• 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

快速急性生理学评分

The Rapid Acute Physiology Score.

作者信息

Rhee K J, Fisher C J, Willitis N H

出版信息

Am J Emerg Med. 1987 Jul;5(4):278-82. doi: 10.1016/0735-6757(87)90350-0.

DOI:10.1016/0735-6757(87)90350-0
PMID:3593492
Abstract

The Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS) was developed and tested for use as a severity scale in critical care transports. RAPS is an abbreviated version of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE-II) using only parameters routinely available on all transported patients (i.e. pulse, blood pressure, respiratory rate, and Glasgow Coma Scale). RAPS has a range from 0 (normal) to 16. Two hundred eighty-three patients were transported by helicopter; 62 died. Pretransport RAPS was available on 282 of 283 patients (mean, 3.85; median, 3). Because of death, discharge, or transfer, 227 complete APACHE-II scores using least physiologic values for the first 24 hours after transfer were collected (mean, 14.98; median, 13). Stepwise logistic regression showed that when all APACHE-II and RAPS values were available, the best single predictor of mortality was worst value APACHE-II (X2(1) = 57.09, P less than .01). When pretransport RAPS was considered as a single explanatory variable, it too had significant predictive power for mortality (X2(1) = 92.53, P less than .01). Correlation analysis comparing RAPS with APACHE-II values at similar points in time revealed a significant relationship in all cases, with the highest correlation between RAPS worst values and APACHE-II worst values (r = .8472, P less than .01). It was concluded that RAPS can be applied usefully in complement with APACHE-II and may have limited utility when used alone.

摘要

快速急性生理学评分(RAPS)被开发并测试用于重症监护转运中的严重程度评估。RAPS是急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE-II)的简化版本,仅使用所有转运患者常规可得的参数(即脉搏、血压、呼吸频率和格拉斯哥昏迷量表)。RAPS的范围为0(正常)至16。283例患者通过直升机转运;62例死亡。283例患者中有282例有转运前RAPS评分(均值为3.85;中位数为3)。由于死亡、出院或转院,收集了227例患者转院后最初24小时使用最低生理学值的完整APACHE-II评分(均值为14.98;中位数为13)。逐步逻辑回归显示,当所有APACHE-II和RAPS值都可用时,死亡率的最佳单一预测指标是APACHE-II最差值(X2(1)=57.09,P<0.01)。当将转运前RAPS视为单一解释变量时,它对死亡率也有显著的预测能力(X2(1)=92.53,P<0.01)。在相似时间点比较RAPS与APACHE-II值的相关分析显示,在所有情况下均存在显著关系,RAPS最差值与APACHE-II最差值之间的相关性最高(r = 0.8472,P<0.01)。得出的结论是,RAPS可与APACHE-II配合有效应用,单独使用时可能效用有限。

相似文献

1
The Rapid Acute Physiology Score.快速急性生理学评分
Am J Emerg Med. 1987 Jul;5(4):278-82. doi: 10.1016/0735-6757(87)90350-0.
2
Rapid acute physiology scoring in transport systems.转运系统中的快速急性生理学评分
Crit Care Med. 1990 Oct;18(10):1119-23. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199010000-00013.
3
Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) and Glasgow coma scores as predictors of outcome from intensive care after cardiac arrest.急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE II)及格拉斯哥昏迷评分作为心脏骤停后重症监护结局的预测指标。
Crit Care Med. 1991 Dec;19(12):1465-73. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199112000-00005.
4
[A new score system for prediction of death in patients with severe trauma: the value of death warning score].[一种用于预测严重创伤患者死亡的新评分系统:死亡预警评分的价值]
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2015 Nov;27(11):890-4.
5
APACHE II scoring in the injured patient.创伤患者的急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统II(APACHE II)评分
Crit Care Med. 1990 Aug;18(8):827-30. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199008000-00006.
6
Predictive accuracy and feasibility of risk stratification scores for 28-day mortality of patients with sepsis in an emergency department.急诊科脓毒症患者28天死亡率风险分层评分的预测准确性及可行性
Eur J Emerg Med. 2015 Oct;22(5):331-7. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000185.
7
[Long distance interhospital transport. Accuracy of severity scoring system].[远距离医院间转运。严重程度评分系统的准确性]
Med Intensiva. 2009 Jun-Jul;33(5):217-23. doi: 10.1016/s0210-5691(09)71755-3.
8
Comparison of the rapid emergency medicine score and APACHE II in nonsurgical emergency department patients.非手术急诊科患者快速急诊医学评分与急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统II的比较。
Acad Emerg Med. 2003 Oct;10(10):1040-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb00572.x.
9
Prediction of mortality among emergency medical admissions.急诊入院患者死亡率的预测
Emerg Med J. 2006 May;23(5):372-5. doi: 10.1136/emj.2005.028522.
10
Comparison of different scores as predictors of mechanical ventilation in drug overdose patients.不同评分作为药物过量患者机械通气预测指标的比较。
Hum Exp Toxicol. 2017 Jun;36(6):539-546. doi: 10.1177/0960327116655389. Epub 2016 Jun 23.

