Suppr超能文献

生命体征在预测危急重症急诊科患者临床结局中的准确性如何。

How accurate are vital signs in predicting clinical outcomes in critically ill emergency department patients.

机构信息

Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University Health System, Singapore.

出版信息

Eur J Emerg Med. 2013 Feb;20(1):27-32. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0b013e32834fdcf3.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the predictive value of pulse rate (PR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure, respiratory rate (RR), oxygen saturation (SaO2), and the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) for cardiac arrest and death in critically ill patients.

METHODS

In total, 1025 patients had vital signs recorded at triage at our Emergency Department and were followed up for three clinical outcomes: cardiac arrest in 72 h, admission to ICU, and death within 30 days. Vital signs were used in univariate and multivariate analyses for outcomes. Age was added in multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

PR, SBP, RR, SaO2, and GCS were significantly associated with cardiac arrest within 72 h, whereas PR, SBP, RR, SaO2, and GCS were associated with death within 30 days. Only PR and GCS were associated with ICU admission. In the multivariate analysis, age, PR (>100) [odds ratio (OR) 1.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00-2.71], SBP (>140; OR 0.41; 95% CI: 0.21-0.79), RR (>20; OR 2.90; 95% CI: 1.67-5.03), and GCS (<15; OR 5.71; 95% CI: 3.40-9.57) were significantly associated with death. Vital signs with age have low sensitivity (cardiac arrest 11.54%, death 22.73%, ICU 12.50%) and high specificity (cardiac arrest 99.28%, death 97.22%, ICU 93.80%). Age and GCS were found to be independent predictors of all three outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Not all vital signs are useful in the prediction of clinical outcomes. Vital signs had high specificity but very low sensitivity as predictors of clinical outcomes. Clinicians should always remember to treat patients and not numbers.

摘要

目的

我们旨在评估脉搏率(PR)、收缩压(SBP)、舒张压、呼吸率(RR)、血氧饱和度(SaO2)和格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)对危重病患者心脏骤停和死亡的预测价值。

方法

共有 1025 名患者在我们的急诊科分诊时记录了生命体征,并对以下三个临床结果进行了随访:72 小时内心脏骤停、入住 ICU 和 30 天内死亡。生命体征用于单变量和多变量分析。年龄在多变量分析中被添加。

结果

PR、SBP、RR、SaO2 和 GCS 与 72 小时内心脏骤停显著相关,而 PR、SBP、RR、SaO2 和 GCS 与 30 天内死亡相关。仅 PR 和 GCS 与 ICU 入院相关。在多变量分析中,年龄、PR(>100)[比值比(OR)1.65;95%置信区间(CI)1.00-2.71]、SBP(>140;OR 0.41;95%CI:0.21-0.79)、RR(>20;OR 2.90;95%CI:1.67-5.03)和 GCS(<15;OR 5.71;95%CI:3.40-9.57)与死亡显著相关。生命体征与年龄的灵敏度较低(心脏骤停 11.54%,死亡 22.73%,ICU 12.50%),特异性较高(心脏骤停 99.28%,死亡 97.22%,ICU 93.80%)。年龄和 GCS 是所有三个结果的独立预测因素。

结论

并非所有生命体征都可用于预测临床结果。生命体征作为预测临床结果的指标具有高特异性,但灵敏度非常低。临床医生在治疗患者时应始终牢记这一点,而不是仅仅关注数字。

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