Suppr超能文献

神经重症监护中的低风险监测

Low Risk Monitoring in Neurocritical Care.

作者信息

Becker Christian D, Bowers Christian, Chandy Dipak, Cole Chad, Schmidt Meic H, Scurlock Corey

机构信息

eHealth Center, Westchester Medical Center Health Network, Valhalla, NY, United States.

Department of Medicine, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, United States.

出版信息

Front Neurol. 2018 Nov 6;9:938. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00938. eCollection 2018.

Abstract

Patients are admitted to Intensive care units (ICUs) either because they need close monitoring despite a low risk of hospital mortality (LRM group) or to receive ICU specific active treatments (AT group). The characteristics and differential outcomes of LRM patients vs. AT patients in Neurocritical Care Units are poorly understood. We classified 1,702 patients admitted to our tertiary and quaternary care center Neuroscience-ICU in 2016 and 2017 into LRM vs. AT groups. We compared demographics, admission diagnosis, goal of care status, readmission rates and managing attending specialty extracted from the medical record between groups. Acute Physiology, Age and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IVa risk predictive modeling was used to assess comparative risks for ICU and hospital mortality and length of stay between groups. 56.9% of patients admitted to our Neuroscience-ICU in 2016 and 2017 were classified as LRM, whereas 43.1% of patients were classified as AT. While demographically similar, the groups differed significantly in all risk predictive outcome measures [APACHE IVa scores, actual and predicted ICU and hospital mortality ( < 0.0001 for all metrics)]. The most common admitting diagnosis overall, cerebrovascular accident/stroke, was represented in the LRM and AT groups with similar frequency [24.3 vs. 21.3%, respectively ( = 0.15)], illustrating that further differentiating factors like symptom duration, neurologic status and its dynamic changes and neuro-imaging characteristics determine the indication for active treatment vs. observation. Patients with intracranial hemorrhage/hematoma were significantly more likely to receive active treatments as opposed to having a primary focus on monitoring [13.6 vs. 9.8%, respectively ( = 0.017)]. The majority of patients admitted to our Neuroscience ICU (56.9%) had <10% hospital mortality risk and a focus on monitoring, whereas the remaining 43.1% of patients received active treatments in their first ICU day. LRM Patients exhibited significantly lower APACHE IVa scores, ICU and hospital mortality rates compared to AT patients. Observed-over-expected ICU and hospital mortality ratios were better than predicted by APACHE IVa for low risk monitored patients and close to prediction for actively treated patients, suggesting that at least a subset of LRM patients may safely and more cost effectively be cared for in intermediate level care settings.

摘要

患者入住重症监护病房(ICU),要么是因为尽管医院死亡率风险较低但仍需要密切监测(低风险死亡率组,LRM组),要么是为了接受ICU特定的积极治疗(积极治疗组,AT组)。神经重症监护病房中LRM患者与AT患者的特征及不同结局尚不清楚。我们将2016年和2017年入住我们三级和四级护理中心神经科学ICU的1702例患者分为LRM组和AT组。我们比较了两组之间从病历中提取的人口统计学、入院诊断、护理目标状态、再入院率和主治专科。使用急性生理学、年龄和慢性健康评估(APACHE)IVa风险预测模型来评估两组之间ICU和医院死亡率以及住院时间的比较风险。2016年和2017年入住我们神经科学ICU的患者中,56.9%被归类为LRM组,而43.1%的患者被归类为AT组。虽然在人口统计学上相似,但两组在所有风险预测结局指标上存在显著差异[APACHE IVa评分、实际和预测的ICU及医院死亡率(所有指标均<0.0001)]。总体上最常见的入院诊断是脑血管意外/中风,在LRM组和AT组中的出现频率相似[分别为24.3%和21.3%(P = 0.15)],这表明症状持续时间、神经状态及其动态变化以及神经影像学特征等进一步的区分因素决定了积极治疗与观察的指征。与主要侧重于监测相比,颅内出血/血肿患者接受积极治疗的可能性显著更高[分别为13.6%和9.8%(P = 0.017)]。入住我们神经科学ICU的大多数患者(56.9%)医院死亡率风险<10%且侧重于监测,而其余43.1%的患者在入住ICU的第一天接受了积极治疗。与AT患者相比,LRM患者的APACHE IVa评分、ICU和医院死亡率显著更低。对于低风险监测患者,观察到的与预期的ICU和医院死亡率比值优于APACHE IVa的预测,而对于积极治疗的患者则接近预测,这表明至少一部分LRM患者可以在中级护理环境中得到安全且更具成本效益的护理。

相似文献

1
Low Risk Monitoring in Neurocritical Care.神经重症监护中的低风险监测
Front Neurol. 2018 Nov 6;9:938. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00938. eCollection 2018.

本文引用的文献

3
Critical care telemedicine: evolution and state of the art.重症监护远程医疗:发展历程与现状
Crit Care Med. 2014 Nov;42(11):2429-36. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000539.
5
Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke.针对中风的有组织的住院(中风单元)护理。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Sep 11;2013(9):CD000197. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000197.pub3.

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