An observational study in Sepsis, sponsored by Jubilee Mission Medical College and Research Institute. Completed at 1 site in India. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-09-15.
Sponsored by Jubilee Mission Medical College and Research Institute · Observational
Prospective observational study to determine the utility of Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) in comparison to National Early Warning Score2 (NEWS2) for predicting morbidity and mortality among patients presenting to the Emergency Department with clinical suspicion of Sepsis
Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) is an attenuated version of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score and has utility in predicting mortality in non- surgical patients. The NEWS2 can be used on all hospitalized patients to allow for the early detection of clinical deterioration and potential need for higher level of care. NEWS2 is closely associated with sepsis, however REMS is not so. But in recent studies comparing other EWS (Early Warning Scores) of sepsis, REMS was found to be superior.
Hence comparing REMs against NEWS2 to determine prognostication value of both scores in sepsis.
2,416 studies on the registry are indexed under Sepsis; 541 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 130 is below the median of 150 across 1,162 observational studies indexed under Sepsis.
Browse Sepsis studies →Jubilee Mission Medical College and Research Institute is the lead sponsor of 25 studies on the registry; 4 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Based on the sensitivity of REMS score for predicting the morbidity and mortality as compared to NEWS2 in patients with clinical suspicion of sepsis as observed in earlier publications; citing hereby "The utility of the rapid emergency medicine score (REMS) compared with SIRS, qSOFA and NEWS for Predicting in-hospital Mortality among Patients with suspicion of Sepsis in an emergency department" \& "NEWS2 Is Superior to qSOFA in Detecting Sepsis with Organ Dysfunction in the Emergency Department" with 95% confidence level \& 15% relative allowable error, minimum sample size comes to 130.
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.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Drug: Antibiotics, Vasopressors
Both groups are scored on REMS and NEWS2, and then observed closely for the period of hospital stay with regard to ICU stay duration, ventilator days, vasopressor dependent days and total hospital duration
To determine the utility of REMS score over NEWS2 score - number of days of intensive care.
To compare REMS score against NEWS2 score with regard to morbidity indicators as - Number of days of intensive care
Time frame: 18 months
To determine the utility of REMS score over NEWS2 score - need for vasopressor administration
To compare REMS score against NEWS2 score with regard to morbidity indicators as - need for vasopressor administration
Time frame: 18 months
To determine the utility of REMS score over NEWS2 score - number of days spent as IP
To compare REMS score against NEWS2 score with regard to morbidity indicators as - number of days spent in hospital
Time frame: 18 months
To determine the utility of REMS score over NEWS2 score - need for mechanical ventilation
To compare REMS score against NEWS2 score with regard to morbidity indicators as - need for mechanical ventilation
Time frame: 18 months
To determine in- hospital mortality of patients with clinical suspicion of sepsis
To compare the effectiveness of REMS and NEWS2 in predicting the in-hospital, 30 day mortality of patients admitted with clinical suspicion of sepsis.
Time frame: 30 days
To determine the utility of REMS score over NEWS2 score of patients admitted with qSOFA >/=2
To compare the utility of REMS score over NEWS2 score for predicting the prognosis of patients admitted with qSOFA \>/= 2 ; serum lactates \>/= 2.
Time frame: 18 months
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Ran from Jan 2023 to primary completion in Jun 2024, 17 months.
Of 491 non-industry observational studies under Sepsis, half reached primary completion within 29 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 13 and three quarters within 58. This study's 17 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 543 studies reached it within 27 months; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 56.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions 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.
Jubilee Mission Medical College and Research Institute