Suppr超能文献

使用当前生理评分系统对符合早期目标导向治疗标准和严重脓毒症复苏集束治疗标准的患者进行死亡率预测。

Mortality predictions using current physiologic scoring systems in patients meeting criteria for early goal-directed therapy and the severe sepsis resuscitation bundle.

作者信息

Nguyen H Bryant, Banta Jim E, Cho Thomas W, Van Ginkel Chad, Burroughs Kristy, Wittlake William A, Corbett Stephen W

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, California 92354, USA.

出版信息

Shock. 2008 Jul;30(1):23-8. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0b013e3181673826.

Abstract

Physiologic scoring systems are often used to prognosticate mortality in critically ill patients. This study examined the performance of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS), and Mortality Probability Models (MPM) II0 in predicting in-hospital mortality of patients in the emergency department meeting criteria for early goal-directed therapy and the severe sepsis resuscitation bundle. The discrimination and calibration characteristics of APACHE II, SAPS II, MEDS, and MPM II0 were evaluated. Data are presented as median and quartiles (25th, 75th). Two-hundred forty-six patients aged 68 (52, 81) years were analyzed from a prospectively maintained sepsis registry, with 76.0% of patients in septic shock, 45.5% blood culture positive, and 35.0% in-hospital mortality. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, SAPS II, and MEDS scores were 29 (21, 37), 54 (40, 70), and 13 (11, 16), with predicted mortalities of 64% (40%, 85%), 58% (25%, 84%), and 16% (9%, 39%), respectively. Mortality Probability Models II0 showed a predicted mortality of 60% (27%, 80%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves was 0.73 for APACHE II, 0.71 for SAPS II, 0.60 for MEDS, and 0.72 for MPM II0. The standardized mortality ratios were 0.59, 0.63, 1.68, and 0.64, respectively. Thus, APACHE II, SAPS II, MEDS, and MPM II0 have variable abilities to discriminate early and estimate in-hospital mortality of patients presenting to the emergency department requiring the severe sepsis resuscitation bundle. Adoption of these prognostication tools in this setting may influence therapy and resource use for these patients.

摘要

生理评分系统常用于预测危重症患者的死亡率。本研究评估了急性生理与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE)II、简化急性生理学评分(SAPS)II、急诊科脓毒症死亡率(MEDS)以及死亡率概率模型(MPM)II0在预测符合早期目标导向治疗标准和严重脓毒症复苏集束治疗标准的急诊科患者院内死亡率方面的表现。对APACHE II、SAPS II、MEDS和MPM II0的区分度和校准特征进行了评估。数据以中位数和四分位数(第25、75百分位数)表示。对前瞻性维护的脓毒症登记册中年龄为68(52,81)岁的246例患者进行了分析,其中76.0%的患者处于感染性休克,45.5%血培养阳性,35.0%院内死亡。APACHE II、SAPS II和MEDS评分分别为29(21,37)、54(40,70)和13(11,16),预测死亡率分别为64%(40%,85%)、58%(25%,84%)和16%(9%,39%)。死亡率概率模型II0显示预测死亡率为60%(27%,80%)。APACHE II、SAPS II、MEDS和MPM II0的受试者工作特征曲线下面积分别为0.73、0.71、0.60和0.72。标准化死亡率分别为0.59、0.63、1.68和0.64。因此,APACHE II、SAPS II、MEDS和MPM II0在区分早期情况和估计需要严重脓毒症复苏集束治疗的急诊科患者院内死亡率方面能力各异。在这种情况下采用这些预后工具可能会影响这些患者的治疗和资源利用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验