Suistomaa M, Kari A, Ruokonen E, Takala J
Critical Care Research Programme, Kuopio University Hospital, Finland.
Intensive Care Med. 2000 Dec;26(12):1773-8. doi: 10.1007/s001340000677.
To study the effect of sampling rate of laboratory and haemodynamic data on severity scorings and predicted risk of hospital death.
Prospective study.
Medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) with 23 beds in a university hospital.
Sixty-nine consecutive emergency admission patients.
Blood samples were drawn from indwelling arterial lines for the laboratory tests of all variables contained in the APACHE II and SAPS II scores at 2-hourly intervals from the time of admission up to 24 h or earlier discharge or death of the patient. Haemodynamic data and temperature were collected either manually by the attending nurse once an hour or as 2-min median values automatically using a Clinical Information Management System (CIMS, Clinisoft, Datex-Ohmeda, Helsinki, Finland). Three sets of severity scores were obtained. (1) "Traditional" scores (haemodynamic data from manual records and laboratory values from tests taken at admission and subsequently on clinical basis only). (2) "CIMS" scores (haemodynamic data from 2-min median values and laboratory values prescribed on clinical indication) and (3) "High rate" scores (haemodynamic data from 2-min median values and laboratory values at 2-hourly intervals). Probability of hospital death was calculated using the SAPS II and APACHE II scores, respectively.
Increasing the sampling rate of haemodynamic monitoring interval to 2-min from once per hour resulted in 7.8 % and 11.5 % increases (p < 0.001) in the APACHE II and SAPS II scores, respectively. The combined effect of increased sampling rate of haemodynamic and laboratory tests on the APACHE II and SAPS II scores was 14.4 % and 14.5 % compared to traditional scores (p < 0.001), respectively. The probability of hospital death increased from 0.23 and 0.21 ("traditional" SAPS II and APACHE II) to 0.31 and 0.25 ("high rate" SAPS II and APACHE II), respectively, and, because eight patients died, standardised mortality ratio (SMR) decreased from 0.53 to 0.41 (SAPS II) and from 0.60 to 0.50 (APACHE II).
Increased sampling rate results in higher scores and lower SMR. Comparisons between hospitals using severity scores are biased due to differences in the sampling rates.
研究实验室检查和血流动力学数据的采样率对病情严重程度评分及预测的医院死亡风险的影响。
前瞻性研究。
一所大学医院中设有23张床位的内科-外科重症监护病房(ICU)。
69例连续急诊入院患者。
从留置动脉导管采集血样,用于检测急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分系统II(APACHE II)和简化急性生理学评分系统II(SAPS II)中的所有变量,从入院时起每2小时采集一次,直至24小时或患者提前出院或死亡。血流动力学数据和体温由主治护士每小时手动采集一次,或使用临床信息管理系统(CIMS,Clinisoft,Datex-Ohmeda,芬兰赫尔辛基)自动采集2分钟中位值。获得了三组病情严重程度评分。(1)“传统”评分(来自人工记录的血流动力学数据以及入院时及随后仅根据临床情况进行检测的实验室值)。(2)“CIMS”评分(来自2分钟中位值的血流动力学数据以及根据临床指征规定的实验室值)和(3)“高采样率”评分(来自2分钟中位值的血流动力学数据以及每2小时一次的实验室值)。分别使用SAPS II和APACHE II评分计算医院死亡概率。
将血流动力学监测间隔的采样率从每小时一次提高到每2分钟一次,APACHE II评分和SAPS II评分分别增加了7.8%和11.5%(p<0.001)。与传统评分相比,血流动力学和实验室检查采样率提高对APACHE II评分和SAPS II评分的综合影响分别为14.4%和14.5%(p<0.001)。医院死亡概率分别从0.23和0.21(“传统”SAPS II和APACHE II)增加到0.31和0.25(“高采样率”SAPS II和APACHE II),并且由于8例患者死亡,标准化死亡比(SMR)从0.53降至0.41(SAPS II),从0.60降至0.50(APACHE II)。
采样率增加会导致评分升高和SMR降低。由于采样率不同,使用病情严重程度评分在医院之间进行比较存在偏差。