ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT05790915Updated May 21, 2024

Impact of Interventions on Admission SOFA Score on Clinical Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients

An observational study in Critically Ill Patients, sponsored by Hospital Sao Domingos. Completed at 1 site in Brazil. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-05-21.

Sponsored by Hospital Sao Domingos · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
849
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Introduction: The SOFA score (Sequential Organ Function Assessment) and its derived measures, such as the Delta SOFA, are used worldwide to determine the severity and prognosis of critically ill patients.

Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to assess the impact of standardized interventions on the six organ dysfunctions of SOFA score on outcomes of critically ill patients through the 48-hour delta SOFA with evaluation of the effectiveness of the interventions performed. Result will be correlated with the 28-day mortality.

The secondary outcome measures comprised the evaluation of standardized interventions on ICU and hospital length of stay; vasopressor-free and ventilator-free days within the 28 days following ICU admission, through the effectiveness of interventions performed Uni and multivariate statistical analysis will be used to determine organ failures associated to outcome.

Read the detailed description

This prospective, observational cohort study will include patients admitted to a medical ICU (12 beds), a surgical ICU (13 beds), and a high complexity surgical and trauma ICU (12 beds). of a tertiary hospital from August 01, 2023 to January31, 2024. The trial will include all patients aged above 18 years, admitted to the ICU for at least 3 days. Patients will be excluded for the following reasons: if they are pregnant, moribund and patients readmitted to the ICU in the same hospital admission.

For the patients who met the inclusion criteria, we will collect the demographic data regarding the age, gender, the admission category (medical or surgical), the primary admission diagnosis, the simplified acute physiology score III (SAPS 3), admission sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) and 48-hour SOFA.

Whenever the admission SOFA score is ≥ 2, the result will be presented to the attending physician who will establish in the therapeutic plan the interventions for each of the dysfunctions identified according to a standardized intervention protocol (Table 1). After 48 hours, a new SOFA score is determined, while the prospective clinical surveillance team simultaneously identify if the interventions proposed by the protocol for each of the organ dysfunctions were effectively implemented.

Three groups of patients will be identified based on their SOFA scores at admission and the 48-hour delta SOFA values: those with an admission SOFA score \< 2 (Group1), those with an admission SOFA score ≥ 2 whose delta SOFA reflected improvement at the end of 48 hours after admission (SOFA after 48 hours \< SOFA on admission) (Group 2, n= ) and finally, those with an admission SOFA score ≥ 2 whose SOFA score increased or remained unchanged at the end of 48 hours postadmission (SOFA after 48 hours ≥ admission SOFA) (Group 3, n= ). The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated in the groups 2 and 3 through the formula:

Number of patients with an organic disfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with that organic dysfunction X 100

Results will be correlated with 28-day mortality.

Table 1. SOFA standardized protocol

  1. Respiratory Protective mechanical ventilation; mechanical power \< 16 NIV Prevention of P-SILI: ROX and HACOR index
  2. Hemodynamic SOSD protocol; Pressoric target; Lactate clearance
  3. Neurologic Image; EEG; Sedation goals
  4. Hematologic Basic disease approach; drugs; DDAVP use; platelet transfusion
  5. Renal Avoid nephrotoxicity; Avoid hypotension
  6. Hepatic Avoid hepatotoxic drugs; basic disease approach.

NIV, Non-invasive ventilation; P-SILI, patient self-inflicted lung injury; ROX, ratio of oxygen saturation index; HACOR, Heart rate, acidosis, consciousness oxygenatrion and respiratory rate; SOSD, salvage, optimization, stabilization and de-escalation; DDAVP, 1-desamino-8-d-arginine-vasopresssin.

