• 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

急诊科死亡率预测:临床预测工具的外部验证与推导

PREDICTing Mortality in the Emergency Department: External Validation and Derivation of a Clinical Prediction Tool.

作者信息

Moman Rajat N, Loprinzi Brauer Caitlin E, Kelsey Katherine M, Havyer Rachel D, Lohse Christine M, Bellolio M Fernanda

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Rochester, MN.

Mayo Clinic, and the Mayo Clinic School of Medicine, Rochester, MN.

出版信息

Acad Emerg Med. 2017 Jul;24(7):822-831. doi: 10.1111/acem.13197. Epub 2017 May 29.

DOI:10.1111/acem.13197
PMID:28401622
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Choosing Wisely campaign has called for better engagement of palliative and hospice care services for patients in the emergency department (ED). PREDICT is a clinical prediction tool that was derived in an Australian ED cohort. It assesses a patient's risk of mortality at 1 year to select those who would benefit from advanced care planning. Such goals-of-care discussion can improve patients' ability to communicate what they want out of their healthcare and, in cases of end of life, potentially reduce the number of futile interventions. Using a cutoff of 13 points, PREDICT had a reported 95.3% specificity and 53.9% sensitivity for 1-year mortality. We externally validated PREDICT and derived a simpler modified PREDICT tool to systematically identify high-risk patients eligible for goals-of-care discussions and palliative care consultation in the ED.

METHODS

This was an observational cohort study of a random sample of 927 patients aged 55+ seen in the ED in 2014. We identified advance healthcare directives (AHDs) on file. We summarized diagnostic accuracy of the clinical tool to predict 1-year mortality using sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC). We refined PREDICT using multivariable modeling. We followed reporting guidelines including STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) for cohort studies and Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD).

RESULTS

A total of 927 patients were included: 55.0% were male, 63 (7.0%) were nursing home residents, 389 (42.0%) patients had an AHD in their medical record at the time of ED visit, and 245 (26.4%) were deceased at 1 year. Of the 780 patients with PREDICT scores < 13, a total of 164 (21.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 18.3-24.1) were deceased at 1 year, and of the 147 patients with PREDICT scores ≥ 13, a total of 81 (55.1%; 95% CI = 46.7-63.2) were deceased at 1 year. The AUC of the PREDICT score was 0.717 (95% CI = 0.680-0.754), sensitivity was 33.1% (95% CI = 27.3-39.4), and specificity was 90.3% (95% CI = 87.8-92.4) to predict 1-year mortality. The modified PREDICT tool resulted in an AUC of 0.709 (95% CI = 0.671-0.747). We decided to select this model as the preferred model, as the variable of intensive care unit (ICU) admission with multiorgan failure can be difficult to assess in the ED and may delay advanced care planning. Reweighting the score did not improve fit or the AUC, so points assigned to each variable were not adjusted.

CONCLUSION

PREDICT is an easy tool to administer to be able to identify patients who are at high risk of 1-year mortality and who could benefit from AHDs, goals-of-care discussion, and when appropriate in the context of an end-of-life setting, palliative medicine consultation. External validation of PREDICT was successful in our population. We simplified PREDICT and derived a new tool, the modified PREDICT minus ICU tool, without significantly altering the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC for death at 1 year. The next steps include external validation of the newly derived rule and prospective implementation.

摘要

背景

“明智选择”运动呼吁急诊科更好地为患者提供姑息治疗和临终关怀服务。PREDICT是一种临床预测工具,源自澳大利亚急诊科队列研究。它评估患者1年内的死亡风险,以筛选出能从预立医疗计划中受益的患者。这种医疗目标讨论可以提高患者表达自身医疗需求的能力,在临终情况下,还可能减少无效干预的数量。据报告,PREDICT以13分为临界值时,对1年死亡率的特异性为95.3%,敏感性为53.9%。我们对PREDICT进行了外部验证,并推导出一个更简单的改良PREDICT工具,以系统地识别急诊科中符合医疗目标讨论和姑息治疗咨询条件的高危患者。

方法

这是一项对2014年在急诊科就诊的927名55岁及以上患者的随机样本进行的观察性队列研究。我们确定了存档的预立医疗指示(AHD)。我们使用敏感性、特异性和曲线下面积(AUC)总结了该临床工具预测1年死亡率的诊断准确性。我们使用多变量模型对PREDICT进行了优化。我们遵循了报告指南,包括队列研究的加强流行病学观察性研究报告(STROBE)和诊断准确性报告标准(STARD)。

结果

共纳入927名患者:55.0%为男性,63名(7.0%)是养老院居民,389名(42.0%)患者在急诊科就诊时病历中有AHD,245名(26.4%)在1年后死亡。在PREDICT评分<13的780名患者中,共有164名(21.0%;95%置信区间[CI]=18.3 - 24.1)在1年后死亡;在PREDICT评分≥13的147名患者中,共有81名(55.1%;95%CI = 46.7 - 63.2)在1年后死亡。PREDICT评分的AUC为0.717(95%CI = 0.680 - 0.754),预测1年死亡率的敏感性为33.1%(95%CI = 27.3 - 39.4),特异性为9

