• 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

疾病严重程度评分对指导急诊科严重脓毒症或脓毒性休克患者处置的作用。

Performance of illness severity scores to guide disposition of emergency department patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Eur J Emerg Med. 2012 Oct;19(5):316-22. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0b013e32834d6efb.

DOI:10.1097/MEJ.0b013e32834d6efb
PMID:22008587
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the number of emergency department (ED) patients with severe sepsis who are admitted to the ICU and to assess whether the predisposition, infection, response and organ failure (PIRO) score can be used as a clinical decision-making tool for guiding the disposition of ED sepsis patients to wards or the ICU.

METHODS

This is a prospective study including ED patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. The PIRO score and in-hospital mortality were assessed in patients admitted to wards and ICUs. The sensitivity and specificity of the PIRO score and clinical judgement of the ED physician for guiding adequate disposition to wards or the ICU were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 47 of 153 patients were admitted to the ICU. Thirty-nine of 106 ward admissions had a 'do not resuscitate' status (not included in analysis). Mortality was 1.5 and 21% in patients initially admitted to a ward and the ICU, respectively. Unanticipated transfer from the ward to the ICU occurred in eight of 67 patients, resulting in higher mortality (38%, P=0.002, false negatives). Nine surviving patients admitted to the ICU for mere observation for less than 1 day were defined as false positives. Sensitivity of clinical judgement and of PIRO score (cut-off 9.5) alone or combined with clinical judgement were 0.92, 0.75 and 0.98, respectively (P<0.001). For specificity, these were 0.71, 0.56 and 0.40, respectively (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Two-thirds of ED patients with severe sepsis were admitted to the ward, of whom ∼13% clinically deteriorated, resulting in ICU admission and higher mortality. The PIRO score adds little value over clinical judgement in guiding adequate disposition to wards or the ICU.

摘要

目的

确定收入重症加强护理病房(ICU)的严重脓毒症急诊科患者人数,并评估易感性、感染、反应和器官衰竭(PIRO)评分是否可用作指导急诊科脓毒症患者入住病房或 ICU 的临床决策工具。

方法

这是一项纳入严重脓毒症和感染性休克急诊科患者的前瞻性研究。评估入住病房和 ICU 的患者的 PIRO 评分和院内死亡率。评估 PIRO 评分和急诊科医师临床判断对指导充分入住病房或 ICU 的灵敏度和特异性。

结果

153 例患者中共有 47 例收入 ICU。106 例病房入院患者中有 39 例(不包括在分析中)具有“不复苏”状态。最初收入病房和 ICU 的患者死亡率分别为 1.5%和 21%。67 例患者中有 8 例从病房意外转入 ICU,导致死亡率更高(38%,P=0.002,假阴性)。9 例收入 ICU 单纯为观察而入住不足 1 天的存活患者被定义为假阳性。临床判断和 PIRO 评分(临界值 9.5)单独或与临床判断联合的灵敏度分别为 0.92、0.75 和 0.98(P<0.001)。特异性分别为 0.71、0.56 和 0.40(P<0.001)。

结论

三分之二的严重脓毒症急诊科患者收入病房,其中约 13%临床恶化,导致 ICU 入院和更高的死亡率。PIRO 评分在指导充分入住病房或 ICU 方面,相对于临床判断,附加值有限。

