• 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

确定格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分为 15 的颅脑损伤患者中 CT 扫描异常的预测因素。

Identifying predictors of an abnormal computed tomographic scan among patients with a head injury and a Glasgow Coma Scale of 15.

机构信息

Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.

出版信息

Eur J Emerg Med. 2013 Apr;20(2):86-90. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0b013e328351e5f4.

DOI:10.1097/MEJ.0b013e328351e5f4
PMID:22387753
Abstract

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the proportions of patients with a head injury and a Glasgow Coma Scale of 15 with an abnormal computed tomographic (CT) head scan and to explore its predictors.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study on adult patients with such injuries. Patients were risk stratified to undergo a head CT and subsequently discharged or admitted to a neurosurgical (NS) intensive care unit (ICU)/high-dependency (HD) NS or general ward (GW) and observation ward [Emergency Diagnostic and Therapeutic Centre (EDTC)]. The primary outcomes were proportions of abnormal CT results and NS interventions. The secondary outcomes included rates of disposition status, and the distribution and predictors of abnormal CT results. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. We identified predictors of an abnormal head CT using logistic regression and reported their odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

We reviewed 2038 complete records. A total of 1088 scans were performed; 115 (10.6%) were abnormal. There were 962 (47.2%) discharges and 1076 (52.8%) admissions; six (0.6%) required NS interventions and ICU/HD admission. The proportions of GW admissions (n=1070) were as follows: EDTC 78.0%; NS 18.0%; and medical 4.0%. The proportions of abnormal CT results among these disposition statuses were as follows: NS ICU/HD 6/6 (100%); EDTC 59/835 (7.1%); NS GW 47/188 (25.0%); and medical GW 3/33 (9.1%). We identified three predictors, namely, vomiting [OR 2.23 (1.39-3.58)]; loss of consciousness [OR 1.56 (1.03-2.36)]; and amnesia [OR 2.08 (1.30-3.31)].

CONCLUSION

Abnormal CT and NS interventions were infrequent in patients with a head injury and a Glasgow Coma Scale of 15. We identified three predictors of abnormal head CTs.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在确定格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分为 15 分的颅脑损伤患者中,行头颅 CT 检查结果异常的比例,并探讨其预测因素。

方法

我们对颅脑损伤的成年患者进行了回顾性研究。患者根据风险分层行头颅 CT 检查,随后分为出院、转入神经外科(NS)重症监护病房(ICU)/高依赖(HD)NS 病房、转入普通病房(GW)和观察病房[急救诊断治疗中心(EDTC)]。主要结局为异常 CT 结果和 NS 干预的比例。次要结局包括处置状态的发生率,异常 CT 结果的分布和预测因素。数据采用描述性统计分析。我们采用逻辑回归分析确定异常头颅 CT 的预测因素,并报告其优势比(OR)和 95%置信区间(CI)。

结果

我们回顾了 2038 份完整病历。共进行了 1088 次扫描,其中 115 次(10.6%)结果异常。出院 962 例(47.2%),入院 1076 例(52.8%),6 例(0.6%)需要 NS 干预和 ICU/HD 入院。GW 入院(n=1070)的分布如下:EDTC 78.0%;NS 18.0%;和内科 4.0%。这些处置状态的异常 CT 结果比例如下:NS ICU/HD 6/6(100%);EDTC 59/835(7.1%);NS GW 47/188(25.0%);和内科 GW 3/33(9.1%)。我们确定了三个预测因素,即呕吐[OR 2.23(1.39-3.58)];意识丧失[OR 1.56(1.03-2.36)];和遗忘[OR 2.08(1.30-3.31)]。

结论

格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分为 15 分的颅脑损伤患者中,异常 CT 和 NS 干预并不常见。我们确定了三个异常头颅 CT 的预测因素。

相似文献

1
Identifying predictors of an abnormal computed tomographic scan among patients with a head injury and a Glasgow Coma Scale of 15.确定格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分为 15 的颅脑损伤患者中 CT 扫描异常的预测因素。
Eur J Emerg Med. 2013 Apr;20(2):86-90. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0b013e328351e5f4.
2
Emergent operation for isolated severe traumatic brain injury: Does time matter?孤立性重度创伤性脑损伤的急诊手术:时间重要吗?
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015 Nov;79(5):838-42. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000000719.
3
Are routine repeat imaging and intensive care unit admission necessary in mild traumatic brain injury?轻度创伤性脑损伤是否需要常规重复影像学检查和入住重症监护病房?
J Neurosurg. 2012 Mar;116(3):549-57. doi: 10.3171/2011.11.JNS111092. Epub 2011 Dec 23.
4
The acute care surgery model: managing traumatic brain injury without an inpatient neurosurgical consultation.急症外科模式:在没有神经外科住院会诊的情况下治疗创伤性脑损伤。
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013 Jul;75(1):102-5; discussion 105. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3182946667.
5
Outcomes of a nontransfer protocol for mild traumatic brain injury with abnormal head computed tomography in a rural hospital setting.农村医院环境中头部计算机断层扫描异常的轻度创伤性脑损伤非转院方案的结果。
World Neurosurg. 2014 Jul-Aug;82(1-2):e319-23. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2013.11.008. Epub 2013 Nov 12.
6
Mild head injury: revisited.轻度头部损伤:再探讨
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2004 Oct;146(10):1075-82; discussion 1082-3. doi: 10.1007/s00701-004-0335-z.
7
Computed tomography-estimated specific gravity at hospital admission predicts 6-month outcome in mild-to-moderate traumatic brain injury patients admitted to the intensive care unit.入院时计算机断层估计比重可预测入住重症监护病房的轻中度创伤性脑损伤患者 6 个月的结局。
Anesth Analg. 2012 May;114(5):1026-33. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e318249fe7a. Epub 2012 Feb 24.
8
The predictive value of field versus arrival Glasgow Coma Scale score and TRISS calculations in moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury.现场与入院时格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分及创伤和损伤严重度评分计算在中重度创伤性脑损伤中的预测价值。
J Trauma. 2006 May;60(5):985-90. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000205860.96209.1c.
9
Changing paradigms in the management of 2184 patients with traumatic brain injury.改变 2184 例创伤性脑损伤患者管理模式。
Ann Surg. 2015 Sep;262(3):440-8; discussion 446-8. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001418.
10
Predictors of outcome in severely head-injured children.重度颅脑损伤儿童预后的预测因素
Crit Care Med. 2001 Mar;29(3):534-40. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200103000-00011.