The Universal Vital Assessment (UVA) score at 6 hours post-resuscitation predicts mortality in hospitalized adults with severe sepsis in Mbarara, Uganda
Sepsis is the leading cause of global death with the highest burden found in sub-Saharan Africa (sSA). The Universal Vital Assessment (UVA) score is a validated resource-appropriate clinical tool to identify hospitalized patients in sSA who are at risk of in-hospital mortality. Whether a decrease in the UVA score over 6 hours of resuscitation from sepsis is associated with improved outcomes is unknown. We aimed to determine (1) the association between 6-hour UVA score and in-hospital mortality, and (2) if a decrease in UVA score from admission to 6 hours was associated with improved in-hospital mortality. We analyzed data from participants with severe sepsis aged ≥14 years enrolled at the Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital in Uganda from October 2014 through May 2015. Among 197 participants, the median (interquartile range) age was 34 (27-47) years, 99 (50%) were female and 116 (59%) were living with HIV. At 6 hours, of the 65 participants in the high-risk group, 28 (43%) died compared to 28 (30%) of 94 in the medium-risk group (odds ratio [OR] 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29,1.08, p = 0.086) and 3 (9%) of 33 in the low-risk group (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03, 0.42, p = 0.002). In a univariate analysis of the 85 participants who improved their UVA risk group at 6 hours, 20 (23%) died compared to 39 (36%) of 107 participants who did not improve (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.27-1.06, p = 0.055). In the multivariable analysis, the UVA score at 6 hours (adjusted OR [aOR] 1.26, 95%CI 1.10-1.45, p<0.001) was associated with in-hospital mortality. When adjusted for age and sex, improvement in the UVA risk group over 6 hours was associated with a non-statistically significant 43% decrease in odds of mortality (aOR 0.57, 95%CI 0.29-1.07, p = 0.08). Targeting a decrease in UVA score over 6 hours from admission may be a useful clinical endpoint for sepsis resuscitation in sSA, but this would need to be proven in a clinical trial.
Authors
- Riley Hazard (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3774-2705)
- Kabanda Taseera (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1397-9572)
- Amir A. Mbonde (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8241-0262)
- Megan Null (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9584-4606)
- Sam Olum (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8918-0615)
- Mark R. Conaway (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0459-2336)
- Christopher C. Moore (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4649-0511)
- Rose Muhindo (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7128-4870)
- Louisa Edwards (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-4887-8564)
Institutions
- Gulu University (UG)
- Mbarara University of Science and Technology (UG)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Mayo Clinic in Arizona (US)
- University of Virginia (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- PLOS Global Public Health
- Published
- 2024-10-22
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003797
- Citations
- 1
- Primary Topic
- Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.39
Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases