• 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

相似文献

1
The Predictive Capacity of American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA PS) Score in Burn Patients.美国麻醉医师协会身体状况(ASA PS)评分对烧伤患者的预测能力。
J Burn Care Res. 2020 Jul 3;41(4):803-808. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/iraa060.
2
Predictive value of quick SOFA and revised Baux scores in burn patients.快速序贯器官衰竭评估和改良 Baux 评分对烧伤患者的预测价值。
Burns. 2020 Mar;46(2):347-351. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2019.03.006. Epub 2019 Dec 16.
3
Predictors of mortality and validation of burn mortality prognostic scores in a Malaysian burns intensive care unit.马来西亚烧伤重症监护病房死亡率的预测因素及烧伤死亡率预后评分的验证
BMC Emerg Med. 2019 Nov 7;19(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12873-019-0284-8.
4
Revised Baux Score and updated Charlson comorbidity index are independently associated with mortality in burns intensive care patients.修订后的 Baux 评分和更新后的 Charlson 合并症指数与烧伤重症监护患者的死亡率独立相关。
Burns. 2015 Nov;41(7):1420-7. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2015.06.009. Epub 2015 Jul 14.
5
Comparison of prognostic models for burn patients: A retrospective nationwide registry study.烧伤患者预后模型的比较:一项回顾性全国登记研究。
Burns. 2020 Dec;46(8):1746-1755. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2020.10.008. Epub 2020 Oct 17.
6
Predicting and Estimating Burn Outcomes: An Institutional Analysis of 4622 Cases.预测和估算烧伤结局:4622 例的机构分析。
J Burn Care Res. 2022 Nov 2;43(6):1426-1433. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irac051.
7
The role of the American Society of anesthesiologists physical status classification in predicting trauma mortality and outcomes.美国麻醉医师协会身体状况分类在预测创伤死亡率和结局中的作用。
Am J Surg. 2019 Dec;218(6):1143-1151. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.09.019. Epub 2019 Sep 24.
8
Factors associated with acute kidney injury in the Helsinki Burn Centre in 2006-2015.2006-2015 年赫尔辛基烧伤中心急性肾损伤的相关因素。
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2018 Dec 13;26(1):105. doi: 10.1186/s13049-018-0573-3.
9
A Prospective Multicenter Comparison of Trauma and Injury Severity Score, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status, and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Calculator's Ability to Predict Operative Trauma Outcomes.前瞻性多中心创伤和损伤严重程度评分、美国麻醉医师协会身体状况评分和国家手术质量改进计划计算器预测手术创伤结局能力的比较。
Anesth Analg. 2024 Jun 1;138(6):1260-1266. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000006802. Epub 2024 May 20.
10
External validation of the revised Baux score for the prediction of mortality in patients with acute burn injury.修订后的 Baux 评分对预测急性烧伤患者死亡率的外部验证。
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014 Mar;76(3):840-5. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000000124.

引用本文的文献

1
A novel lesion severity index to predict 90-day postoperative survival in brain metastasis patients.一种用于预测脑转移患者术后90天生存率的新型病变严重程度指数。
J Neurooncol. 2025 Sep;174(3):799-808. doi: 10.1007/s11060-025-05109-7. Epub 2025 Jun 11.
2
Impact of multidisciplinary collaborative jejunal nutrition care on nutritional status and quality of life in severely burned patients.多学科协作空肠营养护理对重度烧伤患者营养状况及生活质量的影响
Medicine (Baltimore). 2025 Apr 4;104(14):e41965. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000041965.
3
Implementing AI Models for Prognostic Predictions in High-Risk Burn Patients.在高危烧伤患者中实施用于预后预测的人工智能模型
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Sep 18;13(18):2984. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13182984.
4
Risk Models to Predict Mortality in Burn Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.预测烧伤患者死亡率的风险模型:系统评价与荟萃分析
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2022 Dec 16;10(12):e4694. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000004694. eCollection 2022 Dec.
5
Prognosis value of revised Baux score among burn patients in developing country.修订版博克斯评分在发展中国家烧伤患者中的预后价值
Int J Burns Trauma. 2021 Jun 15;11(3):197-201. eCollection 2021.

