Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score is the sum of 6 components, each representing one organ system with dysfunction classified on a 4-point scale. In research, usually by default, the total SOFA score is taken into account, but it may not reflect the severity of the condition of the individual organs. Often, these values are expected to predict mortality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this study, we reanalysed 2 cohorts of critically ill elderly patients to explore the distribution of SOFA subscores and to assess the between-group differences. Both cohorts were adjusted to maintain similarity in terms of age and the primary cause of admission (respiratory cause). RESULTS: In total, 910 (non-COVID-19 cohort) and 551 patients (COVID-19 cohort) were included in the analysis. Both cohorts were similar in terms of the total SOFA score (median 5 vs. 5 points); however, the groups differed significantly in 4/6 SOFA subscores (respiratory, neurological, cardiovascular, and coagulation subscores). Moreover, the cohorts had different fractions of organ failures (defined as a SOFA subscore ≥ 3). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis revealed significant differences in SOFA subscores between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 respiratory cohorts, highlighting the importance of considering individual organ dysfunction rather than relying solely on the total SOFA score when reporting organ dysfunction in clinical research.