• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[远距离医院间转运。严重程度评分系统的准确性]

[Long distance interhospital transport. Accuracy of severity scoring system].

作者信息

Badia Mariona, Armendáriz Juan José, Vilanova Cecilia, Sarmiento Omar, Serviá Luis, Trujillano Javier

机构信息

Servicio de Medicina Intensiva, Hospital Universitario Arnau de Vilanova, Lleida, España.

出版信息

Med Intensiva. 2009 Jun-Jul;33(5):217-23. doi: 10.1016/s0210-5691(09)71755-3.

DOI:10.1016/s0210-5691(09)71755-3
PMID:19624995
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the hospital mortality risk for patients transported from a regional hospital to its second-level reference hospital using several scoring systems: Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS), Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS), SAPS II and APACHE II.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective observational study of patients transferred from the Sant Hospital in la Seu d'Urgell to the University Hospital Arnau de Vilanova in Lleida, at a distance of 132 km.

PATIENTS

Consecutive cohort of 134 patients transferred between October 2005 and July 2007.

MAIN VARIABLES

Several data were collected, such as variables on demography, stay, severity score, diagnosis on admission, destination service and procedures, such as mechanical ventilation, inotropics, sedation, neuromuscular blockers and antiarrhythmics. Variable of result was hospital mortality.

RESULTS

The average transfer time was 105 +/- 14 minutes; 31.6% of the patients were admitted to an ICU; 16 (11,9%) patients died during hospital stay. The APACHE II and SAPS II scores got significantly higher values in those patients who died. The RAPS and REMS scores showed no significant differences among dead and survivors. The higher the APACHE II and SAPS II scores, the higher the proportion of mortality. The RAPS and REMS scores did not prove to have that tendency. Area under ROC curve was higher for APACHE II (0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.89) and SAPS II (0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.89), compared to those of RAPS (0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.75) and REMS (0.63; 95% CI, 0.49-0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

The severity of illness measured with APACHE II and SAPS II is able to identify those patients with a higher predictive of mortality. It is a priority to have the right previous stabilization and the adequately trained team to provide care during the transfer, when facing lengthy journey times.

摘要

目的

使用多种评分系统评估从地区医院转运至其二级参考医院的患者的院内死亡风险,这些评分系统包括快速急性生理学评分(RAPS)、快速急诊医学评分(REMS)、简化急性生理学评分系统II(SAPS II)和急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统II(APACHE II)。

设计与背景

对从塞尔达乌尔盖尔的圣医院转运至莱里达的阿尔瑙·德维拉诺瓦大学医院(距离132公里)的患者进行前瞻性观察研究。

患者

2005年10月至2007年7月间连续纳入的134例转运患者。

主要变量

收集了多项数据,如人口统计学变量、住院时间、严重程度评分、入院诊断、目的地科室及机械通气、血管活性药物、镇静、神经肌肉阻滞剂和抗心律失常药等治疗措施。结果变量为院内死亡。

结果

平均转运时间为105±14分钟;31.6%的患者入住重症监护病房;16例(11.9%)患者在住院期间死亡。死亡患者的APACHE II和SAPS II评分显著更高。RAPS和REMS评分在死亡患者和存活患者之间无显著差异。APACHE II和SAPS II评分越高,死亡率越高。RAPS和REMS评分未显示出这种趋势。与RAPS(0.59;95%可信区间,0.43 - 0.75)和REMS(0.63;95%可信区间,0.49 - 0.78)相比,APACHE II(0.76;95%可信区间,0.63 - 0.89)和SAPS II(0.78;95%可信区间,0.67 - 0.89)的ROC曲线下面积更高。

结论

用APACHE II和SAPS II衡量的疾病严重程度能够识别出死亡预测性更高的患者。在面临较长转运时间时,进行适当的预先稳定处理以及配备训练有素的团队在转运期间提供护理是当务之急。

相似文献

1
[Long distance interhospital transport. Accuracy of severity scoring system].[远距离医院间转运。严重程度评分系统的准确性]
Med Intensiva. 2009 Jun-Jul;33(5):217-23. doi: 10.1016/s0210-5691(09)71755-3.
2
Comparison of the rapid emergency medicine score and APACHE II in nonsurgical emergency department patients.非手术急诊科患者快速急诊医学评分与急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统II的比较。
Acad Emerg Med. 2003 Oct;10(10):1040-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb00572.x.
3
Predictive accuracy and feasibility of risk stratification scores for 28-day mortality of patients with sepsis in an emergency department.急诊科脓毒症患者28天死亡率风险分层评分的预测准确性及可行性
Eur J Emerg Med. 2015 Oct;22(5):331-7. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000185.
4
Critical care in the emergency department: A physiologic assessment and outcome evaluation.急诊科的重症监护:生理评估与结果评价。
Acad Emerg Med. 2000 Dec;7(12):1354-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb00492.x.
5
[Comparison of national early warning score, rapid emergency medicine score and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score for predicting outcome among emergency severe patients].[比较国家早期预警评分、快速急诊医学评分和急性生理与慢性健康状况评估II评分对急诊重症患者预后的预测作用]
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2017 Dec;29(12):1092-1096. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-4352.2017.12.008.
6
Verification of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation scoring system in a Hong Kong intensive care unit.香港一间重症监护病房中急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估评分系统的验证
Crit Care Med. 1993 May;21(5):698-705. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199305000-00013.
7
Validation of severity scoring systems SAPS II and APACHE II in a single-center population.单中心人群中SAPS II和APACHE II严重程度评分系统的验证
Intensive Care Med. 2000 Dec;26(12):1779-85. doi: 10.1007/s001340000715.
8
Accuracy of a composite score using daily SAPS II and LOD scores for predicting hospital mortality in ICU patients hospitalized for more than 72 h.使用每日序贯器官衰竭评估(SAPS)II 评分和住院死亡概率(LOD)评分的综合评分预测入住重症监护病房(ICU)超过72小时患者医院死亡率的准确性。
Intensive Care Med. 2001 Jun;27(6):1012-21. doi: 10.1007/s001340100961.
9
Scoring systems in cancer patients admitted for an acute complication in a medical intensive care unit.入住医疗重症监护病房并出现急性并发症的癌症患者的评分系统。
Crit Care Med. 2000 Aug;28(8):2786-92. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200008000-00018.
10
Is a specific oncological scoring system better at predicting the prognosis of cancer patients admitted for an acute medical complication in an intensive care unit than general gravity scores?与一般病情严重程度评分相比,特定的肿瘤学评分系统在预测入住重症监护病房并出现急性医疗并发症的癌症患者的预后方面是否更具优势?
Support Care Cancer. 2004 Apr;12(4):234-9. doi: 10.1007/s00520-003-0580-3. Epub 2004 Jan 23.

引用本文的文献

1
A transfer triage tool for COVID-19 mass critical care surges.一种用于新冠疫情大规模重症护理高峰的转运分诊工具。
Sci Rep. 2025 Apr 5;15(1):11726. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-95337-8.
2
Comparative study on the prognosis of critical ill patients transferred from another island compared to those patients transferred from emergency department to intensive care unit.从另一岛屿转来的重症患者与从急诊科转入重症监护病房的患者的预后比较研究。
Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci. 2015 Apr-Jun;5(2):85-8. doi: 10.4103/2229-5151.158393.