Zhao Yan-Hong, Liu Ya-Juan, Zhao Xiao-Li, Chen Wei-Chao, Zhou Yi-Xian
First Department of Respiratory Medicine, Xi'an Children's Hospital, Xi'an 710003, China.
Zhongguo Dang Dai Er Ke Za Zhi. 2022 Apr 15;24(4):423-427. doi: 10.7499/j.issn.1008-8830.2110023.
To study the value of Silverman-Anderson score versus Downes score in predicting respiratory failure in full-term neonates.
The convenience sampling method was used to select the full-term neonates with lung diseases who were hospitalized in the neonatal intensive care unit from July 2020 to July 2021. According to the diagnostic criteria for neonatal respiratory failure, they were divided into a respiratory failure group (65 neonates) and a non-respiratory failure group (363 neonates). Silverman-Anderson score and Downes score were used for evaluation. The receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to compare the value of the two noninvasive scores in predicting respiratory failure in full-term neonates.
Among the 428 full-term neonates, 65 (15.2%) had respiratory failure. The Silverman-Anderson score had a significantly shorter average time spent on evaluation than the Downes score [(90±8) seconds vs (150±13) seconds; <0.001]. The respiratory failure group had significantly higher points in both the Silverman-Anderson and Downes scores than the non-respiratory failure group (<0.001). The Silverman-Anderson score had an AUC of 0.876 for predicting respiratory failure, with a sensitivity of 0.908, a specificity of 0.694, and a Youden index of 0.602 at the optimal cut-off value of 4.50 points. The Downes score had an AUC of 0.918 for predicting respiratory failure, with a sensitivity of 0.723, a specificity of 0.953, and a Youden index of 0.676 at the optimal cut-off value of 6.00 points. The Downes score had significantly higher AUC for predicting respiratory failure than the Silverman-Anderson score (=0.026).
Both Silverman-Anderson and Downes scores can predict the risk of respiratory failure in full-term neonates. The Silverman-Anderson score requires a shorter time for evaluation, while the Downes score has higher prediction efficiency. It is recommended to use Downes score with higher prediction efficiency in general evaluation, and the Silverman-Anderson score requiring a shorter time for evaluation can be used in emergency.
研究Silverman - Anderson评分与Downes评分在预测足月儿呼吸衰竭中的价值。
采用便利抽样法,选取2020年7月至2021年7月在新生儿重症监护病房住院的患有肺部疾病的足月儿。根据新生儿呼吸衰竭诊断标准,将其分为呼吸衰竭组(65例新生儿)和非呼吸衰竭组(363例新生儿)。采用Silverman - Anderson评分和Downes评分进行评估。采用受试者工作特征分析比较两种无创评分在预测足月儿呼吸衰竭中的价值。
428例足月儿中,65例(15.2%)发生呼吸衰竭。Silverman - Anderson评分的平均评估时间明显短于Downes评分[(90±8)秒对(150±13)秒;<0.001]。呼吸衰竭组的Silverman - Anderson评分和Downes评分均显著高于非呼吸衰竭组(<0.001)。Silverman - Anderson评分预测呼吸衰竭的AUC为0.876,在最佳截断值4.50分时,灵敏度为0.908,特异度为0.694,约登指数为0.602。Downes评分预测呼吸衰竭的AUC为0.918,在最佳截断值6.00分时,灵敏度为0.723,特异度为0.953,约登指数为0.676。Downes评分预测呼吸衰竭的AUC显著高于Silverman - Anderson评分(=0.026)。
Silverman - Anderson评分和Downes评分均可预测足月儿呼吸衰竭风险。Silverman - Anderson评分评估时间较短,而Downes评分预测效率较高。建议在一般评估中使用预测效率较高的Downes评分,紧急情况下可使用评估时间较短的Silverman - Anderson评分。