引用本文的文献

1
Prognostic Value of the Lactate/Albumin Ratio in Sepsis-Related Mortality: An Exploratory Study in a Tertiary Care Center with Limited Resources in Western Mexico.乳酸/白蛋白比值在脓毒症相关死亡率中的预后价值:在墨西哥西部资源有限的三级护理中心进行的一项探索性研究
J Clin Med. 2025 Apr 19;14(8):2825. doi: 10.3390/jcm14082825.
2
Comparing 11 early warning scores and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department.比较11种早期预警评分和三种休克指数在急诊科早期脓毒症预测中的作用。
World J Emerg Med. 2024;15(4):273-282. doi: 10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2024.052.
3
Performance of several clinical scoring systems as predictors of adverse outcomes in acute exposure to toxic alcohols.
几种临床评分系统作为急性中毒性醇类暴露不良结局预测指标的性能。
Toxicol Res (Camb). 2024 May 5;13(3):tfae069. doi: 10.1093/toxres/tfae069. eCollection 2024 Jun.
4
Improved interpretable machine learning emergency department triage tool addressing class imbalance.改进的可解释机器学习急诊科分诊工具,解决类别不平衡问题。
Digit Health. 2024 May 2;10:20552076241240910. doi: 10.1177/20552076241240910. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
5
Prognostic accuracy of early warning scores for predicting serious illness and in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19.早期预警评分对预测COVID-19患者重症及院内死亡率的预后准确性
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024 Mar 28;4(3):e0002438. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0002438. eCollection 2024.
6
Head-to-head comparison of 19 prediction models for short-term outcome in medical patients in the emergency department: a retrospective study.头对头比较 19 个预测模型在急诊科内科患者短期预后中的应用:一项回顾性研究。
Ann Med. 2023;55(2):2290211. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2290211. Epub 2023 Dec 8.
7
Machine learning-based prediction of acute mortality in emergency department patients using twelve-lead electrocardiogram.基于机器学习利用十二导联心电图预测急诊科患者急性死亡率
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Oct 27;10:1245614. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1245614. eCollection 2023.
8
Predictive Performance of Scoring Systems for Mortality Risk in Patients with Cryptococcemia: An Observational Study.隐球菌血症患者死亡风险评分系统的预测性能:一项观察性研究。
J Pers Med. 2023 Sep 6;13(9):1358. doi: 10.3390/jpm13091358.
9
The risk factors of the 72-h unscheduled return visit admission to emergency department in adults below 50 years old.50 岁以下成年人急诊 72 小时内非计划性再次就诊的风险因素。
Eur J Med Res. 2023 Sep 27;28(1):379. doi: 10.1186/s40001-023-01317-x.
10
Prehospital physiological parameters related illness severity scores can accurately discriminate the severe/critical state in adult patients with COVID-19.院前生理参数相关疾病严重程度评分可准确区分 COVID-19 成年患者的严重/危急状态。
Ann Med. 2023;55(2):2239829. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2239829.