相似文献

1
PREDICTing Mortality in the Emergency Department: External Validation and Derivation of a Clinical Prediction Tool.急诊科死亡率预测:临床预测工具的外部验证与推导
Acad Emerg Med. 2017 Jul;24(7):822-831. doi: 10.1111/acem.13197. Epub 2017 May 29.
2
PREDICT: a diagnostic accuracy study of a tool for predicting mortality within one year: who should have an advance healthcare directive?PREDICT:一项预测一年内死亡率工具的诊断准确性研究:谁应该拥有预先医疗指示?
Palliat Med. 2015 Jan;29(1):31-7. doi: 10.1177/0269216314540734. Epub 2014 Jul 25.
3
The comparison of modified early warning score with rapid emergency medicine score: a prospective multicentre observational cohort study on medical and surgical patients presenting to emergency department.改良早期预警评分与快速急诊医学评分的比较:一项针对就诊于急诊科的内科和外科患者的前瞻性多中心观察性队列研究。
Emerg Med J. 2014 Jun;31(6):476-81. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2013-202444. Epub 2013 Apr 6.
4
Predicting Early Rapid Response Team Activation in Patients Admitted From the Emergency Department: The PeRRT Score.预测急诊科收治患者早期快速反应团队的启动:PeRRT评分
Acad Emerg Med. 2017 Feb;24(2):216-225. doi: 10.1111/acem.13077. Epub 2017 Jan 17.
5
Vital Signs Predict Rapid-Response Team Activation Within Twelve Hours of Emergency Department Admission.生命体征可预测急诊科入院后12小时内快速反应小组的启动。
West J Emerg Med. 2016 May;17(3):324-30. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2016.2.28501. Epub 2016 Apr 26.
6
THERM: the Resuscitation Management score. A prognostic tool to identify critically ill patients in the emergency department.THERM:复苏管理评分。一种用于识别急诊科危重症患者的预后评估工具。
Emerg Med J. 2014 Oct;31(10):803-7. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2013-202772. Epub 2013 Jul 3.
7
Prospective Validation of a Checklist to Predict Short-term Death in Older Patients After Emergency Department Admission in Australia and Ireland.澳大利亚和爱尔兰急诊老年患者短期死亡预测清单的前瞻性验证。
Acad Emerg Med. 2019 Jun;26(6):610-620. doi: 10.1111/acem.13664. Epub 2018 Dec 14.
8
Common laboratory tests predict imminent medical emergency team calls, intensive care unit admission or death in emergency department patients.常见的实验室检查可预测急诊科即将发生的医疗急救团队呼叫、入住重症监护病房或死亡。
Emerg Med Australas. 2013 Apr;25(2):132-9. doi: 10.1111/1742-6723.12040. Epub 2013 Jan 11.
9
Recognizing critically ill children with a modified pediatric early warning score at the emergency department, a feasibility study.在急诊科使用改良儿科早期预警评分识别危重症患儿的可行性研究。
Eur J Pediatr. 2019 Feb;178(2):229-234. doi: 10.1007/s00431-018-3285-9. Epub 2018 Nov 9.
10
Predictive Value of Modified Early Warning Scoring System for Identifying Critical Patients with Malignancy in Emergency Department.改良早期预警评分系统对急诊科恶性肿瘤危急患者的预测价值。
Arch Iran Med. 2020 Aug 1;23(8):536-541. doi: 10.34172/aim.2020.56.

引用本文的文献

1
Validation of a checklist to facilitate serious illness conversations in adult emergency in China: a single-centre pilot study.中文版清单在成人急诊中促进重病沟通的有效性验证:单中心试点研究。
BMC Emerg Med. 2024 Aug 7;24(1):144. doi: 10.1186/s12873-024-01065-z.
2
Geriatric End-of-Life Screening Tool Prediction of 6-Month Mortality in Older Patients.老年患者临终前筛查工具预测 6 个月死亡率。
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 May 1;7(5):e2414213. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.14213.
3
Improved interpretable machine learning emergency department triage tool addressing class imbalance.
改进的可解释机器学习急诊科分诊工具,解决类别不平衡问题。
Digit Health. 2024 May 2;10:20552076241240910. doi: 10.1177/20552076241240910. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
4
Ethical considerations in implementing AI for mortality prediction in the emergency department: Linking theory and practice.急诊科实施人工智能进行死亡率预测中的伦理考量:理论与实践的联系
Digit Health. 2023 Oct 11;9:20552076231206588. doi: 10.1177/20552076231206588. eCollection 2023 Jan-Dec.
5
Development and assessment of scoring model for ICU stay and mortality prediction after emergency admissions in ischemic heart disease: a retrospective study of MIMIC-IV databases.基于 MIMIC-IV 数据库的回顾性研究:用于预测缺血性心脏病急诊入院后 ICU 入住时间和死亡率的评分模型的开发和评估。
Intern Emerg Med. 2023 Mar;18(2):487-497. doi: 10.1007/s11739-023-03199-7. Epub 2023 Jan 22.
6
Development and Assessment of an Interpretable Machine Learning Triage Tool for Estimating Mortality After Emergency Admissions.开发和评估一种可解释的机器学习分诊工具,用于估算急诊入院后的死亡率。
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Aug 2;4(8):e2118467. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.18467.
7
Prospective and External Evaluation of a Machine Learning Model to Predict In-Hospital Mortality of Adults at Time of Admission.机器学习模型对入院时成人院内死亡率的前瞻性和外部评估。
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Feb 5;3(2):e1920733. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.20733.
8
Death in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Analysis of Mortality in a Swiss University Hospital.急诊科死亡情况:瑞士一家大学医院死亡率的回顾性分析
Emerg Med Int. 2019 Sep 2;2019:5263521. doi: 10.1155/2019/5263521. eCollection 2019.
9
The Association of Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment With Intensity of Treatment Among Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department.医生签署的维持生命治疗医嘱与急诊患者治疗强度的关联。
Ann Emerg Med. 2020 Feb;75(2):171-180. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2019.05.008. Epub 2019 Jun 24.