本文引用的文献

1
Predictors of mortality and validation of burn mortality prognostic scores in a Malaysian burns intensive care unit.马来西亚烧伤重症监护病房死亡率的预测因素及烧伤死亡率预后评分的验证
BMC Emerg Med. 2019 Nov 7;19(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12873-019-0284-8.
2
Can systemic inflammatory response syndrome score at admission predict clinical outcome in patients with severe burns?入院时全身炎症反应综合征评分能否预测严重烧伤患者的临床转归?
Burns. 2019 Jun;45(4):860-868. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2018.11.011. Epub 2018 Dec 21.
3
Comparison of six outcome prediction models in an adult burn population in a developing country.六个结局预测模型在一个发展中国家成年烧伤人群中的比较。
Ann Burns Fire Disasters. 2017 Mar 31;30(1):13-17.
4
The measured effect magnitude of co-morbidities on burn injury mortality.共病对烧伤死亡率的测量效应量。
Burns. 2016 Nov;42(7):1433-1438. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2016.03.007. Epub 2016 Sep 1.
5
Epidemiology and outcome analysis of burn patients admitted to an Intensive Care Unit in a University Hospital.某大学医院重症监护病房收治烧伤患者的流行病学及预后分析
Burns. 2016 May;42(3):655-62. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2015.08.002. Epub 2016 Jan 4.
6
Revised Baux Score and updated Charlson comorbidity index are independently associated with mortality in burns intensive care patients.修订后的 Baux 评分和更新后的 Charlson 合并症指数与烧伤重症监护患者的死亡率独立相关。
Burns. 2015 Nov;41(7):1420-7. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2015.06.009. Epub 2015 Jul 14.
7
External validation of the revised Baux score for the prediction of mortality in patients with acute burn injury.修订后的 Baux 评分对预测急性烧伤患者死亡率的外部验证。
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014 Mar;76(3):840-5. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000000124.
8
Norwegian survival prediction model in trauma: modelling effects of anatomic injury, acute physiology, age, and co-morbidity.挪威创伤生存预测模型:解剖损伤、急性生理学、年龄及合并症的建模效应
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2014 Mar;58(3):303-15. doi: 10.1111/aas.12256. Epub 2014 Jan 20.
9
Objective estimates of the probability of death in acute burn injury: a proposed Taiwan burn score.急性烧伤患者病死率的客观估计:台湾烧伤评分。
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012 Dec;73(6):1583-9. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e318265ff5a.
10
Classification of comorbidity in trauma: the reliability of pre-injury ASA physical status classification.创伤后合并症的分类:受伤前 ASA 身体状况分类的可靠性。
Injury. 2013 Jan;44(1):29-35. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.12.024. Epub 2012 Jan 25.

美国麻醉医师协会身体状况(ASA PS)评分对烧伤患者的预测能力。

The Predictive Capacity of American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA PS) Score in Burn Patients.

机构信息

Division of Anesthesiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

出版信息

J Burn Care Res. 2020 Jul 3;41(4):803-808. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/iraa060.

DOI:10.1093/jbcr/iraa060
PMID:32285103
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7333670/
Abstract

Advances in burn care continues to improve survival rates and patient outcomes. There are several burn prognostic tools used to predict mortality and outcomes; however, none include patient comorbidities. We used the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score as a surrogate measure for comorbidities, and evaluated its role in predicting mortality and outcomes in adult burn patients undergoing surgery. A retrospective analysis was performed on data collected from a single burn center in the United States, which was comprised of 183 patients. We evaluated the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score as an independent predictor of mortality and outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, mechanical ventilator (MV) days, and complications. We compared the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score to other prognostic models which included the revised Baux score, Belgian Outcome in Burn Injury, and the Abbreviated Burn Severity Index. Our results demonstrated that the revised Baux and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status scores could be used to determine the mortality risk in adult burn patients. The revised Baux was the best predictor of mortality, ICU LOS, and MV days, while the Abbreviated Burn Severity Index was the best predictor of total LOS.

摘要

烧伤治疗的进展不断提高生存率和患者预后。有几种烧伤预后工具用于预测死亡率和结果;然而,没有一种工具包括患者的合并症。我们使用美国麻醉医师协会身体状况评分作为合并症的替代指标,并评估其在预测行手术的成年烧伤患者死亡率和结果中的作用。对来自美国一个烧伤中心的数据进行了回顾性分析,该中心共包括 183 名患者。我们评估了美国麻醉医师协会身体状况评分作为死亡率和结果的独立预测指标,包括重症监护病房(ICU)住院时间(LOS)、医院 LOS、机械通气(MV)天数和并发症。我们将美国麻醉医师协会身体状况评分与其他预后模型进行了比较,这些模型包括修订后的 Baux 评分、比利时烧伤结局和简明烧伤严重程度指数。我们的结果表明,修订后的 Baux 和美国麻醉医师协会身体状况评分可用于确定成年烧伤患者的死亡风险。修订后的 Baux 是死亡率、ICU LOS 和 MV 天数的最佳预测指标,而简明烧伤严重程度指数是总 LOS 的最佳预测指标。