02

Conditions studied

  • Critically Ill Patients

Keywords

  • SOFA Score
  • Delta SOFA
  • Critically ill patients
  • Interventions
  • Outcomes
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Hospital Sao Domingos is the lead sponsor of 23 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

Adult patients admitted to a medical ICU, a Surgical ICU and a High complexity surgical and trauma ICU in the period from April 01, 2023 to March 31, 2024 and lenght of stay of at least 3 days.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients aged above 18 years,
  • Lenght of ICU stay of at least 3 days.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pregnant patients
  • End-of-life
  • Patients readmitted to the ICU in the same hospitalization
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
849 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Group 1

    Patients with SOFA score \< 2 at admission. No intervention

  • Group 2

    Patients with SOFA score equal to or \> 2 on admission and who improved after 48 hours of treatment. Intervention focused on identified organ dysfunction(s)

    Combination Product: Standardized interventions

  • Group 3

    Patients with SOFA score equal to or \> 2 on admission and who did not improve after 48 hours of treatment. Intervention focused on identified organ dysfunction(s)

    Combination Product: Standardized interventions

Interventions

  • Combination productStandardized interventions

    Standardized interventions according organ dysfunction

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Impact of standardized interventions in respiratory dysfunction on 48-hour delta SOFA with evaluation of the effectiveness of the interventions performed.

    Lung protective ventilation: Tidal volume = 6 ml/kg; Plateau pressure \< 28 mmHg; driving pressue \< 16 cm H2O; Mechanical power \< 16 Joules/min; Prevention of self-inflicted lung injury (P-SILI): ROX index \> 4.8 and HACOR \< 5. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with respiratory dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with respiratory dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 48 hours

  2. Impact of standardized interventions in hemodinamic dysfunction on 48-hour delta SOFA

    SOSD (salvage, optimization, stabilization and de-escalation ) protocol; mean arterial pressoric taget of at least 65 mm Hg, Lactate serum level \< 19 mg/dL. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hemodinamic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hemodinamica dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 48 hour

  3. Impact of standardized interventions in neurologic dysfunction on 48-hour delta SOFA

    Image: cranial CT; Electroencephalografic monitoring and RASS Score between -1 and +1 The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with neurologic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with neurologic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 48 hour

  4. Impact of standardized interventions in hematologic dysfunction on 48-hour delta SOFA

    Basic disease approach; avoid drugs that interfere with coagulation; Platelet transfusion in case of hemohhage; DDAVP when indicated. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hematologic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hematologic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 48 hour

  5. Impact of standardized interventions iin renal dysfunction on 48-hour delta SOFA

    Avoid nephotoxic drugs; Mantain mean arterial blood pressure \> 65 mmHg The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with renal dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with renal dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 48 hour

  6. Impact of standardized interventions in hepatic dysfunction on 48-hour delta SOFA

    Avoid hepatotoxic drugs;basic disease approach The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hepatic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hepatic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 48 hour

Secondary outcomes

  1. Impact of standardized interventions in respiratory dysfunction on ICU length of stay

    Lung protective ventilation: Tidal volume 6 ml/kg; Pateau pressure \< 28 mmHg; driving pressue \< 16 cm H2O; Mechanical power \< 16 Joules/min; Prevention of self-inflicted lung injury (P-SILI): ROX index \> 4.8 and HACOR \< 5. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with respiratory dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with respiratory dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  2. Impact of standardized interventions in hemodinamic dysfuction on ICU length of stay

    SOSD (salvage, optimization, stabilixation and de-escalation ) protocol; mean arterial pressoric taget of at least 65 mm Hg, Lactate serum level \< 19 mg/dL. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hemodinamic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hemodinamic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  3. Impact of standardized interventions in neurologic dysfunction on ICU length of stay

    Image: cranial CT; Electroencephalografic monitoring and RASS Score between -1 and +1 The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with neurologic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with neurologic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  4. Impact of standardized interventions in hematologic dysfunction on ICU length of stay

    Basic disease approach; avoid drugs that interfere with coagulation; Platelet transfusion in case of hemohhage; DDAVP when indicated. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hematologic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hematologic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  5. Impact of standardized interventions iin renal dysfunction on ICU length of stay

    Avoid nephotoxic drugs; Mantain mean arterial blood pressure \> 65 mmHg The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with renal dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with renal dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  6. Impact of standardized interventions in hepatic dysfunction on ICU length of stay

    Avoid hepatotoxic drugs;basic disease approach The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hepatic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hepatic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  7. Impact of standardized interventions in respiratory dysfunction on vasopressor-free days