相似文献

1
Performance of illness severity scores to guide disposition of emergency department patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.疾病严重程度评分对指导急诊科严重脓毒症或脓毒性休克患者处置的作用。
Eur J Emerg Med. 2012 Oct;19(5):316-22. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0b013e32834d6efb.
2
The prognostic performance of the predisposition, infection, response and organ failure (PIRO) classification in high-risk and low-risk emergency department sepsis populations: comparison with clinical judgement and sepsis category.易感性、感染、反应和器官功能衰竭(PIRO)分类在急诊科高危和低危脓毒症患者中的预后评估表现:与临床判断和脓毒症类别比较
Emerg Med J. 2014 Apr;31(4):292-300. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2012-202165. Epub 2013 Feb 14.
3
Sepsis patients in the emergency department: stratification using the Clinical Impression Score, Predisposition, Infection, Response and Organ dysfunction score or quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score?急诊科脓毒症患者:使用临床印象评分、易感性、感染、反应和器官功能障碍评分或快速序贯器官衰竭评估评分进行分层?
Eur J Emerg Med. 2018 Oct;25(5):328-334. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000460.
4
Survival analysis of 314 episodes of sepsis in medical intensive care unit in university hospital: impact of intensive care unit performance and antimicrobial therapy.大学医院医学重症监护病房314例脓毒症发作的生存分析:重症监护病房性能及抗菌治疗的影响
Croat Med J. 2006 Jun;47(3):385-97.
5
Comparison of Predisposition, Insult/Infection, Response, and Organ dysfunction, Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation II, and Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis in patients meeting criteria for early goal-directed therapy and the severe sepsis resuscitation bundle.比较符合早期目标导向治疗和严重脓毒症复苏包标准的急诊脓毒症患者的易感性、损伤/感染、反应和器官功能障碍、急性生理学和慢性健康评估 II 以及死亡率。
J Crit Care. 2012 Aug;27(4):362-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2011.08.013. Epub 2011 Oct 26.
6
PIRO score for community-acquired pneumonia: a new prediction rule for assessment of severity in intensive care unit patients with community-acquired pneumonia.社区获得性肺炎的PIRO评分:一种用于评估重症监护病房社区获得性肺炎患者严重程度的新预测规则。
Crit Care Med. 2009 Feb;37(2):456-62. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318194b021.
7
Prognostic scores for early stratification of septic patients admitted to an emergency department-high dependency unit.急诊科高依赖病房收治的脓毒症患者早期分层的预后评分
Eur J Emerg Med. 2014 Aug;21(4):254-9. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000075.
8
Comparison of PIRO, SOFA, and MEDS scores for predicting mortality in emergency department patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.比较PIRO、序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)和急诊医学严重程度评分(MEDS)对急诊科严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者死亡率的预测价值。
Acad Emerg Med. 2014 Nov;21(11):1257-63. doi: 10.1111/acem.12515.
9
Serum lactate is associated with mortality in severe sepsis independent of organ failure and shock.血清乳酸水平与严重脓毒症患者的死亡率相关,且独立于器官功能衰竭和休克。
Crit Care Med. 2009 May;37(5):1670-7. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31819fcf68.
10
The outcome of patients with sepsis and septic shock presenting to emergency departments in Australia and New Zealand.在澳大利亚和新西兰的急诊科就诊的脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者的治疗结果。
Crit Care Resusc. 2007 Mar;9(1):8-18.

引用本文的文献

1
The association between emergency department length of stay and hospital length of stay: an observational multi-centre cohort study.急诊科住院时间与医院住院时间之间的关联:一项多中心观察性队列研究。
Intern Emerg Med. 2025 May 26. doi: 10.1007/s11739-025-03964-w.
2
Age-adjusted interpretation of biomarkers of renal function and homeostasis, inflammation, and circulation in Emergency Department patients.急诊科患者肾功能和稳态、炎症和循环的年龄调整生物标志物解读。
Sci Rep. 2022 Jan 28;12(1):1556. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-05485-4.
3
Conceptualizations of clinical decision-making: a scoping review in geriatric emergency medicine.
临床决策概念化:老年急诊医学中的范围综述。
BMC Emerg Med. 2020 Sep 14;20(1):73. doi: 10.1186/s12873-020-00367-2.
4
PIRO, SOFA and MEDS Scores in Predicting One-Month Mortality of Sepsis Patients; a Diagnostic Accuracy Study.序贯器官衰竭评估(PIRO)、序贯器官衰竭评分(SOFA)及多器官功能障碍评分(MEDS)在预测脓毒症患者1个月死亡率中的应用;一项诊断准确性研究
Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2019 Oct 20;7(1):e59. eCollection 2019.
5
Central Venous Access Capability and Critical Care Telemedicine Decreases Inter-Hospital Transfer Among Severe Sepsis Patients: A Mixed Methods Design.中心静脉置管能力和重症监护远程医疗减少严重脓毒症患者的医院间转院:混合方法设计。
Crit Care Med. 2019 May;47(5):659-667. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003686.
6
The severity of psychiatric disorders.精神疾病的严重程度。
World Psychiatry. 2018 Oct;17(3):258-275. doi: 10.1002/wps.20569.
7
Initial disease severity and quality of care of emergency department sepsis patients who are older or younger than 70 years of age.70岁及以上或以下急诊科脓毒症患者的初始疾病严重程度及医疗质量。
PLoS One. 2017 Sep 25;12(9):e0185214. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185214. eCollection 2017.
8
The most commonly used disease severity scores are inappropriate for risk stratification of older emergency department sepsis patients: an observational multi-centre study.最常用的疾病严重程度评分不适用于老年急诊科脓毒症患者的风险分层:一项观察性多中心研究。
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017 Sep 11;25(1):91. doi: 10.1186/s13049-017-0436-3.
9
Sepsis patients in the emergency department: stratification using the Clinical Impression Score, Predisposition, Infection, Response and Organ dysfunction score or quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score?急诊科脓毒症患者:使用临床印象评分、易感性、感染、反应和器官功能障碍评分或快速序贯器官衰竭评估评分进行分层?
Eur J Emerg Med. 2018 Oct;25(5):328-334. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000460.
10
Evaluation of community-acquired sepsis by PIRO system in the emergency department.急诊科 PIRO 系统评估社区获得性脓毒症。
Intern Emerg Med. 2013 Sep;8(6):521-7. doi: 10.1007/s11739-013-0969-z. Epub 2013 Jun 16.