Byrne James P, Xiong Wei, Gomez David, Mason Stephanie, Karanicolas Paul, Rizoli Sandro, Tien Homer, Nathens Avery B
From the Sunnybrook Research Institute (J.P.B., W.X., D.G., S.M., P.K., H.T., A.B.N), and Department of Surgery (P.K., H.T., A.B.N.), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center; Clinical Epidemiology Program (J.P.B., S.M., P.K., A.B.N), Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Division of General Surgery (J.P.B., D.G., S.M., P.K., H.T., A.B.N., S.R.), Department of Surgery (S.R.), St. Michael's Hospital, and Institute of Medical Science (S.R.), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; and Trauma Quality Improvement Program (W.X., A.B.N.), American College of Surgeons, Chicago, Illinois.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015 Nov;79(5):850-7. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000000843.
Significant variation exists across registries in the criteria used to identify patients with no chance of survival, with potential for profound impact on trauma center mortality. The purpose of this study was to identify the optimal case definition for the unsalvageable patient, for the purpose of exclusion from performance improvement (PI) endeavors.
Data were derived from the American College of Surgeons' Trauma Quality Improvement Program for 2012 to 2013. We proposed three potential case definitions for the unsalvageable patient: (1) no signs of life as determined by local providers (NSOL), (2) prehospital cardiac arrest (PHCA), and (3) a proxy definition (PROXY) based on presenting vital signs, defined as emergency department (ED) heart rate = 0, ED systolic blood pressure = 0, and Glasgow Coma Scale score motor component = 1. Case definitions were compared using standard predictive tests to determine specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) for in-hospital mortality. After the optimal definition was identified, hierarchical logistic regression was used to assess the impact of including unsalvageable patients on trauma center risk-adjusted mortality. The impact on trauma center performance was determined as change in outlier status and performance decile after exclusion of patients who met the optimal case definition.
During the study period, 223,643 patients met inclusion criteria across 192 trauma centers. Overall in-hospital mortality was 7.2%. The PROXY definition had excellent PPV for death, with less than 1% of patients meeting the PROXY criterion surviving. By contrast, NSOL and PHCA had PPVs low enough such that many of these patients went on to live (33% and 10%, respectively). After exclusion of patients who met the PROXY definition, 7% of trauma centers changed performance decile. This change was greatest for patients with penetrating injury and shock, with change in performance decile at 23% and 33% of centers, respectively.
The PROXY case definition has excellent predictive utility to identify patients who, based on presenting vital signs, will go on to die. PROXY should be used to exclude unsalvageable patients from PI endeavors.
各登记处用于识别无生存机会患者的标准存在显著差异,这可能对创伤中心的死亡率产生深远影响。本研究的目的是确定无法挽救患者的最佳病例定义,以便将其排除在绩效改进(PI)工作之外。
数据来源于美国外科医师学会2012年至2013年的创伤质量改进项目。我们提出了三种针对无法挽救患者的潜在病例定义:(1)当地医护人员确定无生命体征(NSOL),(2)院前心脏骤停(PHCA),以及(3)基于就诊时生命体征的替代定义(PROXY),定义为急诊科(ED)心率 = 0、ED收缩压 = 0且格拉斯哥昏迷量表运动评分 = 1。使用标准预测测试比较病例定义,以确定院内死亡率的特异性和阳性预测值(PPV)。确定最佳定义后,使用分层逻辑回归评估纳入无法挽救患者对创伤中心风险调整死亡率的影响。通过排除符合最佳病例定义的患者后异常状态和绩效十分位数的变化来确定对创伤中心绩效的影响。
在研究期间,192个创伤中心的223,643名患者符合纳入标准。总体院内死亡率为7.2%。PROXY定义对死亡具有出色的PPV,符合PROXY标准的患者存活率不到1%。相比之下,NSOL和PHCA的PPV足够低,以至于这些患者中的许多人继续存活(分别为33%和10%)。排除符合PROXY定义的患者后,7%的创伤中心改变了绩效十分位数。这种变化在穿透伤和休克患者中最为明显,分别有23%和33%的中心绩效十分位数发生变化。
PROXY病例定义具有出色的预测效用,可识别基于就诊时生命体征将会死亡的患者。应使用PROXY将无法挽救的患者排除在PI工作之外。