    Lung protective ventilation: Tidal volume 6 ml/kg; Pateau pressure \< 28 mmHg; driving pressue \< 16 cm H2O; Mechanical power \< 16 Joules/min; Prevention of self-inflicted lung injury (P-SILI): ROX index \> 4.8 and HACOR \< 5. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with respiratory dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with respiratory dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  8. Impact of standardized interventions in hemodinamic dysfuction on vasopressor-free days

    SOSD (salvage, optimization, stabilixation and de-escalation ) protocol; mean arterial pressoric taget of at least 65 mm Hg, Lactate serum level \< 19 mg/dL. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hemodinamic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hemodinamic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  9. Impact of standardized interventions in neurologic dysfunction on vasopressor-free days

    Image: cranial CT; Electroencephalografic monitoring and RASS Score between -1 and +1 The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with neurologic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with neurologic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  10. Impact of standardized interventions in hematologic dysfunction on vasopressor-free days

    Basic disease approach; avoid drugs that interfere with coagulation; Platelet transfusion in case of hemohhage; DDAVP when indicated. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hematologic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hematologic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  11. Impact of standardized interventions iin renal dysfunction on vasopressor-free days

    Avoid nephotoxic drugs; Mantain mean arterial blood pressure \> 65 mmHg The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with renal dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with renal dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  12. Impact of standardized interventions in hepatic dysfunction on vasopressor-free days

    Avoid hepatotoxic drugs;basic disease approach The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hepatic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hepatic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  13. Impact of standardized interventions in respiratory dysfunction on ventilator-free days

    Lung protective ventilation: Tidal volume 6 ml/kg; Pateau pressure \< 28 mmHg; driving pressue \< 16 cm H2O; Mechanical power \< 16 Joules/min; Prevention of self-inflicted lung injury (P-SILI): ROX index \> 4.8 and HACOR \< 5. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with respiratory dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with respiratory dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  14. Impact of standardized interventions in hemodinamic dysfuction on ventilator-free days

    SOSD (salvage, optimization, stabilixation and de-escalation ) protocol; mean arterial pressoric taget of at least 65 mm Hg, Lactate serum level \< 19 mg/dL. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hemodinamic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hemodinamic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  15. Impact of standardized interventions in neurologic dysfunction on ventilator-free days

    Image: cranial CT; Electroencephalografic monitoring and RASS Score between -1 and +1 The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with neurologic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with neurologic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  16. Impact of standardized interventions in hematologic dysfunction on ventilator-free days

    Basic disease approach; avoid drugs that interfere with coagulation; Platelet transfusion in case of hemohhage; DDAVP when indicated. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hematologic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hematologic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  17. Impact of standardized interventions iin renal dysfunction on ventilator-free days

    Avoid nephotoxic drugs; Mantain mean arterial blood pressure \> 65 mmHg The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with renal dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with renal dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  18. Impact of standardized interventions in hepatic dysfunction on ventilator-free days

    Avoid hepatotoxic drugs;basic disease approach The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hepatic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hepatic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 28 days

  19. Impact of standardized interventions in respiratory dysfunction on hospital length of stay

    Lung protective ventilation: Tidal volume 6 ml/kg; Pateau pressure \< 28 mmHg; driving pressue \< 16 cm H2O; Mechanical power \< 16 Joules/min; Prevention of self-inflicted lung injury (P-SILI): ROX index \> 4.8 and HACOR \< 5. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with respiratory dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with respiratory dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 60 days

  20. Impact of standardized interventions in hemodinamic dysfuction on hospital length of stay

    SOSD (salvage, optimization, stabilixation and de-escalation ) protocol; mean arterial pressoric taget of at least 65 mm Hg, Lactate serum level \< 19 mg/dL. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hemodinamic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hemodinamic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 60 days

  21. Impact of standardized interventions in neurologic dysfunction on hospital length of stay

    Image: cranial CT; Electroencephalografic monitoring and RASS Score between -1 and +1 The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with neurologic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with neurologic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 60 days

  22. Impact of standardized interventions in hematologic dysfunction on hospital length of stay

    Basic disease approach; avoid drugs that interfere with coagulation; Platelet transfusion in case of hemohhage; DDAVP when indicated. The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hematologic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hematologic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 60 days

