Centor score
Authored by Patient infomatics teamOriginally published 8 Feb 2026
Satisface las necesidades del paciente directrices editoriales
- DescargarDescargar
- Compartir
- Idioma
- Debate
Profesionales médicos
Los artículos de referencia profesional están diseñados para uso de los profesionales de la salud. Están escritos por médicos británicos y se basan en pruebas de investigación y directrices británicas y europeas. Puede que alguno de nuestros artículos sobre salud le resulte más útil.
En este artículo:
The Centor score, and its age-adjusted modification known as the McIsaac score, are clinical prediction tools used to estimate the likelihood of group A beta-haemolytic streptococcal pharyngitis in patients presenting with acute sore throat.
They are intended to support antibiotic prescribing decisions and reduce unnecessary antimicrobial use in self-limiting illness.
Seguir leyendo
Clinical context and use
The Centor and McIsaac scores are used in primary care, urgent care, and emergency settings when assessing patients with symptoms of acute pharyngitis or tonsillitis.
They estimate the probability that symptoms are due to streptococcal infection rather than viral illness and help stratify patients into groups where antibiotics are unlikely to help, may be considered, or are more likely to be beneficial.
In UK practice, these scores are often discussed alongside the FeverPAIN score, which is generally preferred in NICE guidance, although Centor-based scores remain widely recognised and used.
Components of the Centor score
Back to contentsThe original Centor score assigns one point for each of the following clinical features:
Tonsillar exudate
Tender anterior cervical lymphadenopathy
History of fever
Absence of cough
The total score ranges from 0 to 4.
Seguir leyendo
The modified Centor (McIsaac) score
Back to contentsThe McIsaac score adjusts the Centor score to account for age, reflecting differences in streptococcal prevalence across age groups.
The age adjustment is applied as follows:
Age 3–14 years: add 1 point
Age 15–44 years: no adjustment
Age 45 years or over: subtract 1 point
The total possible score therefore ranges from −1 to 5.
Interpretation of scores
Back to contentsLower scores indicate a low likelihood of streptococcal pharyngitis, where antibiotics are unlikely to provide benefit. Higher scores suggest an increasing probability of streptococcal infection.
As a general guide used in clinical practice:
Scores of 0 or below indicate very low risk and support a no-antibiotic approach.
Scores of 1–2 indicate low to intermediate risk, where antibiotics are usually not indicated and safety-netting is appropriate.
Scores of 3 indicate moderate risk, where delayed antibiotic prescribing or further testing may be considered.
Scores of 4–5 indicate higher risk, where immediate antibiotics may be appropriate.
Thresholds should always be applied alongside clinical judgement, patient factors, and local antimicrobial stewardship policies.
Seguir leyendo
Evidence base
Back to contentsThe Centor score was originally developed in adult emergency department populations. The McIsaac modification broadened applicability to children and primary care settings.
Evidence suggests that Centor-based scores can reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing when used as part of a structured assessment, although specificity is limited, particularly in low-prevalence settings.
Comparison with FeverPAIN
Back to contentsUnlike FeverPAIN, the Centor and McIsaac scores do not include symptom duration or explicitly account for viral features such as coryza. This can reduce their discriminatory value in early presentations of sore throat.
For this reason, NICE guidance generally favours FeverPAIN in UK primary care, although Centor-based scores remain acceptable and are still widely used in practice and education.
Role in antimicrobial stewardship
Back to contentsAcute sore throat remains a common driver of antibiotic prescribing, despite most cases being viral and self-limiting.
The Centor and McIsaac scores support antimicrobial stewardship by providing a structured framework for decision-making, reducing variation in prescribing behaviour, supporting delayed prescription strategies, and helping clinicians explain management decisions.
Limitations and clinical judgement
Back to contentsCentor-based scores do not diagnose streptococcal infection and should not be used in isolation.
They should be applied cautiously in patients with immunosuppression, significant comorbidity, red flag symptoms such as airway compromise or systemic toxicity, recurrent or atypical presentations, or suspected complications such as peritonsillar abscess.
They are not designed to guide management of severe illness or complications.
Practical use in consultation
Back to contentsUsing a recognised scoring system can support documentation, audit, and shared decision-making. Recording the score may also help justify delayed or no-antibiotic strategies in line with antimicrobial stewardship principles.
Regardless of score, patients should receive clear advice on symptom control, expected illness duration, and when to seek further medical review.
Seguir leyendo
Historia del artículo
La información de esta página ha sido redactada y revisada por médicos cualificados.
8 Feb 2026 | Publicado originalmente
Autores:
Equipo informático de pacientes

Pregunte, comparta, conecte.
Explore debates, formule preguntas y comparta experiencias sobre cientos de temas de salud.

¿Se encuentra mal?
Evalúe sus síntomas en línea de forma gratuita