Suppr超能文献

临床虚弱评分是否能提高 SOFA 评分对老年危重症患者住院死亡率的预测准确性?一项前瞻性观察研究。

Does the clinical frailty score improve the accuracy of the SOFA score in predicting hospital mortality in elderly critically ill patients? A prospective observational study.

机构信息

CHU de Rennes, Service d'Anesthésie Réanimation 1, 2 rue Henri Le Guilloux, Rennes 35000, France.

CHU de Rennes, Service d'Anesthésie Réanimation 1, 2 rue Henri Le Guilloux, Rennes 35000, France; Inserm, UMR 1214 NuMeCan, Rennes 35000, France; Inserm 1414, Centre d'Investigation Clinique, Rennes 35000, France; Université Rennes 1, Rennes 35000, France.

出版信息

J Crit Care. 2018 Aug;46:67-72. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.04.012. Epub 2018 Apr 22.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To determine whether the addition of the frailty status assessed by the clinical frailty scale (CFS) to the SOFA score (SOFA-CFS) improves the performance of the SOFA score alone in predicting the hospital mortality of elderly critically ill patients.

METHODS

A prospective observational study performed between February 2015 and February 2016 including 189 patients aged ≥65 years and hospitalized ≥24 h in the intensive care unit (ICU).

RESULTS

The SOFA-CFS score did not improve the performance of the SOFA score alone in predicting hospital mortality (AUC = 0.66, 95% CI 0.58-0.74 vs AUC = 0.63, 95% CI 0.55-0.72, respectively, p = 0.082). The AUC of the CFS score was 0.62 (95% CI 0.53-0.71). In the multivariable analysis, age (OR: 1.09, 95% CI 1.03-1.16, p = 0.006), McCabe score C vs A (reference) and B vs A (reference) (OR: 8.28, 95% CI 2.83-24.27and OR: 2.29, 95% CI 1.02-5.12, p = 0.006, respectively), Glasgow coma score at admission (OR: 0.31, 95% CI 0.14-0.48, p = 0.003), and SOFA score (OR: 1.11, 95% CI 1.01-1.23, p = 0.037) were risk factors for hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of the SOFA score in predicting hospital mortality was low, although it was an independent risk factor for mortality. The combination of frailty status with the SOFA score did not improve the performance of the SOFA score alone.

摘要

目的

确定临床虚弱量表(CFS)评估的虚弱状况与 SOFA 评分(SOFA-CFS)联合是否优于单独 SOFA 评分预测老年危重症患者住院死亡率的能力。

方法

前瞻性观察研究,于 2015 年 2 月至 2016 年 2 月间在重症监护病房(ICU)住院时间≥24 小时的 189 名≥65 岁患者。

结果

SOFA-CFS 评分不能改善 SOFA 评分单独预测住院死亡率的性能(AUC=0.66,95%CI 0.58-0.74 与 AUC=0.63,95%CI 0.55-0.72,p=0.082)。CFS 评分的 AUC 为 0.62(95%CI 0.53-0.71)。多变量分析中,年龄(OR:1.09,95%CI 1.03-1.16,p=0.006)、McCabe 评分 C 级与 A 级(参考)和 B 级与 A 级(OR:8.28,95%CI 2.83-24.27 和 OR:2.29,95%CI 1.02-5.12,p=0.006)、入院时格拉斯哥昏迷评分(OR:0.31,95%CI 0.14-0.48,p=0.003)和 SOFA 评分(OR:1.11,95%CI 1.01-1.23,p=0.037)是住院死亡率的危险因素。

结论

SOFA 评分预测住院死亡率的能力较低,尽管它是死亡的独立危险因素。虚弱状况与 SOFA 评分相结合并不能改善单独 SOFA 评分的性能。

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