Comparative Analysis of Prognostic Scores for Predicting Mortality and the Need for Mechanical Ventilation in Patients With Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Presenting to the Emergency Department

Objective This study aimed to evaluate and compare the predictive accuracy of five established clinical scoring systems - CURB65, BAP65, qSOFA, DECAF, and NEWS - in forecasting in-hospital mortality and the need for mechanical ventilation among patients presenting with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in the emergency department. Methods An observational, cross-sectional study was conducted over a 12-month period (January to December 2023) in the emergency department of Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna. A total of 200 patients aged 18 years and older with AECOPD were enrolled. Clinical, laboratory, radiographic, and electrocardiographic data were collected to calculate the prognostic scores. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; the secondary outcome was the requirement for mechanical ventilation. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0 (Released 2019; IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) and included logistic regression, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, calibration assessment, and evaluation of seasonal variations in score performance. Results Among the five scoring systems, the DECAF score showed the highest predictive accuracy with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80, followed by BAP65 (0.75), NEWS (0.72), CURB65 (0.70), and qSOFA (0.65). DECAF had the strongest association with hospital mortality (OR: 2.8, 95% CI: 1.7-4.5) and need for mechanical ventilation (OR: 2.3, 95% CI: 1.5-3.6). It also achieved the highest sensitivity (0.85) and specificity (0.75). ANOVA revealed significant differences in AUC values across scores (F = 4.76, p = 0.002). Calibration curves indicated accurate prediction for DECAF and BAP65. Seasonal analysis demonstrated consistent performance for both DECAF and BAP65 throughout the year. Conclusions The DECAF score was the most reliable predictor of hospital mortality and mechanical ventilation needs in AECOPD patients presenting to the emergency department. BAP65 also performed consistently well and may serve as a practical alternative, particularly in resource-limited settings. Condition-specific scores like DECAF should be favored over general severity indices for effective risk stratification in COPD.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cureus
Published
2025-04-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.82374
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.52
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Analysis of Prognostic Scores for Predicting Mortality and the Need for Mechanical Ventilation in Patients With Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Presenting to the Emergency Department

Anand Dev, Siddharth Singh, Abhay Kumar, Santosh Kumar Nayan et al.
1 citations
Cureus
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
1.52
article

Comparative Analysis of Prognostic Scores for Predicting Mortality and the Need for Mechanical Ventilation in Patients With Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Presenting to the Emergency Department

Anand Dev, Siddharth Singh, Abhay Kumar, Santosh Kumar Nayan, Santosh Kumar, Shivani Sinha
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to evaluate and compare the predictive accuracy of five established clinical scoring systems - CURB65, BAP65, qSOFA, DECAF, and NEWS - in forecasting in-hospital mortality and the need for mechanical ventilation among patients presenting with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in the emergency department. Methods An observational, cross-sectional study was conducted over a 12-month period (January to December 2023) in the emergency department of Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna. A total of 200 patients aged 18 years and older with AECOPD were enrolled. Clinical, laboratory, radiographic, and electrocardiographic data were collected to calculate the prognostic scores. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; the secondary outcome was the requirement for mechanical ventilation. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0 (Released 2019; IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) and included logistic regression, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, calibration assessment, and evaluation of seasonal variations in score performance. Results Among the five scoring systems, the DECAF score showed the highest predictive accuracy with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80, followed by BAP65 (0.75), NEWS (0.72), CURB65 (0.70), and qSOFA (0.65). DECAF had the strongest association with hospital mortality (OR: 2.8, 95% CI: 1.7-4.5) and need for mechanical ventilation (OR: 2.3, 95% CI: 1.5-3.6). It also achieved the highest sensitivity (0.85) and specificity (0.75). ANOVA revealed significant differences in AUC values across scores (F = 4.76, p = 0.002). Calibration curves indicated accurate prediction for DECAF and BAP65. Seasonal analysis demonstrated consistent performance for both DECAF and BAP65 throughout the year. Conclusions The DECAF score was the most reliable predictor of hospital mortality and mechanical ventilation needs in AECOPD patients presenting to the emergency department. BAP65 also performed consistently well and may serve as a practical alternative, particularly in resource-limited settings. Condition-specific scores like DECAF should be favored over general severity indices for effective risk stratification in COPD.

CureusVol. 17(4)
Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences (IN)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
1.52
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.