  23. Impact of standardized interventions in renal dysfunction on hospital length of stay

    Avoid nephotoxic drugs; Mantain mean arterial blood pressure \> 65 mmHg The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with renal dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with renal dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 60 days

  24. Impact of standardized interventions in hepatic dysfunction on hospital length of stay

    Avoid hepatotoxic drugs;basic disease approach The effectiveness of the interventions on organic disfunction will be evaluated through the formula: Number of patients with hepatic dysfunction and effective intervention / Number of patients with hepatic dysfunction X 100

    Time frame: 60 days

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Hospital Sao Domingos
    Sao Luis, MA 65060-000, Brazil
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Anami EH, Grion CM, Cardoso LT, Kauss IA, Thomazini MC, Zampa HB, Bonametti AM, Matsuo T. Serial evaluation of SOFA score in a Brazilian teaching hospital. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2010 Apr;26(2):75-82. doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2009.10.005. Epub 2009 Dec 29. PubMed 20036543 ↗
  • Bone RC, Sibbald WJ, Sprung CL. The ACCP-SCCM consensus conference on sepsis and organ failure. Chest. 1992 Jun;101(6):1481-3. doi: 10.1378/chest.101.6.1481. No abstract available. PubMed 1600757 ↗
  • Moreno R, Vincent JL, Matos R, Mendonca A, Cantraine F, Thijs L, Takala J, Sprung C, Antonelli M, Bruining H, Willatts S. The use of maximum SOFA score to quantify organ dysfunction/failure in intensive care. Results of a prospective, multicentre study. Working Group on Sepsis related Problems of the ESICM. Intensive Care Med. 1999 Jul;25(7):686-96. doi: 10.1007/s001340050931. PubMed 10470572 ↗
  • Vincent JL, Moreno R, Takala J, Willatts S, De Mendonca A, Bruining H, Reinhart CK, Suter PM, Thijs LG. The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med. 1996 Jul;22(7):707-10. doi: 10.1007/BF01709751. No abstract available. PubMed 8844239 ↗
  • Jones AE, Trzeciak S, Kline JA. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score for predicting outcome in patients with severe sepsis and evidence of hypoperfusion at the time of emergency department presentation. Crit Care Med. 2009 May;37(5):1649-54. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31819def97. PubMed 19325482 ↗
  • de Azevedo JR, Torres OJ, Beraldi RA, Ribas CA, Malafaia O. Prognostic evaluation of severe sepsis and septic shock: procalcitonin clearance vs Delta Sequential Organ Failure Assessment. J Crit Care. 2015 Feb;30(1):219.e9-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2014.08.018. Epub 2014 Sep 10. PubMed 25241933 ↗
  • Soo A, Zuege DJ, Fick GH, Niven DJ, Berthiaume LR, Stelfox HT, Doig CJ. Describing organ dysfunction in the intensive care unit: a cohort study of 20,000 patients. Crit Care. 2019 May 23;23(1):186. doi: 10.1186/s13054-019-2459-9. PubMed 31122276 ↗
  • de Grooth HJ, Geenen IL, Girbes AR, Vincent JL, Parienti JJ, Oudemans-van Straaten HM. SOFA and mortality endpoints in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Crit Care. 2017 Feb 24;21(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s13054-017-1609-1. PubMed 28231816 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Aug 2023 to primary completion in Jan 2024, 5 months.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Feb 21, 2023
First posted
Mar 30, 2023
StartActual
Aug 1, 2023
Primary completionActual
Jan 30, 2024
CompletionActual
Mar 31, 2024
Last update
May 21, 2024
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 21, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05790915
Lead sponsor
Hospital Sao Domingos
Responsible party
José Raimundo Araujo de Azevedo (ICU Assistant Physician, Hospital Sao Domingos) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 30, 2023
Start date
Aug 1, 2023
Primary completion
Jan 30, 2024
Completion
Mar 31, 2024
Last update
May 21, 2024

Study contacts

JOSE R AZEVEDO, MD, PhD
study director · Hospital Sao Domingos
BARBARA L RIBEIRO, MD
principal investigator · Hospital Sao Domingos

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion