-11

Locations

EG (1)