Emergency Department, Maxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, Noord-Brabant, The Netherlands
Emergency Department, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Emerg Med J. 2022 Dec;39(12):903-911. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2020-210628. Epub 2022 Jan 11.
Appropriate interpretation of vital signs is essential for risk stratification in the emergency department (ED) but may change with advancing age. In several guidelines, risk scores such as the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome SIRS) and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) scores, commonly used in emergency medicine practice (as well as critical care) specify a single cut-off or threshold for each of the commonly measured vital signs. Although a single cut-off may be convenient, it is unknown whether a single cut-off for vital signs truly exists and if the association between vital signs and in-hospital mortality differs per age-category.
To assess the association between initial vital signs and case-mix adjusted in-hospital mortality in different age categories.
Observational multicentre cohort study using the Netherlands Emergency Department Evaluation Database (NEED) in which consecutive ED patients ≥18 years were included between 1 January 2017 and 12 January 2020. The association between vital signs and case-mix adjusted mortality were assessed in three age categories (18-65; 66-80; >80 years) using multivariable logistic regression. Vital signs were each divided into five to six categories, for example, systolic blood pressure (SBP) categories (≤80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, >140 mm Hg).
We included 101 416 patients of whom 2374 (2.3%) died. Adjusted ORs for mortality increased gradually with decreasing SBP and decreasing peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO). Diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) had quasi-U-shaped associations with mortality. Mortality did not increase for temperatures anywhere in the range between 35.5°C and 42.0°C, with a single cut-off around 35.5°C below which mortality increased. Single cut-offs were also found for MAP <70 mm Hg and respiratory rate >22/min. For all vital signs, older patients had larger increases in absolute mortality compared with younger patients.
For SBP, DBP, SpO and HR, no single cut-off existed. The impact of changing vital sign categories on prognosis was larger in older patients. Our results have implications for the interpretation of vital signs in existing risk stratification tools and acute care guidelines.
在急诊科(ED),正确解读生命体征对于风险分层至关重要,但随着年龄的增长可能会发生变化。在一些指南中,如全身炎症反应综合征(SIRS)和快速序贯器官衰竭评估(qSOFA)评分等风险评分,在急诊医学实践(以及重症监护)中常用,为每个常用生命体征指定了一个单一的临界值或阈值。虽然单一的临界值可能很方便,但尚不清楚是否存在真正的单一生命体征临界值,以及生命体征与住院死亡率之间的关联是否因年龄类别而异。
评估不同年龄组中初始生命体征与病例组合调整后院内死亡率之间的关系。
这是一项观察性多中心队列研究,使用荷兰急诊评估数据库(NEED),纳入了 2017 年 1 月 1 日至 2020 年 1 月 12 日期间连续就诊的≥18 岁的 ED 患者。使用多变量逻辑回归评估了生命体征与病例组合调整后死亡率之间的关系,分为三个年龄组(18-65 岁;66-80 岁;>80 岁)。将生命体征分为五到六个类别,例如收缩压(SBP)类别(≤80、81-100、101-120、121-140、>140mmHg)。
共纳入 101416 例患者,其中 2374 例(2.3%)死亡。死亡率的调整比值比(OR)随着 SBP 和外周血氧饱和度(SpO2)的降低而逐渐升高。舒张压(DBP)、平均动脉压(MAP)和心率(HR)与死亡率呈准 U 型关系。体温在 35.5°C 至 42.0°C 之间的任何范围内,无单一的临界值与死亡率增加相关,而在 35.5°C 以下的体温则与死亡率增加相关。MAP<70mmHg 和呼吸频率>22/min 也存在单一的临界值。对于所有生命体征,与年轻患者相比,老年患者的绝对死亡率增加幅度更大。
对于 SBP、DBP、SpO2 和 HR,不存在单一的临界值。改变生命体征类别对预后的影响在老年患者中更大。我们的结果对现有风险分层工具和急性护理指南中生命体征的解释有一定的影响。