The Value of Physiological Scoring Criteria in Predicting the In-Hospital Mortality of Acute Patients; a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: There is no comprehensive meta-analysis on the value of physiological scoring systems in predicting the mortality of critically ill patients. Therefore, the present study intended to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to collect the available clinical evidence on the value of physiological scoring systems in predicting the in-hospital mortality of acute patients. Methods: An extensive search was performed onMedline, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases until the end of year 2020. Physiological models included Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS), Rapid EmergencyMedicine Score (REMS), modified REMS (mREMS), and Worthing Physiological Score (WPS). Finally, the datawere summarized and the findingswere presented as summary receiver operating characteristics (SROC), sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Results: Data from 25 articles were included. The overall analysis showed that the area under the SROC curve of REMS, RAPS, mREMS, and WPS criteria were 0.83 (95% CI: 0.79-0.86), 0.89 (95% CI: 0.86-0.92), 0.64 (95% CI: 0.60-0.68) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.89), respectively. DOR for REMS, RAPS, mREMS and WPS models were 11 (95% CI: 8- 16), 13 (95% CI: 4-41), 2 (95% CI: 2-4) and 17 (95% CI: 5-59) respectively. When analyses were limited to trauma patients, the DOR of the REMS and RAPS models were 112 and 431, respectively. Due to the lack of sufficient studies, it was not possible to limit the analyses for mREMS and WPS. Conclusion: The findings of the present study showed that three models of RAPS, REMS and WPS have a high predictive value for in-hospital mortality. In addition, the value of these models in trauma patients is much higher than other patient settings.