The United Kingdom's National Early Warning Score: should everyone use it? A narrative review

This review critiques the benefits and drawbacks of the United Kingdom's National Early Warning Score (NEWS). Potential developments for the future are considered, as well as the role for NEWS in an emergency department (ED). The ability of NEWS to predict death within 24 h has been well validated in multiple clinical settings. It provides a common language for the assessment of clinical severity and can be used to trigger clinical interventions. However, it should not be used as the only metric for risk stratification as its ability to predict mortality beyond 24 h is not reliable and greatly influenced by other factors. The main drawbacks of NEWS are that measuring it requires trained professionals, it is time consuming and prone to calculation error. NEWS is recommended for use in acute UK hospitals, where it is linked to an escalation policy that reflects postgraduate experience; patients with lower NEWS are first assessed by a junior clinician and those with higher scores by more senior staff. This policy was based on expert opinion that did not consider workload implications. Nevertheless, its implementation has been shown to improve the efficient recording of vital signs. How and who should respond to different NEWS levels is uncertain and may vary according to the clinical setting and resources available. In the ED, simple triage scores which are quicker and easier to use may be more appropriate determinants of acuity. However, any alternative to NEWS should be easier and cheaper to use and provide evidence of outcome improvement.

Automated summary

This review discusses the pros and cons of the United Kingdom's National Early Warning Score (NEWS), its validation in predicting death within 24 hours, and its limitations in predicting mortality beyond 24 hours. It also considers the role of NEWS in emergency departments and potential developments for the future.