• 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

简化的MISSED评分在急诊科内部的验证

Internal emergency department validation of the simplified MISSED score.

作者信息

Sivayoham Narani, Holmes Paul, Cecconi Maurizio, Rhodes Andrew

机构信息

Departments of aEmergency Medicine bIntensive Care Medicine, St George's Healthcare NHS Trust and St George's University of London, London, UK.

出版信息

Eur J Emerg Med. 2015 Oct;22(5):321-6. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000176.

DOI:10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000176
PMID:25010926
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The MISSED score was derived and validated in emergency department (ED) patients with sepsis who were admitted to the ICU. This score has now been refined and simplified. The independent variables associated with mortality are age at least 65 years, serum albumin 27 g/l or less, and an international normalized ratio at least 1.3. The simplified MISSED score ranges from 0 to 3 depending on the number of variables present.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective is to validate the simplified MISSED score for predicting all-cause mortality in the ED population admitted with sepsis. The secondary end-point is to validate the risk stratification for ICU admission.

METHODS

This is a pragmatic retrospective study of prospectively collected data. ED patients admitted with a diagnosis of sepsis in the year 2012 were studied. Those on warfarin were excluded. The simplified MISSED score was calculated for each patient. The test characteristics for mortality of the simplified MISSED score and the odds ratios of the high-risk groups for the secondary end-point were calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 674 patients, including 65 deaths, were studied. The area under the curve for the simplified MISSED score was 0.74 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.77; P<0.0001]. The test characteristics for mortality were as follows: sensitivity 93.9% (95% CI 85-98.3), specificity 37.9% (95% CI 34.1-41.9), positive predictive value 13.9% (95% CI 10.8-17.5), and negative predictive value 98.3% (95% CI 95.7-99.5). The odds ratio for mortality for a score 2 or more was 5.01 (95% CI 2.93-8.57; P<0.0001), and that for ICU admission was 3.00 (95% CI 1.70-5.28; P=0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The simplified MISSED score could be used to risk stratify septic patients in the ED.

摘要

背景

MISSED评分是在入住重症监护病房(ICU)的急诊科(ED)脓毒症患者中得出并验证的。现在该评分已得到完善和简化。与死亡率相关的独立变量为年龄至少65岁、血清白蛋白27g/l或更低以及国际标准化比值至少1.3。简化的MISSED评分根据存在的变量数量在0至3之间。

目的

主要目的是验证简化的MISSED评分对预测因脓毒症入住ED的人群全因死亡率的有效性。次要终点是验证ICU入院的风险分层。

方法

这是一项对前瞻性收集的数据进行的务实回顾性研究。对2012年诊断为脓毒症的ED患者进行了研究。服用华法林的患者被排除。为每位患者计算简化的MISSED评分。计算简化的MISSED评分的死亡率检验特征以及次要终点高危组的比值比。

结果

共研究了674例患者,包括65例死亡患者。简化的MISSED评分的曲线下面积为0.74[95%置信区间(CI)0.70 - 0.77;P<0.0001]。死亡率的检验特征如下:敏感性93.9%(95%CI 85 - 98.3),特异性37.9%(95%CI 34.1 - 41.9),阳性预测值13.9%(95%CI 10.8 - 17.5),阴性预测值98.3%(95%CI 95.7 - 99.5)。评分2分及以上的死亡率比值比为5.01(95%CI 2.93 - 8.57;P<0.0001),ICU入院的比值比为3.00(95%CI 1.70 - 5.28;P = 0.0001)。

结论

简化的MISSED评分可用于对ED中的脓毒症患者进行风险分层。

相似文献

1
Internal emergency department validation of the simplified MISSED score.简化的MISSED评分在急诊科内部的验证
Eur J Emerg Med. 2015 Oct;22(5):321-6. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000176.
2
External validation of the MISSED score to predict mortality in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock in the emergency department.急诊科用于预测严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者死亡率的MISSED评分的外部验证
Eur J Emerg Med. 2015 Oct;22(5):327-30. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000156.
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
The MISSED score, a new scoring system to predict Mortality In Severe Sepsis in the Emergency Department: a derivation and validation study.MISSED 评分:一种新的评分系统,用于预测急诊科严重脓毒症患者的死亡率:一项推导和验证研究。
Eur J Emerg Med. 2014 Feb;21(1):30-6. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0b013e328364a8d4.
5
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.
6
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.
7
Usefulness of the Mortality in Severe Sepsis in the Emergency Department score in an urban tertiary care hospital.城市三级护理医院急诊科严重脓毒症死亡率评分的效用
Am J Emerg Med. 2016 Jun;34(6):1117-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2016.03.037. Epub 2016 Mar 17.
8
The use of impedance cardiography in predicting mortality in emergency department patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.阻抗心动描记术在预测急诊科严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者死亡率中的应用。
Acad Emerg Med. 2010 Apr;17(4):452-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00705.x.
9
An observational cohort study of the performance of the REDS score compared to the SIRS criteria, NEWS2, CURB65, SOFA, MEDS and PIRO scores to risk-stratify emergency department suspected sepsis.一项观察性队列研究比较了 REDS 评分与 SIRS 标准、NEWS2、CURB65、SOFA、MEDS 和 PIRO 评分在风险分层急诊疑似脓毒症方面的性能。
Ann Med. 2021 Dec;53(1):1863-1874. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2021.1992495.
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
An observational cohort study of the performance of the REDS score compared to the SIRS criteria, NEWS2, CURB65, SOFA, MEDS and PIRO scores to risk-stratify emergency department suspected sepsis.一项观察性队列研究比较了 REDS 评分与 SIRS 标准、NEWS2、CURB65、SOFA、MEDS 和 PIRO 评分在风险分层急诊疑似脓毒症方面的性能。
Ann Med. 2021 Dec;53(1):1863-1874. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2021.1992495.
2
The REDS score: a new scoring system to risk-stratify emergency department suspected sepsis: a derivation and validation study.REDS 评分:一种用于风险分层急诊科疑似脓毒症的新评分系统:一项推导和验证研究。
BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 26;9(8):e030922. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030922.