Timsit Jean-François, Fosse Jean-Philippe, Troché Gilles, De Lassence Arnaud, Alberti Corinne, Garrouste-Orgeas Maïté, Bornstain Caroline, Adrie Christophe, Cheval Christine, Chevret Sylvie
Service de Réanimation Polyvalente, Hôpital St Joseph, Paris, France.
Crit Care Med. 2002 Sep;30(9):2003-13. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200209000-00009.
The Logistic Organ Dysfunction (LOD) score has been proved effective in evaluating severity during the first day in an intensive care unit but has not been evaluated later. To evaluate attributable mortality related to nosocomial events, organ dysfunction scores that remain accurate throughout the intensive care unit stay are needed. The objective of this study was to evaluate how accurately daily LOD scoring predicts mortality comparatively with daily Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scoring.
Prospective multicenter study.
Six intensive care units in France.
A total of 1685 patients with intensive care unit stays longer than 48 hrs were included in this study (511 hospital deaths). Median age was 66 yrs, and median Simplified Acute Physiology Score II at admission was 38. For each patient, a senior physician recorded the variables needed to compute organ dysfunction scores daily throughout the intensive care unit stay.
None.
SOFA and LOD scores were computed daily during the first 7 days. Calibration was evaluated based on goodness-of-fit by the Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-square statistic (lower chi-square values and higher values indicate better fit) and discrimination based on the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) area under the curve (AUC; a ROC-AUC of 1 indicates faultless discrimination and a ROC-AUC of 0.5 indicates the effects of chance alone). Because calibration of both scores was poor at all time points ( p<.001), customization was performed using the total score (model 1) or separate introduction of each dysfunction (model 2). The performance of customized LOD and SOFA scores on a given day in predicting mortality was assessed in those patients who spent at least one more calendar day in the intensive care unit. The original LOD and SOFA scores had satisfactory ROC-AUC values (0.720 to 0.766). Internal consistency of both scores was acceptable ( p< 10(-4) for each organ dysfunction). After customization, the original scores calibrated well between days 1 and 7. Discrimination by both scores was better with model 2 (AUC-ROC, 0.729-0.784).
Daily LOD and SOFA scores showed good accuracy and internal consistency, and they could be used to adjust severity for events occurring in the intensive care unit.
逻辑器官功能障碍(LOD)评分已被证明在评估重症监护病房第一天的病情严重程度方面有效,但尚未在之后进行评估。为了评估与医院感染事件相关的归因死亡率,需要在整个重症监护病房住院期间都保持准确的器官功能障碍评分。本研究的目的是比较每日LOD评分与每日序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分在预测死亡率方面的准确性。
前瞻性多中心研究。
法国的六个重症监护病房。
本研究共纳入1685例在重症监护病房住院时间超过48小时的患者(511例医院死亡)。中位年龄为66岁,入院时简化急性生理学评分II的中位数为38。对于每位患者,一名高级医师在整个重症监护病房住院期间每天记录计算器官功能障碍评分所需的变量。
无。
在最初7天内每天计算SOFA和LOD评分。根据拟合优度通过Hosmer-Lemeshow卡方统计量评估校准情况(卡方值越低且值越高表示拟合越好),并根据曲线下面积(AUC)通过受试者工作特征(ROC)评估辨别能力(ROC-AUC为1表示完美辨别,ROC-AUC为0.5表示仅为随机效应)。由于在所有时间点两种评分的校准都很差(p<0.001),因此使用总分(模型1)或分别引入每种功能障碍(模型2)进行定制。在那些在重症监护病房至少多住一个日历日的患者中,评估定制的LOD和SOFA评分在某一天预测死亡率的表现。原始的LOD和SOFA评分具有令人满意的ROC-AUC值(0.720至0.766)。两种评分的内部一致性均可接受(每种器官功能障碍的p<10⁻⁴)。定制后,原始评分在第1天至第7天校准良好。两种评分采用模型2时辨别能力更好(AUC-ROC,0.729-0.784)。
每日LOD和SOFA评分显示出良好的准确性和内部一致性,可用于调整重症监护病房发生事件的严重程度。