Lack of a SOFA score change does not rule out sepsis.
A couple weeks ago, I spoke about how the current definition of sepsis, known as “sepsis-3,” was the best definition for the medical community to use at this time. This week, I’m going to discuss the clinical diagnosis of sepsis.
Sepsis diagnoses are a frequent source of disagreement between providers and payers . I’m not advocating for the capture of more or fewer sepsis diagnoses, but rather for correct sepsis diagnoses. Sepsis diagnoses impact not only a provider’s DRG-based payments, but also government subsidies to insurers who offer Medicare Advantage and Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) exchange plans. The same definition needs to be applied consistently and correctly by all.
The sepsis-3 definition is “life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection.” What about the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score? Isn’t that also the definition of sepsis-3? No, it is not.
A myth I want to dispel is that SOFA criteria must be met in order to diagnose sepsis; that is not true. If a clinician feels that a patient has life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection, based on a reasonable clinical assessment, then that patient has sepsis.
Arguing that a patient is not septic because the SOFA score did not change by two points is putting the cart before the horse.
The sepsis-3 authors would have liked to have developed a new and validated organ dysfunction tool to accompany the sepsis-3 definition, but there was neither the time nor resources to do so. However, they recognized that some clinical criteria would have to be put forth to assist in the diagnosis of sepsis.
They actually studied three different tools to identify the organ dysfunction in the new sepsis definition: the aforementioned SOFA, the Logistic Organ Dysfunction System (LODS), and the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS). SOFA and LODS both performed better than SIRS. Because SOFA is easier to administer than LODS, the SOFA score was chosen. That’s the only reason. So let’s take a closer look at SOFA.
The SOFA score was created in 1996 by one of the sepsis-3 authors, Dr. Jean-Louis Vincent. It looks for markers of dysfunction in one of six functional organs or organ systems: respiration, coagulation, liver, cardiovascular, central nervous system, and renal. Specific inputs include the P/F ratio (a measure of hypoxemia), platelet count, bilirubin level, mean arterial pressure or use of vasopressors, Glasgow Coma Scale, creatinine level, and urine output. Points are assigned to each organ system, and the points are simply added. A change of two points over baseline is indicative of significant organ dysfunction. If the baseline score is not known, it is presumed to be zero.
Several specific questions arise with the practical application of the SOFA inputs. To determine a P/F oxygen ratio, technically, an arterial blood gas (ABG) is required. If an ABG is not obtained, does that mean the input cannot be scored? No, because the relationship between oxygen pressure and oxygen saturation, as well as the relationship between inspired oxygen and various oxygen delivery devices, is quite well-established.
When inferring a partial pressure of oxygen and fraction of inspired oxygen provided, however, it is wise to be conservative in estimates when there can be no reasonable doubt that the P/F ratio is below 300. Regarding the Glasgow Coma Scale, the three component inputs may not all be documented, but an abnormal result in one input can guarantee that the score cannot be higher than a certain number. The most conservative (highest) number should be used.
What if the organ that has experienced dysfunction is also the source of infection, such as pneumonia causing hypoxemia? According to a sepsis-3 lead author, the panel discussed this, and determined that the organ system should still be included. For practicality, SOFA inputs should be taken from the same 24-hour period to avoid confounding by time.
In summary, SOFA is a tool that can be used to help support the diagnosis of sepsis, but lack of a SOFA score change does not rule out sepsis. Calculating the proper SOFA score can be challenging but remember that the clinician is the person who should make the final diagnosis of sepsis, not an auditor sitting on a sofa.
Annual funding for entities driving Marketplace enrollment has increased tenfold since hitting pre-pandemic lows. An unprecedented number of individuals are now enrolled in Patient Protection
CMS updated Medicare regulations for 2019 EDITOR’S NOTE: Veteran Washington, D.C. observer Stanley Nachimson reported on the final rules from the Centers for Medicare &
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Expert presenters Kathy Pride, RHIT, CPC, CCS-P, CPMA, and Brandi Russell, RHIA, CCS, COC, CPMA, break down complex fracture care coding rules, walk through correct modifier application (-25, -57, 54, 55), and clarify sequencing for initial and subsequent encounters. Attendees will gain the practical knowledge needed to submit clean claims, ensure compliance, and stay one step ahead of payer audits in 2026.
Accurately determining the principal diagnosis is critical for compliant billing, appropriate reimbursement, and valid quality reporting — yet it remains one of the most subjective and error-prone areas in inpatient coding. In this expert-led session, Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, demystifies the complexities of principal diagnosis assignment, bridging the gap between coding rules and clinical reality. Learn how to strengthen your organization’s coding accuracy, reduce denials, and ensure your documentation supports true medical necessity.
Denials continue to delay reimbursement, increase administrative burden, and threaten financial stability across healthcare organizations. This essential webcast tackles the root causes—rising payer scrutiny, fragmented workflows, inconsistent documentation, and underused analytics—and offers proven, data-driven strategies to prevent and overturn denials. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen documentation and coding accuracy, engage clinicians effectively, and leverage predictive analytics and AI to identify risks before they impact revenue. Through real-world case examples and actionable guidance, this session empowers coding, CDI, and revenue cycle professionals to shift from reactive appeals to proactive denial prevention and revenue protection.
Sepsis remains one of the most frequently denied and contested diagnoses, creating costly revenue loss and compliance risks. In this webcast, Angela Comfort, DBA, MBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, provides practical, real-world strategies to align documentation with coding guidelines, reconcile Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions, and apply compliant queries. You’ll learn how to identify and address documentation gaps, strengthen provider engagement, and defend diagnoses against payer scrutiny—equipping you to protect reimbursement, improve SOI/ROM capture, and reduce audit vulnerability in this high-risk area.
Stay ahead of the 2026-2027 audit surge with “Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue,” a high-impact webcast led by Michael Calahan, PA, MBA. This concise session gives hospitals and physicians clear insight into the most likely federal audit targets, such as E/M services, split/shared and critical care, observation and admissions, device credits, and Two-Midnight Rule changes, and shows how to tighten documentation, coding, and internal processes to reduce denials, recoupments, and penalties. Attendees walk away with practical best practices to protect revenue, strengthen compliance, and better prepare their teams for inevitable audits.
As AI reshapes healthcare compliance, the risk of biased outputs and opaque decision-making grows. This webcast, led by Frank Cohen, delivers a practical Four-Pillar Governance Framework—Transparency, Accountability, Fairness, and Explainability—to help you govern AI-driven claim auditing with confidence. Learn how to identify and mitigate bias, implement robust human oversight, and document defensible AI review processes that regulators and auditors will accept. Discover concrete remedies, from rotation protocols to uncertainty scoring, and actionable steps to evaluate vendors before contracts are signed. In a regulatory landscape that moves faster than ever, gain the tools to stay compliant, defend your processes, and reduce liability while maintaining operational effectiveness.
Get clear, practical answers to Medicare’s most confusing regulations. Join Dr. Ronald Hirsch as he breaks down real-world compliance challenges and shares guidance your team can apply right away.
Federal auditors are zeroing in on Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility (IRF) and hospital rehab unit services, with OIG and CERT audits leading to millions in penalties—often due to documentation and administrative errors, not quality of care. Join compliance expert Michael Calahan, PA, MBA, to learn the five clinical “pillars” of IRF-PPS admissions, key documentation requirements, and real-life case lessons to help protect your revenue.
Prepare for the 2025 CMS IPPS Final Rule with ICD10monitor’s IPPSPalooza! Click HERE to learn more
Get 15% OFF on all educational webcasts at ICD10monitor with code JULYFOURTH24 until July 4, 2024—start learning today!
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24
