Suppr超能文献

创伤质量指标在严重创伤患者中的使用局限性。

Trauma Quality Indicators' usage limitations in severe trauma patients.

机构信息

- Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, Disciplina de Cirurgia - São Paulo - SP - Brasil.

- Irmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de São Paulo, Serviço de Emergência - São Paulo - SP - Brasil.

出版信息

Rev Col Bras Cir. 2021 Feb 24;48:e20202769. doi: 10.1590/0100-6991e-20202769. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

PURPOSE

to analyze the relation between Trauma Quality Indicators (QI) and death, as well as clinical adverse events in severe trauma patients.

METHODS

analysis of data collected in the Trauma Register between 2014-2015, including patients with Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 16, reviewing the QI: (F1) Acute subdural hematoma drainage > 4 hours with Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) <9; (F2) emergency room transference without definitive airway and GCS <9; (F3) Re-intubation within 48 hours; (F4) Admission-laparotomy time greater than 60 min in hemodynamically instable patients with abdominal bleeding; (F5) Unprogrammed reoperation; (F6) Laparotomy after 4 hours; (F7) Unfixed femur diaphyseal fracture; (F8) Non-operative treatment for abdominal gunshot; (F9) Admission-tibial exposure fracture treatment time > 6 hours; (F10) Surgery > 24 hours. T the chi-squared and Fisher tests were used to calculate statistical relevance, considering p<0.05 as relevant.

RESULTS

127 patients were included, whose ISS ranged from 17 to 75 (28.8 + 11.5). There were adverse events in 80 cases (63%) and 29 died (22.8%). Twenty-six patients had some QI compromised (20.6%). From the 101 patients with no QI, 22% died, and 7 of 26 patients with compromised QI (26.9%) (p=0.595). From the patients with no compromised QI, 62% presented some adverse event. From the patients with any compromised QI, 18 (65.4%) had some adverse event on clinical evolution (p=0.751).

CONCLUSION

the QI should not be used as death or adverse events predictors in severe trauma patients.

摘要

目的

分析创伤质量指标(QI)与严重创伤患者死亡和临床不良事件的关系。

方法

分析 2014-2015 年创伤登记处收集的数据,纳入损伤严重程度评分(ISS)>16 的患者,审查 QI:(F1)急性硬膜下血肿引流>4 小时,格拉斯哥昏迷评分(GCS)<9;(F2)急诊无明确气道转移,GCS<9;(F3)48 小时内重新插管;(F4)血流动力学不稳定伴腹部出血患者入院-剖腹时间大于 60 分钟;(F5)无计划再次手术;(F6)4 小时后剖腹;(F7)股骨骨干未固定骨折;(F8)腹部枪弹伤非手术治疗;(F9)入院-胫骨暴露骨折治疗时间>6 小时;(F10)手术>24 小时。采用卡方和 Fisher 检验计算统计学相关性,认为 p<0.05 为相关。

结果

纳入 127 例患者,ISS 范围为 17-75(28.8±11.5)。80 例(63%)发生不良事件,29 例死亡(22.8%)。26 例患者存在某种 QI 受损(20.6%)。在 101 例无 QI 患者中,22%死亡,26 例 QI 受损患者中 7 例(26.9%)死亡(p=0.595)。在无 QI 受损的患者中,62%发生某种不良事件。在任何 QI 受损的患者中,18 例(65.4%)在临床转归中出现某种不良事件(p=0.751)。

结论

QI 不能作为严重创伤患者死亡或不良事件的预测指标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/afe5/10683457/81ba79c283fb/rcbc-48-e20202769-g001.jpg

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