To evaluate the severity of trauma, many scoring systems and predictive models have been presented. The quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) is a simple scoring system based on vital signs, and we expect it to be easier to apply to trauma patients than other trauma assessment tools.

This study was a cross-sectional study of trauma patients who visited the emergency department of Jeju National University Hospital. We excluded patients under the age of 18 years and unknown outcomes. We calculated the qSOFA, the Modified Early Warning Score (mEWS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and Injury Severity Score (ISS) based on patients’ initial vital signs and assessments performed in the emergency department (ED). The primary outcome was mortality within 14 days of trauma. We analyzed qSOFA scores using multivariate logistic regression analysis and compared the predictive accuracy of these scoring systems using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).

In total, 27,764 patients were analyzed. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis of the qSOFA, the adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence interval (CI) for mortality relative to a qSOFA score of 0 were 27.82 (13.63–56.79) for a qSOFA score of 1, 373.31 (183.47–759.57) for a qSOFA score of 2, and 494.07 (143.75–1698.15) for a qSOFA score of 3. In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for the qSOFA, mEWS, ISS, and RTS in predicting the outcomes, for mortality, the AUROC for the qSOFA (AUROC [95% CI]; 0.912 [0.871–0.952]) was significantly greater than those for the ISS (0.700 [0.608–0.793]) and RTS (0.160 [0.108–0.211]).

The qSOFA was useful for predicting the prognosis of trauma patients evaluated in the ED.