[Skip to content]


The CASH Database

The database is the hub of the CASH service. The content can be added, searched and exported to create personalised alerting services for library customers.  There are a number of newsfeeds that can be embedded into external CAS website pages keeping them constantly updated with the latest content.

To search for a specific item enter a keyword that may appear in either the title or summary.

Database entry is very quick and easy, see the Database Quick Guide for further support.

Search Tips

  • Search for the first three words in the title e.g. "Five year forward" will find everything about the Five Year Forward View
  • Browse a category from the drop-down list to see the latest news on that topic

  • Enter a keyword to narrow your search e.g. Category Mental Health and Keyword Parity 

Comparison of the systematic Inflammatory response syndrome and the quick sequential organ failure assessment for prognostic accuracy in detecting sepsis in the emergency department: A systematic review.

International Emergency Nursing
Year of publication
Background: Awareness and prompt recognition of sepsis are essential for nurses working in the emergency department (ED), enabling them to make an initial assessment of patients and then to sort them according to their condition s severity. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate prognostic accuracy in detecting sepsis in the emergency department by comparing the previous sepsis-2 screening tool, the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) and the current sepsis-3 screening tool, the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA). Methods: This systematic review used the guideline by Bettany-Saltikov and McSherry and was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO. A systematic search was conducted using the CINAHL, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases. Study selection and risk of bias was performed independently by pair of authors. Results: Five articles were included. Overall, SIRS showed higher sensitivity than qSOFA, while qSOFA showed higher specificity than SIRS. The positive predictive value for qSOFA was superior, while there was a minor deviation in negative predictive value between qSOFA and SIRS. Conclusion: The overall recommendation based on the included studies indicates that qSOFA is the better-suited screening tool for prognostic accuracy in detecting sepsis in the emergency department. 
Date added
Created by
Michelle Bendall
Published by
Current Awareness Service for Health